Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWell Inspection 00 Smith Street Atli C 0 N1' Ti GENERAL OFFICES: 93 WEST MAIN STREET A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE, INC. / CLINTON, CONNECTICUT 06413-0562 TEL. 203-469-8636 February 12, 1988 Mr. Richard J. Sartor, Town Manager South Windsor Town Hall 1540 Sullivan- Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mr. Sartor: This will confirm the results of our telephone conversations on February 11, 1988. After some discussion, you stated that 56 Felt Road is not a contaminated property and I stated that we had been advised that 358 Deming and 364 Deming are and actually front on Felt Road. These conditions would reduce the footage involving the Town (and DEB) down to 275 feet on Felt Road. Our Company would be responsible for the costs on the rest of Felt Road, now estimated to be an additional 1,200 feet. Also, we will stick with our intent to pay the cost differences between 8 inch pipe and 12 inch pipe on the 275 foot portion of Felt Road as well as on the 12 inch pipe planned for Deming and Smith. A new tabulation of the various streets, pipes, cost estimates and cost allocations is attached. The resulting estimated cost to the Town (and DEP) is $202,410. The estimated cost to the Company is $783,666. We want to own the entire Felt Road and Deming Road mains. It seems better for the Town and the Company to not share ownership of the 12 inch mains but instead for each party to own completely certain but cost equivalent portions of the mains. Therefore we have arbitrarily assigned the Town's ownership in Phase II as follows: a. ) 2,272 lineal feet of 8" on Clark Street b. ) 1,100 lineal feet of 12" on Smith Street c. ) 770 lineal feet of 8" on Ridge Street Using the same cost estimating procedures as used in the attached tabulation, it can be seen that the cost estimate to construct these items a, b, and c is approximately equal to the cost estimate of the Town (and DEP) portions of the estimate to serve the contaminated properties. That is, the estimated cost of these three items totals $202,426. The sum of the Town (and DEP) portions on the tabulation is $202,410. Likewise, the Phase I items as revised in the attached contract have an estimated construction cost of $783,650 or nearly the same as is shown on the tabulation as CWC responsibility. However, I must question the conclusion you came to on the status of 56 Felt Road. As you said, the EDB level did go down from 0.10 to 0.09 ppb in the 1985 samples. But a later sample, in 1986, apparently showed 0.14 ppb. This seems to be at contamination level. If so, the numbers for Felt Road would change again, as would the Phase 1 and Phase 2 descriptions in the contract. Table 4-2 of the TRC report is attached. • x The attached revised contract form also deletes the original item 20 concerning income tax indemnification. It is subject to further revision depending on the Felt Road questions raised in the preceding paragraph. Please advise if you have any questions on this. Sincerely, William F. Guillaume Senior Vice President WFG/be Enc. cc: W.- C. Stewart, w/enc. s R C� , D S 4 FEL' 1 6 1�n Town of Qnuf�h'mosor %i r I n] r V \ , /2-SR1 30 SHEETS S SQUARE v r 17.787 0 SHEETS S SQUARE U 112.239 �08 SHEETS S SQUARE NATIONAL ...... r',eoM 1" q, , ?cA q s imnp / iL-z7 g7 I-OCA- 0i 4 L EN U,-lrt+ Pi At c-rg - uti r Ni r-E `r6-M L, FELT RnI 1 c /zoo 121' $4z 50,400 -$ 50400 275 /21' 4Z 3049 GSs1 1650 /11550 plw: S Rnr ,70 �N 7� 101311 1l9og 27720 P15KIm ) ci:�r 41,50 12�� 4 z f 74 3oa f 74, 5 47 I2 M �f 2 7211 I/7o�j 282c� l9,'7 0 f�.�ciwp jZp. 4g0 0 12 -4 2 J9 3,200 / 53,20c) cl, /s 4 2 $©,4 3-o �3q4? 1 I oo 1 zip 4z 12,/97 ?343 'G,60o 44, 200 C[.q?,t/, "r 2-59 5 gN' 3G, 9 3,42o 73,42 0 /-710 S 3(o 24,006 . 37552 �l1560 4 1�5,276 /0d 9z4- A902 15"Wr4F9f,N4 GEPID) 552(43 A9Nk (b,Z$Z 75,BZ Ca�{TWAUCrAf,`{ C?d�/o) 1/,ors zgDca5 /zg564 lSJ 704. 