HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-01-24; Encina Joint Advisory Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesCITY CLERK
ENCINA JOINT POWERS
MINUTES OF THE JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
HELD ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1978
AT THE
ENCINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY CONFERENCE ROOM
Ed Stiles, Chairman Stanley Mahr, Vice Chairman
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Ed Stiles called the meeting to order at 9:05 &.M.
ROLL CALL
Present;
County of San Diego
Buena Sanitation District
San Marcos County Water District
Vista Sanitation District
Leucadia County Water District
Encinitas Sanitary District
City of Carlsbad
JAC Counsel
Encina Joint Powers
League of Women Voters
Absent:
Chuck Oldsen, Jim Frandsen
Ed Stiles, Bill Dominguez
Stanley Mahr
Joe Zapotocky, Bob Foo
Richard Hanson, Stan Van Sickle
Mark Schneider, Jack Kubota
Mary Casler, A. J. Skotnicki
Ron Beckman
Roy H. Gann, Esq.
Les Evans
Ruth Honnold, Jane Skotnicki
San Marcos County Water District Jim McKay
Guests:
Brown and Caldwell
CM Engineering Associates
Leucadia County Water District
Calavera Hills
BPZA
Vista Press
Graham Fraser, Garr Jones
John Murk
Regina Ash, Eric G. Elliott
Ted Donald
Fred Wilson
Lori Weisberg
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MUNITES - JANUARY/*", 1978
2. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 21, 1977
Chairman Stiles asked for the approval of the December 21,
1977 minutes as submitted. On motion by Mr. Mahr. seconded
by Mr. Zapotocky, the motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS
3. CPO - INSTITUTIONAL ALTERNATIVES FOR
AREAWIDE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Mr. Evans introduced Hadley Johnson of the Comprehensive Plan-
ning Organization who spoke on the "Institutional Alternatives
for Areawide Water Quality Management".
Mr. Johnson outlined the status of the Areawide Water Quality
Management Study. His remarks included comments on runoff, re-
clamation and salt balance studies which are nearing completion.
He summarized runoff problems as created more by agricultural
activities than urban development.
Mr. Johnson then discussed reclamation possibilities in the San
Diego region and outlined four potential projects in the Encina
area including reactivation of the Leucadia County Water District
and San Marcos County Water District treatment plants. The salt
balance studies indicate basins as having favorable and unfavor-
able balance depending on whether the salt concentrations are
decreasing or increasing.
Mr. Johnson continued with an explanation of the alternatives
for institutional arrangements as presented by the management
consultant. Essentially, the alternatives include a modified
arrangement of existing organization, a county plan, a cities
plan and an areawide government approach. The consultant's
final recommendation is to be available in early February.
INFORMATION
4. HEADWORKS UPGRADE
Chairman Stiles asked Mr. Evans for a report on the Headworks
Upgrade.
Mr. Evans stated that, because of the reaction to his comments
on the headworks area deficiencies at the December 21, 1977
JAC meeting, he had researched the files and found a letter
from Brown and Caldwell dated June 27, 1975 in which some of
the problems were discussed.
- 2 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY >K 1978
Q
The letter describes the corrugated metal pipe that was in-
stalled in the influent structure and designed for a short
term service of about 5 years or at least 2^ years prior to
when we can expect to have the major construction work com-
pleted on Phase III. Also, of importance is the grit struc-
ture which is already overloaded. We know that grit is get-
ting into the digesters, reducing their capacity, and our
pumps suffer because the grit wears the impellers. Mr.
Evans did not think that these problems would stop us from
rerating the plant if we were able to get the solids hand-
ling portion up to speed. However,' he said the headworks
is causing some kind of limitation and is definitely caus-
ing maintenance problems.
Mr. Evans estimated $1 million for improving the headworks
area. He recommended that we immediately move towards de-
sign of upgrading the headworks area and that, if we cannot
get grant money to assist us, we go ahead and spend our own
money.
Mr. Zapotocky asked if the work done to design the headworks
would then be a portion of the ultimate design for Phase III.
Mr. Evans said that it would but that it would not be eli-
gible for grant funding.
Mr. Van Sickle asked if there had been any consideration
of the possibility of including as part of the headworks
design and revisions concept, additional solids handling,
such as digestion?
