Fall River Sewer Commission 2 26 25mp4

welcome to the February 26 meeting of the for civil commission uh I want to point out that this is um the first meeting that's being held down in the wastewater treatment facility uh we're in uh what appears to be a major uh transition that took place down here and um I'm very proud of it and I'm glad to be here to have the first meeting I think in my time of it being

held down at the waste water treatment plant so having said all that um Paul will you do the roll call please yepa ales pres here pres okay pursuant of the open meeting law any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or Transmissions are being made whether perceived or

unperceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible having said all that item we all have I think our agendas uh first item on the agenda is citizen input Mr pin is there any citizen no no has anybody I all right that takes us to item number two minutes of the previous meeting we've all been uh sent the minutes of the previous meeting um I think was pretty well described as

to what took place uh if anybody has any questions or wants to take some time to uh review it some more um just mention it if not I'll attain a motion to um approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on December 17th 201 24 make that motion second all in favor I okay third item is the storm waterer repeal for 47 Whitefield Street um I guess Mr reposer who was supposed

to be here uh who is I I believe the resident of 47 Whitefield Street Whitefield street is not here yeah so uh excuse me I apologize you about that but Mr Roser uh did contact me yesterday he had an emergency that he wasn't going to be able to make it tonight uh so uh you know if the board wanted to table this to uh the next available meeting to see whether he is eligible that is something

that Bo do anybody have any objection to tabling this I'd like to give this gentleman the opportunity to come in and you know give his so what yeah he did contact he did initially say he was going to be available and you know and then he had an emergency come up so and did contact us to let us know okay um Paul you have any problems with no problem okay um just for everybody's benefit I've

I've looked at the property um it's it's for both your benefits it's located at the corner of um Whitfield and Marana Bishop cor am I right yes okay so um having said all that um I'll antain a motion to table item number three to sometime in the future when Mr reposer is available I make that motion I'll second that motion all in favor I item number four we're at that time of year again

and we have in front of us the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 um being presented the budget that the proposed amount is $32,988 no I'm sorry $2,991 and 128 32,1 91,8 got to get my decimal points in the right place place um go ahead Paul yeah so if you want I'll go over a brief overview of uh any of the changes within the budget from FY 25 which is the current fiscal year into

FY uh 26 which is the proposed budget uh that is in front of you uh overall uh the budget does increase about uh little over 1 uh 1.9 billion uh from last fiscal year to this fiscal year uh on the revenue side some of those increases uh one of the increases is due to the rate uh so if you remember last year we had an extensive race study that was done uh

in conjunction with woodw cured by rap Tellis who is a utility rate study company uh they came in and uh last year uh we had a large rate adjustment uh we did not use any retained earnings within the budget last fcal year which was a big change from prior fiscal years for us uh so that was uh that was last year this year we're looking for a rate increase of 40 cents on the rate uh and

that's the next item agenda but I just want to that's where our user uh charges increase from uh so it would be from $811 the current rate up to $851 per CCF uh the future rate so that's uh the sewer user charge increase uh on the revenue side the other thing that we did increase this year was the septage revenue uh so we've kept that uh Flatline but we've seen a great increase

in the revenue that we've received by septage Revenue uh over the past couple of years uh this so in FY 24 uh we uh we took in uh $860,000 over $860,000 uh this year we're slated probably to come in about 1.1 to 1.2 million uh in revenues uh so we did increase that Revenue line item uh within the budget what do you let me stop there what do you think the reason for that

is so our staff in the office uh and our staff down here at the plant has come up with uh a a really good way that septage Hall is like it's a pretty seamless way for them to be able to come in unload their AG it be properly documented down here at the wastewater treatment plan uh we do bi-weekly billing so now rather than waiting a longer period of time month two months three months and then

the sepol is get a large Bill we're billing them every two weeks now uh which helps their you know budgetary management as well as ours uh so I think that's definitely played into it we've reached out to a lot of septage hallers let them know that we're available uh what our r rates are uh our rates are uh you know lower than some of the other competitors around in the area uh there's a number

uh other septage uh facilities that take it uh we are uh somewhat a little bit lower but the revenue uh the revenue stream that we do get from that is uh is substantial I can remember when it used to be like 300,000 a year correct so you somebody's doing a good job that's good um I I've got one question Paul with respect to the $32 million that were proposing almost 33

um last year we were at a budget like you said where there was no return retain the inds put in it and so forth but we were at almost $31,100 th000 now if you take a look at the rate that we proposing of $851 correct and we were at $811 last year that's like um it's almost a 5% increase correct and yet 32 m991 th000 compared to the last year's budget is just a little better than