70 7 459 07 0' PiPF. — 39 26'Q 0 > 1�/-I181'� �- 16 ] 9P+ Souym Y� immoP, *�a2g10 P P , o GtNC 12EPoPT 11/17P)� �wlc S�Ig2E. VI PI F, URCF14 71R 4U. r TABLE 4-2 SM1ARY OF EDB, EDC AND VORLEX® LABORATORY ANALYSIS r i Location Lab. Date EDB EDC VORLEX* (pg/1) (Ng/1) (ug/1) -175 Clark St. S 8/21/84 0.49 i �- TRC 1/14/86 0.35 ND ND -480 Clark St. S 9/13/84 0.12 S 10/3/84 0.08 S 11/6/84 ND S 1/24/85 0.06 r S 1/24/85 0.05 TRC 5/8/86 0.30 ND ND 489 Clark St. S 9/13/84 0.25 -- S 9/27/84 0.31 TRC 1/14/86 0.16 ND ND - 490 Clark St. S 9/13/84 0.36 S 9/27/84 0.40 • - -- TRC 1/14/86 0.27 ND ND 500 Clark St. S f,, 9/13/84 0.76 S 9/27/84 0.67 TRC 1/14/86 0.49 ND ND 523 Clark St. S 9/13/84 0.35 S 9/28/84 0.38 TRC 1/14/86 0.27 ND ND 324 Deming St. S '1/31/85 0.08 S 2/28/85 0.06 -- -- TRC 1/15/86 0.10 ND ND 358 Deming S 11/29/84 0.15 -- _- S 12/14/84 0.12 TRC 1/15/86 0.17 ND ND 364 Deming S 11/29/84 0.16 -- -- TRC 1/15/86 0.13 ND TR 325 Ellington Rd. S 7/18/84 0.63 -- -- S 7/22/84 0.68 -- -- r TRC 5/8/86 0.36 ND ND ' 395 Ellington Rd. S 8/8/84 0.25 -- -- S 8/21/84 0.34 -- -- TRC 1/27/86 0.26 ND ND 56 Felt Rd. S 3/6/85 0.10 -- -- S 4/25/85 0.09 -- -- G&F 2/15/86 0.14 ND ND 9 Ridge Rd. S ll/l/84 0.39 -- -- S 11/20/84 0.26 -- -- TRC 1/31/86 0.25 ND ND 19 Ridge Rd. S 11/29/84 0.31 -- -- S 12/14/84 0.19 -- -- TRC 1/15/86 0.12 ND ND 29 Ridge Rd. S 11/30/84 0.41 4.6 -- S 12/14/84 0.38 ND -- TRC 1/15/86 0.26 ND TR -27- a TABLE 4-2 (Continued) SUMMARY OF EDB, EDC AND VORLEXe LABORATORY ANALYSIS Location Lab. Date EDB EDC VORLEX* (ug/1) (Ng/1) ()Ig/1) 36 Ridge Rd. S 12/17/84 0.54 S 3/21/85 0.51 TRC 1/15/86 0.41 ND ND 45 Ridge Rd. S 11/19/84 0.13 S 12/14/84 0.08 S 1/31/85 0.08 TRC 1/15/86 0.10 ND TR ,,. 176 Smith St. S 7/18/84 0.19 S 7/27/84 0.2 -- -- TRC 1/13/86 0.15 ND ND \.188 Smith St. S 8/9/84 0.70 S 8/21/84 0.72 TRC 1/13/86 0.47 ND ND '1- 198 Smith St. S 8/9/84 0.99 -- -_ S 8/23/84 0.75 17.0 -- TRC 1/30/86 0.59 ND ND 216 Smith S 8/23/84 1.1 2.3 (" S 9/12/84 1.2 -- TRC 1/13/86 0.74 ND ND 250 Smith St. S 9/12/84 0.87 S 10/1/84 0.98 -- __ G&F 2/15/86 0.57 ND 6.9 LEGEND: ND = Not detected (below detection limit) -- = Not analyzed Lab Reference = A-Agricultural Exp. Sta. S-State Health N-Newlands G&F-Griswold NE-Northeast TRC-TRC Environmental Consultants *1,2 Dichloropropane -28- Installation and Service Agreement This Agreement is entered into as of this day of , 1988, by and between the TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, a municipal corpora- tion existing within the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut (the "Town") , and THE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY, a corporation organ- ized and doing business in the State of Connecticut and having its principal office in the Town of Clinton, County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut (the "Company") . WHEREAS, the Town requires water service for domestic and fire protection uses along Clark Street, Deming Street, Buckland Road, Smith Street, Felt Road Extension and Ridge Road in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut (the "EDB Area") , which is shown on the Project Plan (as hereinafter defined) ; and WHEREAS,. the Project Plan provides for the installation of cer- tain utility plant consisting of water system facilities, including, without limitation, various water mains and appurtenances; and WHEREAS, the Company desires to cooperate with the Town in con- nection with the design, construction and installation of said util- ity plant and to provide water utility services to the EDB area; .NOW THEREFORE, the Town and the Company, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do covenant and agree as follows: 1. Subject of Agreement: The Town hereby authorizes the Com- pany to arrange for the construction and installation of the follow- ing described utility plant (the "System") , at the cost of the Town except as otherwise provided herein, in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by the Company, consistent with the Company's standard design procedures. The Town hereby contracts with the Com- pany for all necessary design, engineering, construction and full- time inspection services for the System and authorizes