HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-01-10 WSB AGENDAAG ENDA
ENGLEWOOD WATE R AN D SEWER BOARD
JANUAR Y 10 , 1995
5:0 0 P .M.
CONFERE NCE ROOM A
1. MINUTES OF THE NOVEM BER 15, 1994
WATER AND SEWER BOARD MEETING. (ATT. 1)
2. LETTER FROM HILL & ROBBINS DATED 11-22-94
RE: MITIGATION OF P ENALTY ASSESSED BY COLO.
WATER QUALITY CONTRO L DIV. (ATT. 2)
3. GUEST: DAVID HILL -CENTENNIAL RULING.
4. OTHER.
WATER AND SEWER BOARD
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 1994
The meeting was called to order at 5:02 p.m.
Chairman Fullerton declared a quorum present.
Members present:
Members absent:
Also present:
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
Gulley, Lay
Stewart Fonda, Director of
Utilities
1. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 11, 1994.
The Englewood Water and Sewer Board Minutes from the October
11, 1994 meeting were approved.
Mr. Vobejda moved;
Mr. Neumann seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
To approve the October 11,
1994 meeting Minutes.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
2. CENTENNIAL V. NEVADA DITCH.
Stu discussed current negotiations with Centennial. Stu
hopes to present a draft of the proposed settlement with
Centennial at the January, 1995 meeting.
3. TOLL ROAD TICKET FROM MEXICO.
The Board received a copy of a toll road ticket from Mexico.
The toll is used as a method for funding water line
improvements in Cozumel.
4. CHERRY HILLS SANITATION DISTRICT SUPPLEMENT #3.
The Board received a request from the Cherry Hills
Sanitation District representing the owner/developer of The
Preserve for inclusion into the Cherry Hills Sanitation
District. Supplement #3 is for an area approximately 44.180
acres. The area is located in the Southgate Sanitation
District, but to avoid a lift station, service will be
provided by Cherry Hills Sanitation District, which will
enable a natural drainage situ ation.
Ms. Habenicht moved;
Mr. Resley seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
To recommend to Council
approval of Cherry Hills
Village Supplement #3
for The Preserve.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
5. LETTER FROM DEPT. OF HEALTH DATED 10-14-94.
Stu discussed the letter from the State of Colorado
documenting the Health Department's denial of the request
from Englewood for a relaxed turbidity standard. A
reconnaissance study that would be conducted by CDM was
discussed. The study would involve gathering various
experts in January to recommend water treatment options,
costs and expected results. The Board concurred.
Ms. Habenicht moved;
Mr. Otis seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
To approve the COM
reconnaissance study to
recommend water treatment
options.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
6. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF LITTLETON.
The Board received a request for a License Agreement from
the City of Littleton to install a 24" corrugated metal
storm sewer under Englewood's right-of-way for the City
Ditch. The pipe installation is for a section of the city
Ditch located in Littleton's Ridgewood Park, near Prince
Street estates Subdivision, located west of Prince and south
of Ridge Road.
Mr. Otis moved;
Mr. Wiggins seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
To recommend Council approval
of the City Ditch License
Agreement with the City of
Littleton.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
7. MISC. EXPENSES ADDED TO QUARTERLY WATER BILLS.
Stu discussed an ordinance revision being drafted to enable
the Utilities' Dept. to charge expenses for items that are
required by code when the property owner refuses to correct
the situation after notice has been given by the Utility.
It would mainly apply to curb stop repairs since other
requirements are usually handled by discontinuation of
service at the curb stop.
Mr. Wiggins moved;
Mr. Neumann seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
To recommend Council approval
of an ordinance revision
allowing the Utilities' Dept.
to charge back expenses for
repairs on the quarterly water
bills.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
8. LETTER FROM MARJORIE SUTTON RE: DENNIS SCHUM
The Board received a copy of a letter sent by Marjorie
Sutton commending Dennis Schum.
9. ARTICLE FROM LITTLETON INDEPENDENT RE:
CITY DITCH.
The Board received a copy of an article titled "Ditch winds
way into Littleton history," that appeared in the Littleton
Independent.
10. LICENSE AGREEMENT FROM HRITZ FOR CROSSING THE
CITY DITCH.
Susan and Stephen Hritz submitted a License Agreement to
cross the City Ditch, located on their property at
approximately W. Euclid and s. Prince st. in the Parkview
Subdivision, with a footbridge.
Mr. Resley moved;
Mr. Vobejda seconded:
Ayes:
To recommend Council approval
of the License Agreement from
Susan and Stephen Hritz for
crossing the City Ditch.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
Nays: None
Members absent: Gulley, Lay
Motion carried.
11. ARTICLE FROM OCTOBER 10, 1994 WATERWEEK.
Stu reviewed an article that appeared in the October 10,
1994 Waterweek titled "EPA warn s Colorado of program-funding
slide." The Board discussed concerns about drinking water
program primacy at State and national levels.