6% now why would the rate be what did I say 5% 5% and this is the money is turning up to be about a little better than 6% so again with the septage increase so if you look at last year's budget we budgeted 500,000 uh as a revenue uh this year in FY 26 we're budgeting a million dollars in Revenue so that's uh money uh Revenue that's coming in that rate payers will

not have to uh will not have to pay so you know that's part of the percentage uh there was also some incre increase in our other Revenue which is uh uh some of the outer Town users go into the other re Revenue line item uh specifically Tim and Wastewater District uh their usage has increased and continues to increase as they bring new people into their system uh and discharg into our uh as

well as uh Freetown has ISP and some other ones where their uh usage has increased as well uh and that's that other uh Revenue so again there are other revenues that we've been able to achieve within our Revenue line items and are projecting uh that does not go onto the back of the rate pay okay okay um yeah I had a question about that um all right like I can understand your

point um the other thing is um you also presented with us the backup package spelling out just what each line item is supposed to represent and so forth um with respect to where is it a sheet that shows salary people

Michael candido Yes are we paying for like half his uh no so he is a water maintenance worker one CDL slbo uh that is he's a union employee uh he's part of the green crew uh which helps maintain some of our storm water uh assets throughout the city is he a safety coordinator it saids something there about safety coordinator is that is he uh no Michel do you know is water maintenance work one

cdlb okay but you see right under it it says safety coordinator you have that on your list that's on the he's on the project I think that's a separate person yeah right right so safety coordinator project manager that line underneath it so yeah okay so that that refers to the project manager right that's that's a separ that's a separate position okay um is that a filled position uh right

now no no because there's no employee number on the side correct right okay and I think would we back to what we did last year are you anticipating I know you didn't I didn't see anything for for free cash or retain earnings you know it's showing as zero you feel confident that we can meet our our commitments on this yes without having to dig into retainer yeah without a doubt you know the way that the uh

Revenue side of the expense side of the budget struction into a balanced budget uh revenue is feeding expenses uh and without the use of retained earnings or free cash uh I I am comfortable that uh the FY 26 budget as proposed will will balance um you know and again we went through this uh we dealt with this and that was one of the reasons for the in the size of the increase that we had

last year was uh the lack of retained earnings uh if you remember last year year as well uh within the FY 24 budget we actually ended the uh fiscal year in a deficit and we had to transfer funding from our stabilization fund because we had no retained earnings we had to transfer from our stabilization fund into our fiscal year budget to be able to make up that deficit so uh we do have retained

earnings available this year I'm not proposing to use it because uh you know we're at a point here now uh where we shouldn't be using that's a horrible practice to use retained earnings that's building a structural deficit within your budget because what happened last year where you have no retained earnings when you get to that point you have to deal with it at that point uh my

proposal with the retained earnings that we do have in place uh is to take a portion of it a number one replace that funding that we needed to use from stabilization replace that funding uh back into our stabilization account was about 175,000 or so uh then also take uh an additional uh sum and transfer that into stabilization so that's building up your savings account uh we have and all

that money would be coming from free cash from 24 retained earnings yeah free cash from 24 correct yep okay yeah and then that would leave us with uh potentially a uh an amount within our retained earnings that uh we can use uh for pay as we go projects rather than bonding out projects uh so that uh we can uh we can do the construction without having to

bond out for it uh and if we do not end up uh authorizing that money for use uh then it just comes out in uh in the following years uh retained earnings so it's not that we lose that money or it goes anywhere else kind of stays in our bank account and it just comes out next year as well be great if we can move forward like the next five six seven

years just doing that we we'd have a good piece of uh cash to to be able to either distribute back or keep moving ahead in capital projects and things of this nature like we just finished yeah 100% you know that's that's the one thing um you know we're looking for just sustainable budget um and that's uh that's what uh that's what we built here as a sustainable budget that's not using

any one- time Monies to be able to plug gaps in the budget good um you had a question yeah so just back to the um these two vacancies there's a second vacancy for administrative assistant was that there last year my second budget

actually there's three there's a there's a board member rant and there's a um did I see an assistant uh Deputy administr Deputy Administrator yes that Deputy that Deputy Administrator position uh was open last year as well okay yeah I up yeah and obviously wasn't filled correct any reason why is it planned to be filled this this year or uh that would be with the correct candidate yes

directly on you yes so that's so that's actually old position uh when uh uh Terence Sullivan was the administrator still so I'm not do both jobs trying to fight somebody and then obviously it's I think it's upon point that safety coordinator do we do we have one or uh So currently we don't have one um but uh through Community utilities uh you know as it gets with multiple different licenses and uh different uh

different uh regulations that come down you know just uh back in 2020 there was a change in the Dig Safe regulations where uh now all municipalities fall think safe regulations to have somebody to manage and maintain that program as well as all of our in-house safety trainings uh uh making sure everything's up to date we haven't had that position in the past but my hope is to be able to