the Company to solicit bids and contracts for all work necessary or desirable to complete the System and place the System in operation. The Company shall have complete authority, except as limited by this Agreement, to act for the Town in all matters relating to the System. Phase I (as hereinafter defined) of the System shall be installed, paid for and owned by the Company. Phase II (as hereinafter defined) of the System shall be paid for and owned by the Town and installed by the Company in cooperation with the Town. Upon the completion of con- struction of the System, the Company shall be obligated, during the term of this Agreement, to provide water service to the System and to operate, maintain, service and repair the System. The System is described as follows: Place of installation: Town: South Windsor Streets: Clark Street, Deming Street, Buckland Road, Smith Street, Felt Road Extension and Ridge Road Description of plant to be installed: Phase I: (a) 2,033 lineal feet, Class 52, 8" diameter, ductile iron water main on Clark Street; beginning at the intersection of Clark Street and Deming Street and continuing southward for 2, 033 feet. (b) 4,620 lineal feet, Class 52, 12" diameter, ductile iron water main on Deming Street; beginning at the intersection of Clark Street and Deming Street and continuing eastward for 4, 620 feet. (c) 4,600 lineal feet, Class 52, 12" diameter, ductile iron water main on Buckland Road; beginning at the intersection of Deming Street and Buckland Road and continuing southward for 4, 600 feet to the intersection of Smith Street and Buckland Road. (d) 1,915 lineal feet, Class 52, 12 diameter, ductile iron water main on Smith Street; beginning at the intersection of Smith Street and Buckland Road and continuing westward for 1, 915 feet. (e) 1,475 lineal feet, Class 52, 12" diameter ductile iron water main on Felt Road Extension; beginning at the inter- section of Route 30 and Felt Road Extension and continuing southward for 1, 475 feet to the intersection of Deming Street and Ridge Road. Phase II: (a) 2,272 lineal feet, Class 52, 8" diameter, ductile iron water main on Clark Street; beginning at a point 2, 033 ' south of the intersection of Clark Street and Deming Street and continuing southward for 2,272 feet. (b) 1,100 lineal feet, Class 52, 12" diameter, ductile iron water main on Smith Street, beginning at Wheeler Road and continuing eastward for 1, 100 feet. (c) 770 lineal feet, Class 52, 8" diameter, ductile iron water main on Ridge Road, beginning at Deming Street and continu- ing southward for 770 feet. The System is more particularly shown on a certain plan or map entitled "Proposed Water Mains South Windsor EDB/EDC 2/88, " which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof (the "Project Plan" ) . The Company shall be obligated to perform only as required and described in this Agreement and shall have no obligation under any agreements by or between the Town, the State of Connecticut or any of its agencies, or any other party. . 2. Term: This Agreement shall have a term of five. years, with automatic renewal periods of five years, which term shall be automat- ically extended unless and until either party, by giving written no- tice to the other of its election, shall terminate this Agreement, whereupon such termination shall be effective five years from the receipt by such other party of such notice. 3. Costs of Phase I: The Company shall pay the actual cost of designing, acquiring, inspecting and. installing Phase I of the Sy- stem. 4. Costs of Phase II: The Town shall pay to the Company an advance equal to the cost (including all special cost factors listed below, if any) of designing, acquiring, inspecting and installing Phase II of the System, in the following manner: With the execution of this Agreement: The estimated cost as determined by the Company in the amount of $202, 426.00. Within fifteen (15) days after billing: The actual cost adjust- ed for prior estimated payments. Any amounts paid in excess of the actual cost will be refunded to the Town within fifteen (15) days after actual cost determination. Costs shall be determined in accordance with the general ac- counting practice of the Company. Special cost factors: Rock excavation, gravel, five per cent gross receipts tax, services and materials used in connection with the design and supervision of construction. 