Mr. Evans replied that if we did proceed with additional
digestion capacity, we might run into some problems with
Coastal Permit approvals and Environmental Impact approvals
because we would be increasing the capacity of the plant.
Mr. Mahr questioned if additional digestion capacity would
correct the problems with the foaming digesters. Mr. Evans
stated that it would not.
Mr. Kubota suggested that, if our digesters are working
satisfactorily at 50% capacity, we could use that as a design
parameter and double the amount of digestion capacity since
we are only 50% efficient. We could do so as an O & M item
and that would not constitute any kind of enlargement.
Discussion on the recently approved 1977 Clean Water Act
Amendments ensued. Garr Jones stated that the law provides
for the EPA administrator to grant a waiver of requirements
for secondary treatment for marine dischargers. After the
- 3 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY f 1978
law was signed, the State Water Resources Control Board mod-
ified the ocean plan to require a level of treatment which
is not primary and is somewhat less that one would expect
from a secondary treatment plant. The new law provides that
any application for modification be in the EPA's hands 270
days after the date of the enactment of the bill. The law
also indicated that substantial amounts of evidence must be
submitted if one is to obtain a modification. He further
stated that information, from people within EPA and the State,
indicates that it will be very difficult to obtain a modifi-
cation.
Mr. Jones did not want to discourage the JAC from trying but he
suggested that the JAC could go forward in the planning of the
secondary project. The strategy, that he suggested to the JAC,
is if they were successful in obtaining a waiver of modifica-
tion of secondary treatment requirements and the State Ocean
Plan became the discharge limitation, l^hat we wouldn't have
to build all of the planned secondary ]ilant. We would only
build one or two modules. The effluent of the secondary plant,
when co-mingled with the effluent from the primary plant, would
meet the State Ocean Plan requirements. It would also provide
backbone system for any water reclamation scheme that may be
attractive in the near future. It is also apparent, from the
wording of the new law, that EPA will probably not allow a modi-
fication to secondary treatment requirements to any increases
in capacity.
Mr. Jones suggested that, given the capacity crunch the agency
is facing, it might be a good idea to go forward with the design
of a secondary treatment plant and, at the same time, go ahead
with the application for waiver.
Chairman Stiles agreed that it would be good to have the appli-
cation on file.
Mr. Skotnicki asked for a clarification of Mr. Jones' statement
that the only modification we could get would be to existing
capacity but that anything in excess of that capacity, which we
now have, would still have to meet the secondary requirements.
Mr. Jones' stated that the way the law reads is the existing
permit volume of 18 mgd would be the capacity limit and he
believed that the EPA is going to draw a hard line on it.
Mr. Evans stated that he would like to have permission to go
ahead with the headworks area and not worry about the grant
funds. Mr. Skotnicki stated that it would be difficutlt to
make a decision on any part of the project without knowing
- 4 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY/*"^!, 1978
everything because if we were to act on the headworks area,
how would it fit in with the total expansion. He did not feel
that he wanted to do this in isolation and could not under-
stand how the improvement in headworks was going to fit into
the Phase III expansion with what Mr. Jones had to say about
the primary and secondary requirements.
Mr. Evans stated that there would be no difference in Phase
III no matter what happened in the headworks area. Mr. Jones
agreed.
Mr. Oldsen recommended that the Phase III project be split
into two parts; that of the headworks area and the remainder.
He suggested that such a proposal was being made for the San
Elijo project and the State Water Resources Control Board
had indicated that they would consider such a proposal.
Mr. Jones mentioned that Brown and Caldwell was working with
the State on a project for Santa Barbara which wouj.d essen-
tially allow the engineers to proceed with the design of those
portions of the project that would not be affected should a
waiver of secondary treatment requirements be granted.
Mr. Zapotocky made the motion that we defer action until the
next regular meeting and that the manager be authorized to
investigate the possibility of going into a two step plan.
Seconded by Ms. Casler, the motion carried.
5. ENCINA EFFLUENT METER
Chairman Stiles asked Mr. Evans to report on the effuent meter.
Mr. Evans reported that he had received a letter from McCrometer
Corporation who had spent a half day at the Encina plant test-
ing the meter. McCrometer feels that the meter is functioning
well within its specified limits. They feel that the problem
is that the meter was not used in the right application; that
the pipe walls are not smooth enough.