take and uh fill that position so that we have somebody to do are all let me ask you this are all your well only a few men you have here right are they ocean certified do you mandate or are all these all your guys ocean certified uh in the out that are that are out on the field I can tell you all the guys that we have have at least

their ocean tent uh on on the water well on the water side uh I have so that's on the city side yeah okay how about on treatment side uh not sure so we have a a robust safety program to meet all the oan Reg but some of our positions don't requ necessarily course those that do require it's part of their saf train and just for anybody who's who's watching or anything like that uh we have some

members from uh infok uh infok that is here they are the ym contractor for our wor water treatment plan and just one more so I I believe I've asked this in the past after this leaves us tonight on a vote it does still go in front of the council correct yes rejected by the council or adjusted by the council or it can be so uh this this leaves leaves you

guys uh it goes uh up to the uh to the mayor and the uh and the financial team which I've already had briefings with them on this proposed budget uh from there have they seen it yes have yep from there it gets s down to council prior to March 3rd that meets the requirement of 120 days prior to the close of the fiscal year uh from there they have 45 the city council has 45

days to act on the budget uh and then they also uh in a company with the budget itself is also the rates which the rates require a change of ordinance because those are set by ordinance so there's two separate actions that the city council needs to take one approving the budget or uh acting on the budget within 45 days and then uh uh if there is a rate change teed approve in the

ordinance for the rate change just a clarification for the public yep um Paul getting back to this sheet here um I think you and I had talked maybe about a month or so ago um you were still looking for an individual um did that pan out or uh you know we're in talks with a couple of people to fill these uh vacant positions but we have not had anybody accept a position yet okay all

right anybody else have any questions um okay so the process right now it's been it's up at the sixth floor um sixth floor will be presenting it down to the council at which point it'll be our responsibility to be there to to explain things and so forth and so on um just for my edification their responsibility is is strictly for the budget budget to either approve it disapprove it or request a change to it

yeah so for for my understanding of the law they can either approve reject or reduce right well I'm sure they're not going to increase it right um right leave they leave that for us yeah all right so uh unless anybody has any other questions I guess we were being asked to approve this uh budget uh I've looked through it um I think Paul you've answered my my question is with respect to the money

and with respect to the rate in terms of you know percentage and so forth um I think it's a good budget um especially in letter of the fact that we're we're not proposing to use any retaining earnings in it and um I think that would be a a positive thing for us going in front of the council because historically we're always grabbing Peter the pay Paul and uh I think we're finding out getting

ourselves in a position to uh to to finally put some money in a bank and I think like you Paul you said um the septage revenue is uh is going to help with that and so forth so um having said all that Paul do you have any questions with respect to this what we're doing you will okay well then Iain a motion to accept the um proposed budget for fiscal year

2026 in the amount of 32,900 9 1,128 anybody want to make that motion I'll make that motion for the fisal year 2026 budget I second all in favor I Scott hi Hi I hi okay now the proposed rate we have a sheet that's spells up the proposed rates would be under this budget including um rates that deal with um other areas and I think that's been presented to us so uh for the benefit of approving this

sheet we can um as the board we we can make a motion to um approve all the rates that are proposed on this instead of going one by one by one right yes okay so gentlemen we have this sheet in front of us that uh shows what the proposed rates would be under the new budget the U thinking is to approve what's on this what's on the sheet as the uh as the proposed rates for 2026

so if we make that motion make it in light of what's being presented on this paper yeah so just as a summary of what's on there so the uh current rate is $811 the proposed rate for residential is $851 uh the significant industrial user rate uh currently is $387 the increase would be to $46 uh and listed on the sheet is also a number of uh uh per household uh for households

that do not have a water meter we build per the number of people that are within a household uh based on the uh census uh so those are all listed uh in the lower those went up the same percentage that the actual rate uh did go up uh so the rates increases 40 cents per CCF uh which equates to about 5% just under 5% of the rate uh that was what was

recommended by uh raphis uh uh company that came in that did evaluations of our budget in our rates uh last fiscal year with the the uh proposed 5% they also did propose a 5% increase on the stor Mort fee as well for this fiscal year uh once I constructed the budget I didn't feel that that was needed so I felt that we could forego the 5% increase of the stone Bo fee as well uh the overall

impact to the average household uh would be $212 per year uh that's based on an average household using uh 53 CCF per year uh that would be their uh that would be their increase uh so $21.20 to the average household if you have a multif family there's three households there so you'd be times three on that but uh that's part of the average household so the 21 20 cents is