12. ASSIGNMENT OF EASEME NT WITH SOUTHGATE
SANITATION DISTRICT.
Southgate Sanitation District s ubmitted an Assignment of
Easement. During the Big Dry Creek Interceptor, Phase IVA
Project, Southgate Sanitation District, as the contractor,
acquired easements along the r e location alignment. With
completion of the construction and warranty periods and
recognizing that these easement sections of the Interceptor
are within the ownership of the City of Englewood, Southgate
submitted an Assignment of Eas e ment to transfer ownership to
the City of Englewood.
Ms. Habenicht moved;
Mr. Fullerton seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
13. EPA FINE -BI-CITY
To recommend Council approval
o f the Assignment of Easement
f rom the Southgate Sanitation
District.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Neumann,
Otis, Resley, Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Gulley, Lay
Stu discussed the Bi-City permi t violation for ammonia and
chlorine levels from the State Health Dept. The fine was
reduced from $232,036 to $81,2 1 2. Stu noted that the fine
can be spent for environmenta l enhancement projects on a
ratio of 2:1.
14. 2880 -2882 S. EMERSON ST.
The Board was briefed on the situation of the owners of
three building sites requesting water and sewer taps, with
no utility mains immediately available. The Board concurred
that the property owners would be responsible for building
the mains to run in the right-of-way easement in S. Emerson
st. The Board concurred that an individual easement along a
property line to serve an adjacent residence would not be
acceptable.
15. WATER AND SEWER BOARD CHRISTMAS DINNER.
The Water Board Christmas dinner will be at County Line
Barbecue Tuesday, December 13, 1 994 at 5:30 p.m.
The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
The next Water and Sewer Board meeting will be December 13,
1994 at County Line Barbecue.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathy Burrage
Recording Secretary
DAVID W. ROBBINS
ROBERT F. HILL
DENNIS M. MONTGOMERY
KAREN A. TOMB
RONALD L. WILCOX
JOHN H. EVANS
MARK J. WAGNER
JEFFREY M. HALL
ANNE K. LAPORTA
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Director
HILL & ROBBINS, P. c.
A'M'ORNEYS AT LAW
100 BLAKE STREET BUILDING
1441 EIGHTEEN'ni STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80202•12~6
November 22, 1994
Bi-City Wastewater Treatment Plant
3400 South Elati
Englewood, Colorado 80110
TELEPHONE
303 296•8100
TELE COPIER
303 296•2388
Re: Mitigation of Penalty Assessed By
Colorado Water Quality Control Division
Dear Stu:
At our meeting with representatives of the Colorado Water Quality Control Division
last week, the Division determined that it would reduce the penalty assessed for violations
of the Cities' CPDES Permit from $232,036.00 to $81,213.00. In addition, the Division
indicated that it would be willing to further reduce that penalty if the Cities would agree to
undertake a "special project" pursuant to the Division's civil penalty policy.
The provision of the civil penalty policy which deals with special projects provides as
follows:
In exceptional . cases, where the violator has returned to
compliance and agrees to complete a special project, up to one
. hundred percent of the penalty for effluent violations may be
waived. Such special project shall be outside of any improve-
ment to be made to the treatment facility, cannot directly
benefit the violator, and must result in an identifiable benefit
to water quality. In considering the amount of the penalty to
be waived, the Division will use the following guidelines:
1. The maximum amount of reduction shall not exceed fifty
percent of the actual cost of the project.
Mr. Stewart Fonda
November 22, 1994
Page 2
2. The project should be identified and commenced by the
violator and must be primarily designed to benefit the
environment rather than to benefit the violator.
At that meeting, the Division representatives indicated that examples of special
projects that might be considered by the Cities would be (1) construction of bike paths along
the river corridor; (2) aquatic life habitat improvements, such as drop structures or
placement of boulders in the stream channel; (3) bio-·solid application studies analyzing the
most beneficial application rates for bio-solids and affects on ground water; ( 4) voe
emission studies may also be considered, if it provides some measurable data that could be
used by other POTWs. The Division representatives indicated that the TMDL study would
probably not be considered acceptable to offset the penalty.
The next step in the process is for the Cities to identify which, if any, of these types
of special studies they would like to undertake, to devefop a scope of work document
outlining the special projects and including the anticipated costs of the project. This can
then be forwarded to the Division for approval and inclusion in the settlement agreement
to offset the remaining penalty. It should be noted that in order to offset the entire
$81,213.00 penalty remaining, the special projects should have associated costs of at least
$162,426.00.
Please let me know if you have any questions or wish to discuss this further. Also
let me know if you would like me to assist in coordinating this effort with the two Cities.
Otherwise, I will assume that this will be handled by appropriate staff of the Cities.
MJW/jlv
cc: Dennis Stowe
Larry Berkowitz, Esq.
Martin Semple, Esq.
Very truly yours,