5. Agreement as to Access: The Town agrees that the Company shall have access to the System for the purpose of performing its ob- ligations under this Agreement. The Town agrees to deliver to the Company all such easements and other rights as may in the reasonable discretion of the Company or its counsel be deemed necessary or desirable from time to time to preserve and protect the Company' s rights hereunder and to enable the Company to perform its obligations hereunder. 6. Conformance to Company Rules and Regulations: This Agree- ment shall conform and be subject to the Rules and Regulations Un- cluding main extension regulations) of the Company now in force and on file with the Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control (DPUC) , which are made a part hereof. 7. Additional Customers: The Company reserves the right to serve additional customers of the Company from the System and to fur- ther extend the System to serve additional customers of the Company and neither the Company nor such additional customers shall be liable to advance to or reimburse the Town for any portion of the cost of the System to be installed pursuant to this Agreement. 8 . Use of the System for Other Systems: The Town agrees that the Company shall have the right, during the term of this Agreement, to use the System to provide water to other systems now or hereafter owned by the Company, and neither the Company nor the customers of such other systems shall be liable to advance to the Town or reim- burse the Town for any portion of the cost of the System to be in- stalled pursuant to this Agreement. 9. Ownership of the Svstem: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, except as hereafter specifically provided in this Section, (i) Phase II of the System, including any curb stops situated on the premises of any customer from time to time, shall be and remain the property of the Town, (ii) Phase I of the System shall be and remain the property of the Company, and (iii) any service lines and appurtenances thereto, including any curb boxes extending from any curb stop away from any water pipes or mains , shall be and remain the property of the customer. The Company shall have no obli- gation with regard to repairs, replacements or maintenance of said customer service lines, curb boxes , meter vaults or pits , and appur- tenances. The Company shall pay for any fire hydrants, which shall be the property of the Company. 10. Water Rates: The Company shall be entitled to charge each user of water from the System, including the Town to the extent it may be a user with regard to public fire protection or any other use, at the established rates of the Company (Northern Division) as ap- proved from time to time by the Connecticut Department of Public. Utility Control (the "DPUC") . Each user shall be a direct customer of the Company. The Town agrees to pay fire protection charges on water mains and hydrant facilities in the System. 11. Service Connections and Meters: Each user of water shall have a meter, curb stop and other piping and valves customarily used to supply water to a customer's premises. The Company shall install customer service connections (from water main to street line) and meters to customers who request water service, for which the Company will charge the customer at the Company's regular charges from time to time in effect. Water meters installed by the Company shall be- owned by the Company. 