Mr. Evans noted the Hirsch & Koptionak study recommended that,
if we couldn't get the propeller meter to read correctly, we
put in a flume type meter.
Mr. Evans researched the various types of meters available
and their costs. The Palmer-Bowlus flume, which was sug-
gested by the Hirsch & Koptionak report, would cost about
$5,000. The Encina operators would like to see a Venturi
meter because it is simple and they could do the adjustment.
It would cost about $14,000. San Marcos County Water District
_ 5 _
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY /**% 1978_ _ _
has had good luck with Sonic meters and have replaced their
two main meters with Sonic meters. The Sonic meter, that
would work in our 42" pipe, would cost about $19,000.
Regardless of which of these three meters we decide to install,
it would mean some major work. We would have to build a sep-
arate channel, by-pass the flow and then install one of these
meters. We estimate about $15,000 for the by-pass structure,
necessary valves and the contractor's share of installation.
Another alternative is that we stick with the existing meter
and put in a perfectly smooth 35 or 40 ft. section of pipe
with straightening vanes similar to the installation at San
Elijo. McCrometer feels they could guarantee an accuracy
of plus or minus 2% in that kind of installation.
Mr. Evans discussed the above possibility with Graham Fraser
who feels that a manhole could be installed someplace in the
effluent pipe line and sections of smootih pipe inserted in
the existing pipe in hopes that it woulq eliminate the prob-
lem. The cost would probably run in the neighborhood of
$2,500 and may or may not work.
Mr. Evans further stated that if we chose one of the alter-
natives, as mentioned above, a specification could be written
which would include a testing procedure informing manufacturer
that he would have to guarantee his meter to be accurate.
Another possibility is that perhaps one of the agencies might
want to by-pass the plant and do some work near the outfall
structure and end up doing enough construction that we could
put in one of these meters without too much extra cost.
The final alternative is to decide to do it and spend the
$17,500 to $34,000 and start doing it right away.
Motion made by Mr. Foo that there be no action taken on the
meter until Mr. Evans reports back on the possibility of the
headworks being divided into a second project. Seconded by
Mr. Van Sickle, the motion carried.
6. COASTAL PERMIT STATUS
Mr. Evans distributed the letter from the Coastal Commission
staff dated January 19, 1978. The letter verified that the
Coastal Pemit issue had been removed from the January Coastal
Commission agenda. It also stated that the Coastal Commission
staff felt that the differences of opinion over statements of
conditions for the Encinitas Sanitary District and the Leu-
- 6 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY |**^ 1978
cadia County Water District were basic issues and probably
would not be able to be worked out through further negoti-
ation. Mr. McGrath recommended that Leucadia and Encinitas
take their case directly to the Commission.
Chairman Stiles asked if Leucadia County Water District had
a chance to analyze the letter and take a position on the pro-
posed conditions. Mr. Hanson indicated that they had not.
Mr. Van Sickle discussed the conversations that the Leucadia
County Water District board had had with Mr. McGrath and
indicated that Mr. McGrath expressed the condition in terms
of "the Leucadia County Water District will not provide sewer
service unless a Coastal Permit had been received". Mr. Van
Sickle felt that the wording should be "the Leucadia County
Water District will provide sewer service when a Coastal Per-
mit is issued".
Mr. Gann suggested that the Coastal Conjmission staff seems
to want the matter heard at the February Commission meeting
and that, if at all possible, we should be prepared to make
our presentation at that time.
It was determined that a strategy meeting be held prior to
the February 15 Coastal Commission hearing. The date of the
strategy meeting is to be determined by the dates of the Leu-
cadia County Water District and City of Carlsbad special meet-
ings.
7. PILOT DIGESTER PROGRAM
Chairman Stiles asked Mr. Evans for a report on the pilot
digester program. Mr. Evans called on John Murk of CM En-
gineering Associates who discussed the status of the program.
Mr. Murk reviewed the operation since November 16, 1977 and
indicated that, after about 4 weeks of operation, all diges-
ters suddenly died. He indicated that the digester failure
seemed to be due to introduction of a toxic substance and
related the miniature digester failure to a failure of di-
gester #1 about a week later. An attempt to analyze for the
failure was unsuccessful. One digester was reseeded on
about December 22 and the data contained in the agenda packet
refers primarily to that digester. On about January 22, Mr.
