Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-12 WSB AGENDAWATER & SEWER BOARD AGENDA Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE ROOM 1. MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 8, 2008 MEETING. (ATT . 1) 2. ALUM SLUDGE HAULING BID . (ATT. 2) 3. TRACTOR MOWER PURCHASE. (ATT. 3) 4 . ARTICLE FROM THE AURORA SENTINEL: "AURORA STILL TRYING TO SOLVE WATER WOES ." (ATT . 4) 5. WATER RIGHTS UPDATEFROMDAVIDHILLDATEDJANUARY 14, 2008. (ATT . 5) 6. OTHER. WATER AND SEWER BOARD MINUTES January 8, 2008 A TT. I The meeting was called to order at 5:04 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Higday,. Cassidy, Wiggins, Oakley, Habenicht Bums, Moore, Woodward, Clark Stewart Fonda, Director of Utilities 1. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 13, 2008 MEETING. The Englewood Water and Sewer Board approved the minutes of the meeting of November 13, 2008 meeting. Mr. Higday moved; Mr. Wiggins seconded: Ayes: Nays: Members absent: Motion carried. Gray Clark entered at 5: 10 p.m. To approve the minutes from the November 13, 2007 meeting . Higday, Cassidy, Wiggins, Oakley, Habenicht None Bums, Moore, Woodward, Clark 2 . Co WARN MUTUAL AID AND ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT. The Colorado Water and Wastewater Agency Response Network (CoW ARN) is a network for municipal utilities departments to help other utilities departments during emergencies. Co WARN provides a method for water and wastewater utilities that have sustained or anticipate damages to receive intrastate assistance in a timely manner. Participants can then receive or provide support in the form of personnel, equipment, materials and services. Co WARN was established because in past disasters, it was discovered that municipal utilities operations are a specialized field with special requirements and the entity in need must be self-sufficient until the arrival of other government aid. Co WARN enables quick response time at local and state levels of government during natural and human caused events. The responding party would provide an itemized bill within 90 days to the requesting member for expenses incurred for providing assistance. The requesting member must pay the bill in full within 45 days following the billing. Any unpaid bills will accrue interest at the bank prime loan rate. Mr. Wiggins moved; Mr. Habenicht seconded: Ayes: Nays: Members absent: Motion carried. To recommend Council approval of the Colorado's Water/Wastewater Agency Response Network (Co WARN) Mutual Aid and Assistance Agreement. Clark, Higday, Cassidy, Wiggins, Oakley, Habenicht None Burns, Moore, Woodward 3. WATER RIGHTS UPDATE FROM DAVID HILL. The Board received water rights updates dated November 12, 2007 and December 11 , 2007 from David Hill, Englewood's Water Attorney. Stu discussed developments in water litigation cases in which Englewood is involved. Councilmen Bob Moore and Bill Woodward entered at 5: 15 p .m. 4 . CITY DITCH BETWEEN OXFORD AND PRINCETON. Councilman Bob McCaslin received a letter from a resident concerned that the City Ditch on S. Huron between Oxford and Princeton will be piped or filled in. Stu discussed the City 's concern regarding the City Ditch in this section because the bank is eroding and the resulting sloughing may endanger the adjacent street. It was also noted that the ditch must accommodate stormwater events. Costs and risks of various options are being evaluated. Once options are determined , concerned residents will be invited to a future Water Board meeting to discuss. 5 . LOW FLOW APPLIANCES. The Utilities Department received a request from Council for information regarding grant or refund programs to Englewood residents for low flow appliances. Utilities staff responded with a memo to Council that discussed why Englewood does not participate in these programs . The memo states Englewood has adequate water to meet its present and future development needs along with excess water to lease to Highlands Ranch, significant water conservation has been achieved without a rebate program, that funding the programs would have to come out of water revenues and Englewood's aging sanitary sewer system requires higher flows to function properly. Another item noted was that new construction would be required to install water saving fixtures . The Water and Sewer Board discussed the issue. 5. GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON LEASE AGREEMENT . Carbon filters have been used successfully for effective taste and odor removal. The granular activated carbon (GAC) removes the organic and inorganic material in Englewood 's water supplies which causes the taste and odor problems . Carbon filters have been used successfully for effective taste and odor removal. The GAC is leased since carbon requires periodic regeneration and possibly correct disposal according to Colorado law . The existing ACMS Lease Agreement has been providing these services but has expired. ACMS is no longer in existence, but its affiliated company, A .A.E.T. (American Anglian Environmental Technologies, LLC) has taken over that line of business. The ACMS/A.A.E.T . GAC Lease Agreement, which began the fourth quarter of 1998 , provides carbon for five filters , each requiring 2, 700 cubic feet of GAC. Due to increased cost of fuel and increased costs for reactivation of the carbon, the parties wish to redo the lease agreement to provide for the increased expenses. The proposed increase over the existing cost is $500 per month for each filter, making replacement GAC for the five filters $2,450 per month, per filter. The new lease agreement amount will be $2,450 per month, per filter effective upon the first installation for a thirty month period. Mr. Moore moved ; Mr. Cassidy seconded: Ayes: Nays: Members absent: Motion carried. To recommended Council approval of the GAC Lease Agreement in the amount of $2,450 per filter for three filters to ACMS/ A.A.E. T. Clark, Higday, Cassidy, Wiggins , Oakley, Habenicht, Moore, Woodward None Bums 6. SOUTHGATE/ SOUTH ARAPAHOE AGREEMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT A clerical error caused 5 accounts that were in Southgate and South Englewood Sanitation District to be coded as being in the South Arapahoe Sanitation District. As a result, Southgate and South Englewood Sanitation District's residents incurred the South Arapahoe Sanitation District's maintenance charges, which were higher than Southgate's and South Englewood Sanitation District's charges. A similar issue was brought to Council in June, 2006 when 84 such accounts were discovered. South Arapahoe performed an audit and found these last 5 accounts. Notices with instructions will be sent to the affected property residents on obtaining refunds. The South Arapahoe Sanitation District has calculated the amount of the refunds due the owners of the properties , including interest rates based on rates earned by South Arapahoe during the time period. The City of Englewood and South Arapahoe have consulted their records and all concur with the amounts noted. Mr. Clark moved; Mr. Cassidy seconded: Ayes: Nays : Members absent: Motion carried. To recommend Council approval of the agreement between City of Englewood, South Arapahoe Sanitation District, Southgate Sanitation District and South Englewood Sanitation District for refunding overcharges. Clark, Higday, Cassidy, Wiggins, Oakley, Habenicht, Moore, Woodward None Bums ·· 7 . PURCHASE OF 4-Y ARD DUMP TRUCK. The Utilities' four-yard tandem dump truck is used for hauling dirt and fill material for main construction and repairs. It is also necessary for installing and repairing sections of the City Ditch. The new truck is a replacement for the existing truck #1306 according to the CERF replacement schedule. There was a request for bid published and five responded. Transwest Trucks , Inc is the lowest recommended bidder at $79 ,166. A change from a tandem axel to a one axle truck adjusted the bid to $77 ,000. This item was approved in the 2008 budget for CERF replacement. Mr. Higday moved; Mr. Wiggins seconded: Ayes: Nays : Members absent: Motion carried . To recommend Council approval of the four-yard tandem dump truck from Transwest Trucks, Inc. in the amount of $77,000 . Clark, Higday, Cassidy, Wiggins, Oakley, Habenicht, Moore, Woodward None Burns 8. MAIN BREAKS The Board received a copy of a memo from Stu Fonda to the Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection crew for the time and effort given over the Christmas and New Years holidays during the 12 water main breaks and 2 collection system backups. The next Water and Sewer Board meeting will be Tuesday, February 12 , 2008 at 5:00 p.m. in the Community Development Conference Room. Respectfully submitted, Cathy Burrage Recording Secretary COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item February 19, 2008 AT T. 2. Subject Allen Plant Alum Residuals Removal and Disposal INITIATED BY Utilities Department STAFF SOURCE Stewart H. Fonda, Director of Utilities COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION Council approved on July 19, 2004 the bid for the Allen Water Filtration Plant Residuals Removal and Disposal Service to Waste Management in the amount of $163,260.00 for disposal of one year of production . Council approved on June 19, 2006 the bid for Allen Water Filtration Plant Residuals Removal and Disposal Service to Waste Management, Inc. in the amount of $49,768 .00 for disposal of approximately 800 cubic yards of production. RECOMMENDED ACTION The Englewood Water and Sewer Board, at their February 12, 2008 meeting , recommended Council approval, by motion, of the proposal for the Allen Water Filtration Plant residuals removal and disposal to Allied Waste in the amount of $108,775 for disposal of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of production. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED Alum sludge is produced by the settling process and filter backwashing . Sludge builds up in the washwater reservoir and the settled solids are pumped out by the sludge-handling barge. It then goes into the belt press, which dewaters the residuals . This process allows us to stockpile 2,000 cubic yards of residuals annually. Sludge is produced year-round , and it is imperative that the sludge be processed when the weather is amenable and stored until disposal. Storage space has since run out, and the Allen Filter Plant needs to dispose of this sludge in the quickest, most economical and legally compliant method . The dewatering process concentrates a naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM), also known as technologically enhanced radioactive material (TERM) that falls under State Health Department requirements with EPA guidelines. For a comparison of relative radiation exposure -standing next to the residuals pile for 6 months produces 1 -2 mrem/year, watching TV produces 1 mrem/year and living in a brick or stone house produces 7 mrem/year (information provided by Joseph Cattafe of COM). Residuals sludge disposal has been an on-going challenge and debate with EPA for the past several years for Colorado Front Range utilities. The disposal site must be approved by the State Health Department as an allowed site for properly disposing of residuals resulting from normal sludge removal operations at the Allen Water Filter Plant. FINANCIAL IMPACT Engineer's estimate was unknown since new disposal requirements have been implemented. Allied Waste is the recommended acceptable bidder at $108,775.00 for one year's production (2,000 yards). The Utilities Department budgeted $80,000.00 in account #40-1603-55201 in the 2008 Budget for this project. Additional funds are available from the Water Fund and will be budgeted for 2008. COM reviewed the bids and did a technical evaluation deeming the Allied Waste bid the lowest, acceptable bid. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Bid Tabulation Sheet dated January 31 , 2008 City of Englewood Bid Tabulation Sheet Bid Opening Date: January 31, 2008 10:00 a.m. ITEM BID: IFB-08·104 Residuals Removal & Disposal Services Line Item #1 Line Item #2 Qty Cost Hauling per Extended Cost for Vendor {yds) yard 2000 yds Clean Harbors 2000 $ 112.61 $ 225,220.00 42 Longwater Dr Norwell, MA 02061 CS/ Landfill (Waste Management) 2000 $ 75.00 $ 150,000.00 7780 E. 96th Ave' Henderson, CO 80640 Al/led Waste 2000 $ 54.38 $ 108,775.00 8480 Tower Road Commerce City, CO 80022 Midway Landfill 2000 $ . $ . New Horizons 2000 $ . $ . Line Item #3 Cost per load Exceptions: •' $ 1,802.00 Addendums acknowledged $ 1,275.00 Addendums acknowledged $ 870.00 Addendums acknowledged $ . NOBID $ -NOBID ITB-08-104Residuals _TAB.xis AT!. 3 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item Subject February 19, 2008 Purchase of a Tractor Mower INITIATED BY Utilities Department STAFF SOURCE Stewart H. Fonda, Director of Utilities COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION None. RECOMMENDED ACTION Council approval, by motion, of the purchase of one, 6415 Cab Tractor and Mower from Potestio Brothers Equipment in the amount of $56,858.09. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The proposed John Deere 6415 Cab Tractor is used by Allen Filter Plant personnel for mowing weeds and grass along the City and McBroom Ditches, at Mclellan Reservoir and the Allen Filter Plant. The John Deere 6415 tractor and mower is a CERF replacement for Unit #1335, a 1995 John Deere 5300 tractor with mower. The proposed model has a larger boom- type attached mower to reach places currently inaccessible to the existing mower and will provide a closer mow to the ditches. The Purchasing Department received the bid per State Bid #CDOT-310000675. FINANCIAL IMPACT Potestio Brothers Equipment is the recommended bidder at $56,858.09. It has been approved in the 2008 Budget for CERF replacement. CERF cost will be $32,000.09 and Utilities Department will fund $24,858.00. The Utilities portion is to fund the larger tractor and boom-type mower. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Summary Specification Sheet for New Vehicles -Prepared For CITY OF ENGLEWOOD Prepared For Prepared By Creation Date Expiration Date Quote Id Quote Expires : Jan 03 , 2008 POTESTIO BROTHERS EQUIPMENT 19020 LONGS WAY PARKER I co 80134 Phone : (303)841 -2299 frankp@pbequi . om TOMRIOITE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD Phone : (303)762-2650 JOHN ALCAMO 19020 LONGS WAY PARKER I co 80134 Phone : 303-841-2299 JOHNA@PBEQUIP.COM Dec 15, 2007 Jan 03 , 2008 1988407 Prepared By JOHN ALCAMO . · . Frepared For CITY OF ENGLEWOOD Salesperson: X. ______ _ Additional Comments Hi Torn , Total Prepared By JOHN ALCAMO $ 56,858.09 $ 56,858.09 $ 0.00 0.00 0.00 $ 56,858.09 $ 56,858.09 Accepted By: x. ______ _ The price on the boom mower is the Colorado Department of Transportation price . The award number is 310000675 this contract is good till 2/28/08 . If you would like the city could piggyback on there price. PRICES BASED ON COLORADO STATE CONTRACT 002-98 MAKE P.O. OUT TO JOHN DEERE COMPANY 2000 JOHN DEERE RUN CARY, NC 27513 SHOW POTESTIO BROTHERS AS THE DELIVERING DEALER Thank You, JohnAlcamo If you have any questions please call me. Cell 720 320 8998 office 303 841 2299 Quote Expires : Jan 03, 2008 >repared For CITY OF ENGLEWOOD Equipment Name : LANDPRIDE BOOM MOWER Serial Number : Equipment Name : John Deere 6415 Cab Tractor Serial Number : 0150 0250 1288 4168 7010 7152 7611 9102 9115 AL80126 AL80127 AL111705 9075 9260 8810 AR203298 AL169793 AL169957 AL169861 RE227949 ab MFWD SyncroPlus w/ LHR Flanged Mechanical Seat Value Package Standard Cab MFWD Front Axle with Limited Slip Differential 18.4R34 In . 144A8 R1W Radial (480/8SR34 In. 147A8 R1W Radial) 13.6R24 ln.128A8 R1WRadial yncroPlus 16F/16R Transmission with Left Hand echanical Reverser (19 mph/30 kmh) langed Axle, 8 Position Steel Wheels uper Comfort Seat (MSG 83) with Mechanical uspension, 3-ln. Seat Cushion ear Windshield Wiper with Front & Rear Washer ack-Up Alarm IRRORLH IRRORRH RAKE LIGHT KIT ECOND SCV DELUXE OADER PREP KIT RON WEIGHT SUPPORT ELUXE CONTROL VAL VE OVER RIGHT HAND OSITION KIT #3 SCV . NGINE COOLANT HEATER ubtotal IS COUNT Quote Expires : Ja_n 03, 2008 Pr-epared By JOHN ALCAMO Equipment Quantity: 1 Equipment Quantity: 1 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 292 .00 1 1,603.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 361.00 1 357.00 1 110.00 1 110.00 1 220.00 1 92.00 1 835.00 1 1,918.00 1 294 .00 1 839 .00 1 195.00 1 146 .00 ' 1 80 .33 61,337.33 17,187.2 44,150.09 ·Aurora'-Sentinel Online I Aurora still trying to solve water woes A T7. '-I PRINT a AURORA Sentinel Wednesday , January 16 , 2008 Aurora still trying to solve water woes THE VOICE OF AURORA, COLORADO ONLINE Innovative drought-resistant project doesn't bring contort to residents with high bills By J.C. O'Connell The Aurora Sentinel Wednesday , January 16 , 2008 Page 1 of 3 It could be the motto of Aurora Water, as the city's utility enterprise tries to craft a rate structure acceptable to residents who must still foot the bill for its groundbreaking water project. From the outside, the city is building an innovative, under-budget project that will make Aurora one of the most drought-resistant cities on the Front Range. lliililiiiiii:~ But that achievement isn't very comforting to the residents who saw their water bills -skyrocket last summer and fear more of the same high prices this year. Heather A. Longway-Burke/The Aurora Sentinel The city spent three days last week trying out four proposed new rate structures . Some residents aren't happy with the current rates or those proposals because they all rely on a tiered structure that charges more for water as consumption increases. "I don't pay a higher rate when I use more gas to heat my house in the winter. I don't pay a higher rate when I use more electricity. My bills go up, but I pay the same rate per unit," said Gerald Ortloff, who saw his bill almost double last summer to $554 . In addition to encouraging conservation, Peter Binney, director of Aurora Water, said a tiered-rate structure is a political necessity when it comes to buying and negotiating water rights throughout the state. Other drought-sensitive communities wouldn't approve of a flat rate system, because tier-rate structures promote water conservation, according to city officials . The rate hike is also necessary to pay for the city's Prairie Waters Project. The $750 million project is a direct response to the precarious position Aurora found itself in almost six years ago when reservoirs sunk so low the city only had enough water for nine months . Aurora implemented tough drought policies and restrictions . "The city has one of the best water-supply systems in the State of Colorado," Binney said "What we're looking to do at this time is to improve the level of service we provide to you when we get into these droughts. What that means is we have to bring more water onto the system or have more water sitting in the bank than we did in 2002." While the project is a technical success thus far, it has been a public-relations problem for Aurora. The overall 12-percent