12. Grant of Authority to the Company: The Town does hereby grant to the Company the right to install, inspect, operate, main- THE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY ^1''p GENERAL OFFICES: 93 WEST MAIN STREET A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE, INC. u,f J CLINTON, CONNECTICUT 06413-0562 TEL. 203-669.8636 November 16, 1987 To Our Customers: The water serving your area comes primarily from a surface water supply at Lake $henipsit. This supply suffered an.unusual growth of algae in October which led to taste and- odor in the water. Ordinarily this condition is controllable by our complete conventional treatment plant which uses granular Activated carbon (GAC) filtration as approved by the Connecticut Department of Health Services. When the Rockville Water Treatment Plant was renovated in 1984, we replaced the original sand filters with GAC filter media specifically to remove taste and odor. There are a number of benefits to using GAC, including taste and odor removal, however GAG does not have an infinite capacity and must be replaced periodically. Predicting the useful life of GAC at a supply without any prior history is difficult. Our experiences at other CWC water treatment .plants using GAC indicated a probable life of four years at Rockville. The useful life of GAC turned out to be three years. Accordingly, we have immediately moved to take the following remedial measures 1) We have increased the sampling of reservoir water to better monitor and control algae growth. 2) We are replacing the GAC filter media at a cost of $150,000. 3) We are instituting procedures to test the filter media at more frequent_ intervals in an attempt to more accurately predict its useful life. We regret any inconvenience to our customers resulting from this problem. We continue to provide modern facilities and careful supervision of our supplies. If you wish additional information, please call our office at 623-3354 and we will be happy to provide you with information responsive to your questions . Very sincerely yours, �0 THE CONNECTICUT ER COMPANY p o o�P 11C9 William C. Stewart President WC b&r THE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY ► Fcw71!,' GENERAL OFFICES: 93 WEST MAIN STREET A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE, INC. CLINTON, CONNECTICUT 06413-0562 TEL. 203-669.8636 March 28, 1985 Mr. Robert Deptula Health Department Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: EDB Contamination South Windsor, CT Dear Mr. Deptula: In accordance with our recent telephone conversations, the meeting at your office last Friday (including our A.L. Tarnowicz and R.J. Ulkus) and the field inspection that followed, enclosed is a preliminary cost estimate prepared by us to provide water service to the EDB contaminated homes near the intersection of Felt and Ridge Roads. We expect that the Town would stake the Right-of-Way and cut trees as we have discussed. We have included in our estimate stump removal, estimates of 20% rock excavation and 10% unsuitable excavation. We have not included the cost of the water services from the curb line into the houses. The main to curb portions of the services are included. An Inland Wetlands permit may be required to cross the Felt Road and Oakland Road intersection. We would make the permit application, if required, and have enough engineering time to cover this item in our estimate. If you are successful in.your grant application, we are willing to make plans, do final estimates and work with you as required. The second area you asked that we look at is along the north side of` Smith Street opposite Wheeler Road. We are interested in serving this area including the proposed Winchester Mall. We need more time to develop a preliminary proposal for this area. Sincerely yours, � Kenneth W. Kells Vice President - Design & Construction KWK/cic Enclosure cc: W.F. Guillaume w/enc. A.L. Tarnowicz w/enc. R.J. Ulkus w/enc. P.F. Breen w/enc. PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE FELT ROAD, RIDGE ROAD AREA SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 7� Materials 2,000' - 8" D.I.P. @ $7.08/Ft. $ 14,160 4 - 8" gate valve and valve box @ $330./Ea. 1,320 2 - 8"x8" tee @ $170./Ea. 340 4 - 8" tyton plug @ $40./Ea. 160 1 - 12"x8" reducer @ $170./Ea. 170 $ 16,150 Installation 1. Install 2,000 