Murk indicated that the reseeded miniatrue digester began to
foam. He indicated possible causes of the foaming were the
recycling of fines and a buildup of toxic substances.
Mr. Skotnicki expressed his concern that we could not realize
- 7 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY, 1978
^,W
the greatest benefit from this study because a lack of an-
alytical ability. Mr. Evans indicated that the additional
testing for the pilot digesters should have been sent to an
outside laboratory rather than over-burdening the Encina
laboratory with the testing.
INDEPENDENT MANAGEMENT AND REORGANIZATION
Chairman Stiles reviewed the history of the managenent pro-
posals. He mentioned that, in 1975, a meeting with Dave
Spear and Lee Taylor was held to discuss the possibility
of increasing the service to the plant and also the JAC's
grave concern of the expense of operating the plant.
As a result of that meeting, the County suggested creation
of an independent agency and dispensing with the County ser-
vice. The County offered assurance that they would help us
in every area during the changeover.
Chairman Stiles mentioned that, as time went on, there was
more discussion and we all seemed to be going in one di-
rection which was an independent agency. The reason for
it (independent agency) is that, in addition to saving
money, the County has a very cumbersome operation. Mr.
Stiles explained that we have always been going along with
the idea of an independent agency and he did not believe
that it was the intent of any individual on the committee
that it be operated by any one of the entities. Now, we
have a letter from the City of Carlsbad in which there are
two things that he would like Mr. Skotnicki to explain.
"Would you explain the phrase in the letter which says
'management by whatever agency the joint members agreed on1?"
Mr. Skotnicki responded that it refers to one of the six
member agencies of the Encina Water Pollution Control Fa-
cility.
Chairman Stiles then asked if there was an advantage to hav-
ing one of the agencies take over while we were deciding
what to do.
Mr. Skotnicki replied that there must have been some ad-
vantage since that was the intent of that proposal and
there would be that kind of arrangement.
Chairman Stiles' second question to Mr. Skotnicki referred
to the statement that the City will not agree to any changes
which would create another layer of government - "what would
Carlsbad propose then as far as the operation of the plant?"
- 8 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY/*S, 1978
Mr. Skotnicki referred to the first paragraph of the letter
which suggested giving the JAC greater control in operations
without giving them policy authority.
Chairman Stiles asked why that change couldn't be made with
the County as operator. Mr. Skotnicki replied that he guessed
it could.
Mr. Schneider expressed his opinion that if Carlsbad is not
going to go along with the reorganization under a SERRA type
organization, then we should continue to have the County of
San Diego operate the plant and there would be no further
need for Mr. Evans' services.
Mr. Skotnicki expressed his opinion that this would be a
change from the agreement, under which we are presently
operating, but he would would be willing to take Mr. Schneider's
proposal back to the City of Carlsbad.
Chairman Stiles asked Counsel whether Mr. Skotnicki's state-
ment was correct.
Mr. Gann replied that he would have to study the issue and
return with an answer.
Chairman Stiles explained that the original concept was that
we would eventually and hopefully operate as an independent
agency and that the Maynard report recommended this.
Mr. Skotnicki interjected that Carlsbad did not go along with
that.
Mr. Schneider said "Yes, but we didn't know".
Mr. Skotnicki said "Just read our resolution". Mr. Schneider
answered "But we never got it".
Mr. Skotnicki said that the resolution is a matter of record
and is in the City of Carlsbad's archieves and will stand up
to the test of law. "It was passed in open session, openly
voted on, openly discussed. It was not something that was
done behind closed doors."
Mr. Schneider asked "But why were we not informed that it
was changed"?
Mr. Skotnicki said "I haven't the vaguest idea."
Mr. Schneider said "Your representatives come to all of these
- 9 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY /*"\ 1978
meetings. If we had known, we would have stopped then".
Mr. Skotnicki recommended that we proceed on the reorgan-
ization in a step-by-step basis instead of trying to go
whole hog. "I thought when we sent that letter we offered
you the opportunity to proceed at least a step or two in
the direction that we consider to be the ultimate solution",
Mr. Schneider said that Carlsbad had not really told us
what they want to do, what type of agency they want to con-
trol the plant.