is strictly the increase on the uh sewer sewer rate side sewer user Fe yes it doesn't include anything with storm water because we didn't increase it correct okay and they do for the board's knowledge to uh the Water we also did a 5% even though it's not under your jurisdiction but we also uh are going to be proposing a 5% increase uh to that one as well can we do a dual meeting

last year with these rates and we had a sem yeah yeah we yes it does yes it does yeah we did a dual meeting water in Sil yeah how come we didn't do that R this time so last year we had re tell us that did the large rate study and the uh you know evaluated our budget and everything like that so for both boards to be able to get all that information at the same

time and uh because as much you know Water and Sewer they're separate separate boards but a lot of it worked together who did the study this year uh so I I put together the budget with my team uh and we proposed the rates uh we I worked all all of this into the same model at the end of the study that they did they provided us with a model moving

forward I work worked all this back into the model that they provided us last year that was a savings answer doing an in housee yeah correct yeah that was that was interesting last year I thought they did a good job ni presentation and the thought process was right on yeah it was inter interesting and what I Was preparing it this year is going through uh going through the material from last

year and again without these rate increases you see where it's just a declining going into a deficit and the free cash just you know the line goes below zero and uh it's not sustainable uh that's why you know that's why uh last year you know and again last year we did have a substantial rate increase and this year we're following the model uh so that we do have that ability to be

able to have is the state Budget moving for now was that was that presentation also used on any other the departments in the city in terms of the the scope of it and and what they were trying what what you're trying to be get out of it not really any other departments because there's not many other departments that are like us there's only one other department and that's EMS is an Enterprise fund they're

the only other ones that their rates support their budget uh and EMS is is even different than us because a number one their rates are not ordinance their rates are set as fees uh and you know sometimes people say well their rates don't affect the rate payers of the customers because it's a healthare typically but it still does affect people's Healthcare rates and stuff like that but um you know so the EMS is the

only other Enterprise fund within the city uh everybody else Falls underneath the general fund everybody else you know a lot of departments building department traffic department they do have revenues but they don't need to uh you know they don't need to fund all of their budget all of their Debt Service payments all the work that they do doesn't come specifically just from their revenues

like order and Sewer um so you know with water and sewer the way that we're structured with our Enterprise funds we get no funding from the general fund uh we're fully self-funded by the rates that and the revenues that we collect okay um I think we still need I think I still need a motion to approve the rat that's been presented um anybody want yeah I'll make that motion for the uh rate increase of uh

fiscal year 2026 SE rates $851 a second all in favor I I thank you gentlemen all right that takes us item number six INF for Mark North intercept aligning under onm contract $645,000 go ahead Mr ferin uh so I put this uh in front of the board kind of two parts to this one is an amendment uh which allows our onm contractor uh under sec of the contract to be able to perform work

outside of uh the regular scope of Duties that routine maintenance or service work uh that we that we request um what one of these was uh lighting that we uh that we ended up doing up on the North End Interceptor uh so we have the uh North End Interceptor starts up on Innovation Way follows the free toown line down to the railroad tracks from the railroad tracks uh then head south

uh on the uh on the railroad tracks to about Collins Street uh comes out to North Main Street comes back a couple of spots uh so the uh mot and MBTA uh are starting the commuter rail uh we had concern with that uh with that uh with that line uh as you know we were working with W Cur they went out they cambered that line cleaned uh that line and came

with that line uh some of the line was was uh found to be uh not a great shape um as you know we had a collapse out there about 8 months ago on that line that's what triggered us really to start all this work uh so we work with infomar for them to bring in uh c24 which is a a lining company uh to line uh we ended up lighting it was probably about 4,000 ft

of that light uh to uh which uh improves the structural Integrity of the line uh and uh will extend the life of the line uh for a number of years uh it was a uh reinforced concrete pip line how many feet you think this WR we did roughly about 4,000 ft of lighting uh so there was there uh a little bit under 4,000 ft there was a couple there was a couple different

shots that we did uh in the most troubled areas uh and some of these areas it's uh it's an 18in RCP pipe reinforced concrete pipe uh some of these areas of the pipe had the uh the full wire Exposed on the crowd of the pipe uh so the reinforcing wire uh was fully exposed on the crowd of the pipe uh some of them had sections of the concrete that have fallen uh it was just

a matter of time till we uh till we had issues out there so um so this was more of an emergency type thing correct okay and for the sakes of of experience it sounds like um we utilize their capability to make things happen quick correct appreciate it gentlemen appreciate it this work has been done yes okay I remember we talked about it Interruption with the railroad was up but that all worked out well yeah

you know it did uh you know we were uh we worked with the railroad which they're uh interesting interesting group to work with uh but we worked with them we worked with uh uh some of the other uh you know ities that were involved down there uh to be able to get in there do the cleaning that we needed to do do the lighting that we needed to do uh to be

able to make sure that uh they're moving forward uh and just in the nick of time uh as of this past Monday uh they're going to be running seven days a week with crew trainings and then end of March they're supposed to go to full Fair service all the way to Boston from from what I've been from what I've seen in the News That's I'm not making that commitment that's what they're doing but

that's what I've seen in the news that that they're going to be doing so uh it was just in the nick of time we were able to get this done a week later and I don't even know whether we would have been able to get track time to be able to get uh the crews out there to do this work okay um you feel satisfied with it with the U the cost of it yeah you know