increase in water rates hit some residents harder than others, with some customers reporting their bills had as doubled or even tripled. http://www.aurorasentinel.com/print.asp?ArticleID=18149&SectionID=l5&SubSectionID=l5 1/17/2008 · A urora 'Sentinel Online I Aurora still trying to solve water woes Page 2of3 In response to public outcry, city council apologized and refunded some customer money and pledged to revamp the rate structure while asking for residents' input. The city sent refunds totaling $487, 795 to 1 ,246 customers who saw their bills increase more than 30 percent even after using less water than in the previous year , according to city officials . The rebate money came from water-department savings. While refunds may have helped a relative handful of Aurora's 68,000 residential water customers , the city still wanted to hear from a diverse group of residents who have lived in Aurora for at least a few years . Aurora held five focus groups in December to gather the opinions of Aurora residents . Many of the participants said the rate structure should be fair, predictable and encourage conservation -all goals the city has been working toward they said . But a report on the groups compiled by Public Opinion Strategies notes that the definition of fair can vary depending on the audience. That much was apparent Jan . 9 as the city gathered feedback on four different tiered structures . Many residents expressed concerned that they're paying the way for growth, with some asking questions about Aurora's annexation and growth policies . Robbie Hunter said he felt that current residents were the "victims" who are being forced to pay higher water rates in order to pay for development. Aurora's growth has slowed with the housing slump and is now below the state average, according to city officials. Aurora's growth rate has hovered around 1. 7 percent the past few years, said Deputy City Manager Nancy Freed . But growth and tap fees haven't slowed enough to put the project's financial future in jeopardy , said Greg Baird, deputy director of Aurora Water Business Services . In Denver, connecting a single family home to the water system costs $2 , 125 plus 46 cents for every square foot of the lot , according to Denver Water. In addition to raising water rates, the city increased tap fees -the price developers pay to connect a new property to the existing water system -to more than $20 ,000 . Even months after receiving their highest water bills , residents spent more time criticizing the water rates than commenting on Aurora Water's new proposals. The feedback the city did receive at its Jan. 9 meeting was far from positive , with some residents entirely rejecting the idea of a tiered-rate structure . "The fundamental problem is the tiering structure. One size fits all just doesn't work. I can't see any of the four plans that's a good plan ," said Don Kado, an Aurora resident who has attended several public meetings about the water rates. Hunter agreed, saying the only "fair and equitable" solution would be a flat-rate structure, that charges residents the same amount for every 1,000 gallons of water used. At the city's last water meeting the following night, other water customers said they've made efforts to conserve water and want those who use the most to foot the majority of the bill. "We're actually down to the wire where 90 percent of what we've heard is an inclined block, with the conservation effect and it's something we can implement by the irrigation season ," said Greg Baird, deputy director of Aurora Water Business Services . "That's not to say that we can't in the future look at something else to try and meet what people's definitions may be on fair and equitabile." The city also plans to introduce budget billing to allow customers to spread the cost of higher summer water bills throughout the year.The city's Water Policy Committee is scheduled to review residents' comments Jan . 15 before recommending a new rate structure. City council will make a final decision in February, in time for the new rates to take effect before the summer http://www.aurorasentinel.com/print.asp? ArticleID=l 8149&SectionID= l S&SubSectionID= 15 111 7/2008 Daniel L. Brotzman January 14, 2008 Page 2 AT T. s- First, in the interest of the budget, the bill has been reduced by $2 , 187 .50 from standard hourly rates. The following time spent on deed research that was withheld from the previous bill: $8 ,352 for Angela Johnson and $5 ,692 .50 for Jamie Ryan has been reduced on the statement by the $7 ,000.00 that Aurora is sending to us . I hope that we have come to at least a temporary high point in the billings on the FRI CO/United/East Cherry Creek case. Our expert witne·ss report is complete and will be filed on January 14 , the deadline . The report , which was authored by a number of engineers at Martin and Wood , is some 160 pages in length. I consider it to be an exceptional document. There were several preliminary drafts . Reading the preliminary drafts and making constructive suggestions consumed significant attorneys time. That attorneys work is complete . The report shows a massive expansion of the rights which Applicants seek to change and points out that the expansion was improper. Therefore , the new municipal use should be substantially reduced , and it is quite possible that the historic use by the remaining farmers will be cut way back. We suggested to counsel for Aurora that a settlement offer should include letting the farmers continue to use most of their expanded rights , so long as the rights are used only for farming on existing farms . When the shares "go municipal" they would have to be dramatically reduced in yield. There were two purposes to the suggestion: fust, ifthe farmers were to be immediately cut back , a bitter trial and an appeal to the Supreme Court would be guaranteed, because some farmers simply might not have enough water to continue farming. Second, we wished to avoid stories in the Denver newspapers that "Englewood, Aurora and Public Service were destroying family farms with their greed for water," or words to that effect. At first Aurora 's counsel res isted our suggestions, but now personnel within Aurora have endorsed that suggestion. At some point in the next month or so settlement negotiations will commence , and our suggestion will be proposed, along with resolution of other issues . The previous case and settlement requirements in the present case will indeed make a reduction in farmer use, but not as severe a reduction as would occur if the entire unlawful expansion were immediately eliminated . Settlement is not assured, of course. Daniel L. Brotzman January 14, 2008 Page 3 The present bill includes over $14,000 of paralegal time which was actually expended in November, on the task of locating the farms where the Burlington water rights were initially and lawfully used. The initial Burlington appropriation for those farms was made in 1885 , and was completed well before 1909. In 1909 the Burlington rights could provide a good deal of excess water from the then-existing Burlington canal, and in addition the existing canal was insufficient to carry all the water which was decreed. (The full decreed amount had not been used.) In 1909 FRI CO bought shares in Burlington, and bought Burlington's "excess" water as well. FRI CO then expanded the canal and used the senior Burlington water throughout the much larger FRICO system. (FRICO water is also used throughout the system.) It is that issue on which the paralegal time was expended, in cooperation with Martin & Wood's people. We held the time on the November bill because Aurora's counsel had promised to pay for some of the work. Aurora has now said they would pay $7,000. We have not received the funds, but our understanding is that they will come to us and we have reduced the Englewood bill by that amount. A good deal of time was also spent on drafting a motion to require FRI CO to allocate its releases from Barr Lake by decree, and to prove that the released water had been lawfully diverted and stored. We believe it may be impossible, or extremely difficult, for FRICO to meet those requirements , ifthe Judge were to impose them. FRICO has taken so much water out of priority over the years, and its records are so bad, that the requisite proof might be virtually impossible. There is good law supporting our position. The motion should assist in obtaining a settlement. We may wait until early February to file the motion, and file it after Applicants have submitted their rebuttal expert reports, which might deal with the issue. Work on other matters was inconsequential in December. The remainder of the cases are described below. 1. General (#001): This matter is our general file for work not attributable to specific cases. In some instances, the work is not specific to a particular matter. In other instances, the time spent on any individual matter is not large enough to justify a separate bill, but the time on the group of matters is significant. This includes charges related to general calendaring, reviewing various daily incoming pleadings and correspondence, overall case management and other activities that are not case specific. It usually includes preparation of many statements of opposition. 2. Colorado Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation (93CW121) (#322): This case involves an exchange right (absolute and conditional) upstream of Englewood 's senior South Platte exchange rights in W-8456-76. Englewood entered this case to ensure that the sources of