L.F. of 8" D.I.P. @ $8./L.F. $ 16,000 2. Cut existing pavement 2,000 L.F. @ $1./L.F. 2,000 3. Gravell backfill 586 C.Y. @ $8./C.Y. 4,688 4. Connect to existing main 1 @ $500./Ea. 500 5. Concrete thrust blocks 4 @ $100./Ea. 400 6. Rock and ledge removal 311 C.Y. @ $30./C.Y. 9,330 7. Pavement 560 S.Y. @ $12./S.Y. 6,720 8. Loam and seed 2,222 S.Y. @ $2./S.Y. 4,444 9. Clearing, R.O.W. staking, Town of South Windsor 0 10. Stump removal 0.5 ac. @ $920./ac. 460 $ 44,542 $ 60,692 CWC Engineering and Inspection 10% 6,069 Contingency 20% 12 138 Traffic Control 1,600 $ 80,499 Say $ 80,500 $80p5OO/2,000 L.F. = $40.25/L.F. 7 - One inch service (main to curb) @ $500./Ea. $ 3,500 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE $ 84,000 Prepared by Paul F. Breen March 28, 1985 THE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY CWS GENERAL OFFICES: 93 WEST MAIN STREET A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE, INC. U11 , CLINTON, CONNECTICUT 06413-0562 TEL. 203-669.8636 May 8, 1985 Mr. Robert Deptula Health Department Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: EDB Contamination South Windsor, CT Dear Mr. Deptula: Following up our letter of March 28, 1985, we have prepared the enclosed preliminary cost estimate for the work required to serve the EDB contaminated houses on Smith Street in South Windsor. We have included estimates of 15% rock excavation and 10% unsuitable excavation and replacement with gravel backfill. Actual job costs would reflect actual field conditions. We have also included in this estimate the cost of running five 1-inch services from the water main to the curb. The cost associated with running those 1-inch services from the curb to the houses are not included. We have included one half of the estimated cost of the meter pit necessary at the Manchester town line. The Connecticut Water Company's participation is the other half of the meter pit's costs. We have had discussions with Manchester Water officials regarding this proposal. If you wish to proceed, we will need to enter into an Agreement with Manchester. Then we can prepare detailed final estimates and plans. Sincerely yours, reG�C•u✓ Kenneth W. Kells Vice President - Design & Construction PFB/cic Enclosures cc: R. Young, Manchester Water w/enc. W.C. Stewart w/enc. W.F. Guillaume w/enc. A.L. Tarnowicz w/enc. R.J. Ulkus w/enc. P.F. Breen w/enc. W.L. Dunn w/enc. t .t I� PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 8" DUCTILE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN SMITH STREET, WHEELER STREET & WINSOR STREET IN MANCHESTER AND SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT Materials: 4,000' - 8" D.I.P. @ $7.00/ft. $ 28,000 6 - 8" gate valves and valve boxes @ $500.00/ea. 3,000 1 - 8" x 8" x 8" tee @ $200.00/ea. �200 2 - 8" tyton plugs @ $40.00/ea. 80 1 - 90' x 8" bend @ $125.00/ea. 125 $ 31,405 Installation: 1. Install 4,000 ft. of 8" D.I.P. @ $.9.00/ft. $ 36,000 Including: Excavation, pipe setting, backfill, compaction 2. Saw cut existing pavement 4,000 IF @ $1.00/LF 4,000 3. Gravel backfill 1,527 cy @ $8.00/cy 12,216 y 4. One meter pit at town line @ $20,000 20,000 5. Connection to existing main 1 @ $500.00/ea. 500 6. Concrete thrust blocks 5 @ $100.00/ea. 500 7. Rock and ledge removal 500 cy @ $30.00/cy 15,000 8. Temporary pavement 266 sy @ $7.00/sy 1,862 9. Permanent pavement 1,333 sy @ $12.00/sy 15,996 10. Loam and seed 1,333 sy @ $2.00/sy 2,666 $108,740 $140,145 Traffic Control $ 3,200 C.W.C. Engineering and Inspection $ 14,015 Contingency 20% 28,029 5 - One inch services (main to curb) @ $500.00/ea. 2,500 Total $187,889 CWC meter pit participation $(10,000) $(10,000) Net to Town $177,889 $177,889/4,000 ft. = $44.47/ft. Prepared by Paul F. Breen May 1, 1985 tnn� 4 � , 4� -- ----- -- - -- � r ----------------- ------ — ----- -- -- — �L�;F� ._..-..ram- -- --- ------- ----------- — a t _.-------------- ----—_._.__._. 1 �y z Al Cr L Ic6a 131 30 eq l3y 1 , Wt w - 1 �F� ContTC�eyC.t n(Q'(tb _ �� �v/� ��,��.