I think the cost was reasonable with the uh with uh what we had to contend with out there there on the rail you know we were working uh you know literally on the rail with all high rail equipment so special equipment that goes on the actual rail track grapple trucks um excavators to be able to move the liners uh in place and uh work within C2 form with limited access uh in some uh a

parking lot of uh an apartment complex in one spot down the end of a dirt road with another one so it wasn't the easiest access to be able to get in there uh for them to be able to perform the work was um was woodwood and to involved with this spot yeah so they assisted with the oversight oversight of it uh we had a I had uh one of our onsite uh inspectors uh so Stant Tech

was also uh provided the on-site inspection you remember we had an emergency we had a on call contract with them uh and they provided the inspection through that on call uh cont director so who who was the the General on uh so it was it's tough it kind of wasn't an overall General that that said you know it was It was kind of uh my staff and us uh organizing these

different teams uh working with wood Cur working with uh infar uh to be able to make sure that everybody did what they were supposed to to be able to get the job done that we needed done okay all right so obviously it worked out pretty well from what you're telling me you got we got ourselves off the hook and uh we didn't interfere with any railroad traffic that's going to be down the road

or something like that so yeah correct you know if if we had to if we went and uh you know if we uh did a full design on this project uh if we uh went out to bid with the with the overall GC you know we could have been talking a couple once with that process uh I think you could move the decimal point over on this thing uh not in our favor uh to

what it would have cost us no I got it I got it no that's that's good again again thanks fellas appreciate it just uh in a future um you know I spoke about this before just an itemizer if I can get an the board can get an itemize of that 645,000 okay yeah so I apologize yeah it's it's kind of tough for us say it tonight you just vote on a number when

we don't see where things went you know there pretty other things we voted on in pretty detail yep no I can definitely provide provide the backup that was provided by uh nc24 I don't have a problem with a vote a yes vote tonight but you know just in uh we can get some backup on that yep definitely yeah okay we do have that back up be that that intercept the line does it

in any way shape or form tie in anywhere with regard to the mother's Brook project was that so this was originally part of the mother's Brook project this that's what I thought yeah this is all part of the mother's Brook project so the mother's Brook project started from uh started from Wilson Road Innovation Way you know Airport Road riging back and included all of this area uh when we

did the evaluation of the 18in line on the railroad track uh it was determined that this line did not need to be upsized for future capacity that the capacity was there um and lining would be able to uh would be able to carry the capacity with the slopes of that line uh and where it is that's why we opted to do this to do this lining if not you know again we

would have potentially been looking at replacing it in lodic like we are in other sections of it but this particular section did not need to be upsized okay have any other question no okay gentlemen um guess we're going to need it a um a motion to approve um the infomar north intercept the linning under om o onm contract the amount of $645,000 now this is a oneshot deal yes yes at this you know at this

point in time we've got we've got verbiage in the in the onm contract in the event something like this happens again you know we can we got verbage there to use them as a source and so forth all right okay so we don't need do we need to do we need to approve that as well so the amendment yes the amendment does so there is some stuff in the contract but this changes

it to uh include the full uh verbage that that we're looking for with infu um as well as the uh as well as the change all right so we'll need a motion to approve the First Amendment to the agreement for the operations to maintenance of the contract correct correct right AB and which spells out also the quantity of 645 I well right so that's that's separate there's kind of yeah two parts to it two

parts to it the amendment to the contract do you want do you want two motions or would one motion do if you want to take two motions that's fine one motion hold on I'm a little confused on that first item there so there's a light item six for the 645 425 for the repairs that had to be done correct what is the second now for language and no making and you can

correct me on this point we need to we need to establish Amendment to the contract okay existing contract omm contract that went into effect July 1 that allowed us to go in and utilize their services to do it you needed to have some Authority in there to do it yep so that is in now actually isre all right so we'll we'll do this in two phases then we'll need a

uh a motion to approve the amendment to the contract that allowed this work to be done and which will remain as part of the contract in the future okay will anybody make that motion I'll make that motion second all in favor I I very good okay second motion we need is the approval uh on the amount of $645 $425 for the work that was done in replacing the north Interceptor lining piping that collapsed and was

necessary to do on an emergency basis with the understanding that um Paul you're going to provide us with a backup as to what the expenses were against this but yep we're moving ahead to to uh approve the U the quantity on this right okay um if in the event something you know you see something Paul see something I see something that may warrant some attention to it later on then we'll deal with that yep at that

point yep okay all right so I need a motion to approve um the work done by infam Mo that amount to 645,000 I'll make that motion for item number six for