Mr. Skotnicki replied that right now we want the agency
to remain just exactly the way it is. "The way it is now
with some improvement over the way the JAC operates. Give
it more authority rather than keeping it strictly advisory;
and one of us accepting the administrative responsibility
of handling the things that this entity cannot because it
doesn't have the overhead personnel".
Mr. Kubota asked Mr. Skotnicki whether Carlsbad would con-
sider an offer from the Encinitas Sanitary District.
Mr. Skotnicki replied "I don't care, if Mark wants to take
over Carlsbad's position as administrator."
Chairman Stiles said there was one area which he wished to
question at this time. This is that "the City will not
agree to any changes which would create another layer of
government. It is not a Carlsbad agency but a six entity
agency". He felt that the theory that Carlsbad is pre-
ferred here isn't a fair theory for all of the agencies.
Chairman Stiles asked if there was a motion to accept Mr.
Skotnicki's recommendation to go back to his council with
the proposal to eliminate the manager position and go back
to full County operation.
Mr. Hanson suggested that the matter be tabled until the
next meeting.
It was finally decided that the subcommittee would meet
between now and the next meeting to discuss the matter.
REPORTS - ROUTINE
9. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Chairman Stiles asked for a report on the Operations and
- 10 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY *S. 1978
Maintenance. Mr. Evans reported that there was nothing sig-
nificant that had not already been covered other than another
decrease in the amount of septage dumped by haulers. He com-
mented briefly on the effect of the rains on the Encina oper-
ation and mentioned that there had been no significant damage
or problem but that peaks up to 25 mgd had been received at
the plant and average daily flows as high as 17 mgd per day.
10. FLOW REPORT
Chairman Stiles asked Mr. Evans for his comments on the Flow
Report. Mr. Evans reported that there was nothing signifi-
cant in the Flow Report with the exception that the flow re-
flects a 7% meter error at the plant.
11. SULFIDE CONDITION REPORT
Mr. Evans reported that there was no significant change over
j. the period of the report.
12. EXPENDITURE REPORT
Chairman Stiles asked Mr. Evans for his comments on the Ex-
penditure Report.
Mr. Evans noted that we are now $70,000 underspent against
the pro-rated budget. $40,000 can be accounted for as un-
spent contingency funds. Additionally, over $55,000 in
capital outlay funds are not yet obligated.
OTHER BUSINESS
13. TRI-CITY BOXING CLUB
Chairman Stiles asked Ms. Taylor to discuss an upcoming
event involving one of the Encina Operators who is doing an
exceptional job with the youngsters of the Oceanside and
Vista areas.
Ms. Taylor reported as follows:
Mike Adame (an Operator I at Encina for the past 9 years)
formed a boxing club about 2 years in an attempt to help
get youngsters off of the streets by teaching them boxing.
Recently, contact was made with the Oceanside Elks who
agreed to foot the bill for the trophies which will be
presented to Mike's boys at a dinner on Thursday, February
23. Also, the Elks have formed a committee to help Mike
11 -
JOINT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES - JANUARY ^\ 1978
with the business end of the club, etc. so that he can devote
his time to teaching boxing.
This dinner is brought to the attention of the JAC members be-
it would certainly help the morale of the club to see some of
our members in attendance.
The dinner is to be held at the Oceanside Elks Club on Thursday,
February 23, 1978 at 7:00 P.M. Tickets are available from Ms.
Taylor at $6.00 each.
14. GENERAL MANAGER'S VACATION
Chairman Stiles mentioned that Mr. Evans would be on vacation
during the week of January 30 through February 3.
15. FINAL AUDIT - PHASE II
Mr. Oldsen reported that the review of $75,000 of Phase II costs
is proceeding through the State and, if reviewed favorably, would
result in the distribution of $65,000 of additional grant funds
to the agencies.
16. NEXT MEETING
Chairman Stiles announced that the next JAC meeting would be held
on Wednesday, February 22 at 9:OO A.M. at the Encina Water Pollu-
tion Control Facility.
There being no further business, Chairman Stiles adjourned the meeting
at 12:05 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary F. /Taylor
Recforclrng Secretary^ecforclrnc
- 12 -