$645,000 classified section of the paper probably about I want to say maybe about two months ago where uh they all of a sudden said here's a rough draft you're perit and so forth and so on and and um we've been waiting for this for a while having made it what we hope to be some addendums to it but I don't know if it ended up showing in at this point in

time but all right Paul what is update yeah so uh you know if board remembers about a year ago uh back in January of 24 uh the EPA issued a draft ni permit for uh uh discharges uh we uh are allotted by Statute 30 days to respond uh public comment period um on that first draft uh we got a Time extension uh with an additional 45 days uh for public you know so the 30 plus

the 45 total of 75 days for public comment uh we Pro provided substantial uh comment during that period uh our uh our letter uh numbering a naming the number of issues with the per uh was almost 80 pages long uh with about 1500 pages of supporting documentation including our uh integrated plan uh which we feel that they did not uh include in uh constructing our permit uh a number of epa's actual own policies uh

specifically in relation to EJ communities that they did not follow uh when they drafted that permit uh and such uh so we submitted that within the timely man that was required uh we did not hear anything from EPA the only thing that we heard uh from uh d EP was that the D after the public comment period issued a water quality permit uh which pretty much uh in their permit referenced the ni's permit which wasn't

issued yet uh by uh EPA and uh that had some additional requirements within the water quality permit uh we naturally what we appealed uh that permit you needed to appeal it within a 10-day period we did file Appeal on on that permit uh and then we didn't hear anything from EPA uh until January 20th uh of this year where they issued a second draft nipy permit uh the second draft nities permit was pretty much the

same as the first one besides some uh red highlighted issues the instructions that were issued uh said only to uh that this second draft was only too common on the red uh the red uh items within the within the second draft permit those red items were limited to you know there wasn't a lot of them but the ones that they did that were in there uh definitely had a major impact so

primarily what it did it took in uh csos uh in the other permit pretty much said that the csos need to be uh the water quality standards of the water body that they're discharging to uh so they need to meet the water quality standards of mon hope Bay uh which our csos did within those water quality standards uh there are exemptions for csos during wet weather uh wet weather times um they took that wording out and

they put in uh fecal Colo limits uh and end kakai limits um uh on a number of our csos um so those limits would be dry weather wet weather doesn't make a difference that's are we the only community that they've done it too as far as I've as far as our research has shown us we are one of the first in the nation uh Portsmith New Hampshire did have something that kind of looked like this

but not exactly like us uh and there was another community in Georgia that had something that kind of looked like this but isn't exactly like us so the limits that they're putting in place on us uh are the first that have been seated the nation so looking at it and it's an entirety you're looking at in order to remedy or be in that position to pass those limitations we need suici operation yeah

we need to we need to close off our we need to close off our csos 1.5 to2 billion doll worth of work I remember I remember I was talking about this 10 15 years ago and and the number was staggering you know people looking at it at 5 to 600 million then here we are at least double that and still trying to fight for the fact that this is crazy yeah so they released they released this

uh this second draft they called it uh and uh right away I request they released it with the 30-day comment period uh right away I requested an extension on the comment period uh we worked with a legal team at the engineers uh CDM Smith uh and uh and a legal team to uh start to put together public comment uh this has uh drummed up a lot of attention amongst other uh

Wastewater you know uh entities so uh I've had a couple of meetings with uh uh about 30 different Wastewater communities in Massachusetts at the CSO communities 17 of them are CSO communities as well as uh some other communities from Georgia New Jersey uh as far as San Francisco is uh looking at our permit um do they have do they have any um proof that would substantiate the need to do this another words is there

any indic has there been any indications that what's going on in the mount H Bay you know the the purity of it in terms of feal and so forth um has been growing and is is been becoming more and more apparent and and they're trying to you know stop this because people are panicking or something I mean what would be their motive I I think the most recent studies has have actually show the opposite that

it's on the de that's what I thought that's what I always heard you know that the bay is you know cleaner than ever yeah the study you know in our last set of comments that we provided to uh to EPA uh their scientific basis was a study that was 13 14 years old of mod um which had a lot different inputs back then that it does now so uh the scientific basis for their change uh

they really did didn't provide much of a backup of uh scientific evidence on why they are requesting in this second draft what they're requesting it's definitely something that's Troublesome so initially we did get an extension to our public comment period so we worked uh tirelessly with our team to be able to uh provide comments they were going to be due on February uh 18th uh the day after uh the

holiday last Tuesday uh the Friday before that uh we were finally issued an extension uh there was there was a number of other communities and other uh agencies uh other uh you know uh you know groups that did request extensions as well um that are that are going to be commenting on our permit or planning to comment on our permit um so they did finally uh issue a uh a 60-day extension

so we have have a little bit more time to be able to uh refine our comments we have all the bases of our structure of our comments built but we're going to be working to refine that with our team U but that's kind of where we are this was uh this is uh this is a real tough pill to swallow you know the way that the permits issued uh the first rain sto we

going to be in violation yeah yeah we will not be able to be this what makes it crazy the permit of the first first rainstorm or the second or the first 20 years with the affordability of it so does now does does the D have are they going along with this because I understand the this is strictly the EPA um because of the way they're structured that that they control they I

guess they're the top layer of authority in a certain area that's around here and the DP D DP I guess you you know they're at either the level are below or they're kind of like on a side on a side over this thing but um they come out as far as you know it they' thought about this and said hey this is getting a little over could be a little bit overbearing on our communities uh so

they they have not they you know they haven't said D has not said uh either way uh they've also uh pulled back the permit the water quality permit that they issued uh they also have a uh another permit um pretty much that may is the deputy's permit that they'll issue uh but in state for uh uh Nifty permit National pollution uh discharge elimination systems permit uh privacy goes to EPA so Mass DP hasn't taken

privacy uh there there's only three states in the United States that EPA has privac still has privacy that the local uh regulatory agency the state regulatory agency hasn't take privacy uh it's us New Hampshire uh and then uh New Mexico so those are the only three states in the United States that that don't have uh State privacy um and you know it's tough but EPA uh I feel sometimes EPA likes to uh see how far

they they can push the envelope uh in some of those states that they have privacy on yeah okay now this permit is supposed to be effective when so this is a draft permit for public comment uh so just like the one we got a year ago we provided public comment we didn't hear a peep from them until they issued this next draft uh the op permit ran out op permit ran out

in 20 6 but but we still fell underneath the old permit because we applied for a new permit prior to the expiration of our old per so uh you know we're we're fully uh you know we're fully in compliance right now with our current permit which is the one that was issued in 2001 so we're in compliance with that um I Le still look into excuse me J are they still looking to extract

nitrogen so they did not change any of the wording about nitrogen limits within the permit so the same so that problem still the stuff that we talked about a year ago that was a $350 million yeah issue that we had to deal with within a 5year period has now compounded with deletion of all of our csos okay anybody have any questions yeah it's we'll move on then thanks Paul that was for upate I wish I

had better news for you well you know I guess somebody has to throw it sometime yeah all right um item number eight the mother's Brook sewer project design change order number three for Woodward and curring the amount of 310,000 last meeting we had another change order for them this is the this is the third one then right yeah okay what's what's this one all about so this one's uh strictly in relation to

the uh to the work that's being done down on uh the railroad track as well again uh been here uh we talked about the cleaning and lining that was done that was done as part of wward the current contract uh for inspection to be able to evaluate that line the condition of the line um so again this is uh something where uh they were out there cleaning and lighting uh we couldn't

really stop the progress of work uh and then uh also the bypass and the bypass was left out there and set up uh while we did the uh while we did the U the lining as well uh so this is work and the support that they provided in their this subcontractor uh pki provided uh while we were doing the lining as well when we when you do the lining you essentially

you need to set up the bypass you run your cleaners you run your Jetts through again just to make sure all debrises out you got a camera of the line before the lighter goes in to make sure it's fully clean so that's what a lot of this work was did we ever get did we ever get the um final cost on doing the mother's Brooks s or was that strictly still in

design so that's still in design right now portions of it so as you know we've the mothers Brook sewer has has kind of turned into one giant project it's to a mish mash of projects this cleaning and lighting down on the railroad tracks was part of the original mother's Brook sewer design uh contract 1A that was approved At Last At the last meeting uh for rjv construction which was

replacement uh of about 3,000 ft of uh sewer line that's part of the mother's Brook sewer that was a bestest concrete pipe where we've had multiple failures uh so we Advanced a 1A contract to be able to to go in uh to do that work out there uh the part that's still in design really is from that 1A contract uh which uh goes all the way from Route 24 up to

the center of the landfill uh so from there Upstream is still uh it's still in final design we're just waiting for uh D in the U for D in um concom to finalize the uh Wetlands permitting on that and then we also I have the area for Route 24 down to the railroad tracks that area uh is still uh that's about again 95% designed just waiting to finalize the permitting of that

work okay none of this was part of that $120 million um master plan was it I don't think it was was it that's that's a lot of money yeah the $123 million uh Sewer Master Plan some of that funding did go for this cuz this is for sewer improvements um so there was a portion but a lot of this so this so uh 1.2 billion of this contract uh was paid

through an Eda Grant uh so most of this all the base original design contract and everything all the work that we're finishing up right now with the design that's all paid through an ed contract uh the only work outside that we've done on this uh outside of that Eda a grd uh was the uh was the cleaning cleaning or inspection done on the railroad tracks uh and then uh the separate contract and

contract inspection for the 1A contract okay anybody else have any questions okay I'm a motion to U approve change order number three to Woodward and cover an amount of $310,000 I'll make that motion for the mothers Brook sewer project designed of a change order of 310,000 item number eight second all in favor I I I okay um for other business I put just down uh item number nine is hopefully won't take

to one did you he anything any result back on that efficiency audit that right Pier was doing haven't seen anything yet but I'll be checking with to see where we are this just interested you know yeah know that that'll be an interesting to see the results com out of that and I just have this one more thing too I know Paul we spoke before the meeting on o Avenue any and you explain to me uh you

know what the time period is on a wife taking so long any toing any what any cost on that obviously uh yeah it wasn't no sword that was just a water job originally it started as as a water job uh we did come to the commission with a change uh with a change order for for that uh for that work um the uh the work the the progress has been uh slower than was anti you

know originally anticipated this is bisco right yeah this is bisco and Oak grve Avenue you know if anybody seen that work out there uh we're replacing a sewer that's 21 22 ft deep uh it's an extremely deep sewer uh the pocket of ledge that we're working in uh sometimes at the bottom is only 30 in wide uh so it's uh and what's a l on that going to be

uh get off the top of my head but I want to say we going from Locust right down in the Bost yeah Locus to new yeah we're going to do the whole entire length uh so that way that'll have that's fine uh at this point we not getting into that one um question was is it fine that that one you know uh we didn't see when we ran the Cameron down

that area we didn't see any areas that were collapsed or we were uh you know there are cracks at the top of the pipe as an Old Clay pipe that you see uh anywhere in the city uh but there were were no areas that we were extremely concerned about collapses uh so um you know with the enging infrastructure you know that's uh30 140 year old sewer uh you know you're going to it's it's been in use

for a long time you wonder how they get down there that far going working with ledge and granite and everything else and and stringing a pipe to go through it it it's amazing to think that they did this 130 years ago without the equipment that we have nowadays uh and I still say whoever did that one okav I think they got paid by the manhole because there's not a stretch

that's 100 feet on that road without a manhole you know it's it's it's and and that's one thing that does add to the time of the project is you know every manhole they need to fully take all their trench boxes all the support of excavation out of the hole back fill that side of the manhole open up on the other side of the manhole so that all adds time if you're running you know if

you're 800 ft in between man holes you're able to take and drag your your equipment down and work behind you and in front of you but when you're talking 100 feet in between bed holes it just makes it tough so I got I I got another I'm sorry no no so just answer my question so there was a line item at a past meeting yeah that addresses this

that right so so they had some kind of a figure for that whole length of that pipe that an amount yeah we had an initial figure broken down um you know 300 milon how much no it's two two 2.1 Point 2.1 I believe it was yeah you know and again they they have notified us of of some unexpected conditions so we we we can expect a little another row okay yeah correct well I think W

Street W Street that goes you know goes up with the call Billy so I don't know what was it last year they they dig up the street and then they I guess they finished it I think then they resurfaced it was that for water or was it sewer or was it gas pipe or something so I believe that was the gas company that did the work over there well why is

it why is it that when they C when they came to where like KNX Street comes into uh Ward Street right there's a whole section where they they didn't they didn't finish it and the same thing holds true when they go up Wall Street and you he Pier straight that runs into it there's a section there that they didn't finish it and it and it's a few other places that I've

you know up in that area where they I don't know they just and now they're plowing and the and the manhole covers are sticking up because they never finished it right and everybody's digging up the damn place yeah but anyways I I I'll talk to engineering about that that may have been one of their contracts or it may have been the gas company you know sometimes they get when they get to the end of the season

they leave stuff in binder with the anticipation of coming back in the spring to do the top cope I'll talk to engineer about that without appreciate it okay uh anybody else have any other business they want to talk about if not I'll t a motion to rejourn uh so just one other thing that I wanted to mention to the board uh and we haven't finalized dates or anything like that but coming

up this spring uh everybody should kind of keep their eyes open we're planning on doing an open house down here at the waste waterer treatment C the community and stuff like that again we haven't finalized any dates or anything we we put it on advertisements just want to put it on there that' be good yeah all right uh anybody make I'll second that motion to close this meeting all in favor i f