�e� �'✓off = �''l ` v b V b 2 117 �x Lf �ht 41a „a Ll 1 rawap ZL IN llyv '( ✓ NWW Im•ITT N WWs ccc _ m %n,7 --; tea-ata' eh + _ d7O 24A19N�-z)0NS LSO Q a2�, _ "3 3w'd7lic, LC. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 00.3 PM: t(r� . . .. D----A-----T-----E---- �. PROJECT. ............._...__.----- ......................... --- _ ... ._.......................... _._.............. .......... ..__........._... ......._ l_::... .L. ._.._I _t_ 1......._...... . _.._. L! .'_k'__..._L'.�.,-_.__.._._.cl!_4(._ .....__..._..._____..._....____.___ L9�A?IQ�i _ _-� '. ....��.._ ��DC✓ ' _.W.-._ ... ATTENTION RE: TO: _ __._..._..._...__....._._................_................................... ... r GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOUHEREWITH ❑DELIVERED BY HAND ❑UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA_...___.. ....._.._.__..._......._----____....................................._-THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑PLANS ❑PRINTS ❑SHOP DRAWINGS ❑SAMPLES ❑SPECIFICATIONS ❑ ESTIMATES ❑COPY OF LETTER ❑ _.._ _ __ _ ;COPIES DATE OR NO. DESCRIPTION L�L THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS INDICATED BELOW ❑FOR YOUR USE ❑APPROVED AS NOTED [] RETURN __ _.._........CORRECTED PRINTS ❑FOR APPROVAL ❑ APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION ❑SUBMIT _................-COPIES FOR ...._........_.......... _._ ❑AS REQUESTED ❑RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS ❑RESUBMIT.............__COPIES FOR ..._.___._ ❑FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US ❑ FOR BIDS DUE._........._...........__..................................................... _ ❑ ..............................................._---__._-_.....__._..... REMARKS: �....._ _...___._._._ _-_--------_---_----------------t....................-_-------------------_ ...........__ _.___.......__.._... IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS INDICATED, SIGNED: PLEASE NOTIFY US AT ONCE. R.S.MEANS CO.,INC.KINGSTON,MA 02364 // cc Q CELEBRATE STATE OF CONNECTICUT CONNECTICUT xr ,� DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Y E A R S 1985 & 1986 February 28, 1986 Mr. Kenneth W. Wei Is Vice President The Connecticut Water Company �C 93 West Main Street , Cl i nton, CT 06413-0562 Dear Mr. Wel 1 s: Enclosed you wi 1 1 find a copy of the Hearing Officer ' s report for the December 9, 1985 public hearing which was held to discuss the adoption of regulations to govern the award of grants to muni ci pal i ti es and water companies for the evaluation of groundwater contamination problems and the design and construction of potable water supplies. This report addresses the concerns presented in your December 16, 1985 letter sent to Wi 1 1 i am Hogan, Hearing Officer. Should you have any questions regarding this report, j then please contact my office at 566- 3282. Very /truly yours, John Parker Senior Engineer Water Compliance enc e Ak STATE OF CONNECTICUT } DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION sn= CF ao�riecizcxrr nrALNESSUM 70: Stanley J. Pact Cammissioner February 26, 1986 Department of Environmental Protection FROM: William R. Hogan, Engineer of Water Pollution Control Facilities DEP/Water Compliance Unit, 122 Washington Street, Hartford,CT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF REGULATIONS FOR GRANTS TO MUNICIPALITIES AND WATER COMPANIES FOR POTABLE WATER SUPPLIES A public hearing was held on December 9, 1985 for the purpose of considering the adoption of regulations to govern the award of grants to municipalities and water companies for the evaluation of groundwater contamination problems and the design and construction of potable water supplies. The regulations are required by Section 22a-471 'of the Connecticut General Statutes. Authorization to conduct the public hearing was issued by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection on October 18, 1985. The Notice of Intent to Adopt Regulations and Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Connecticut Law Journal on October 29, 1985. The proposed actions include the repeal of Section 22a-451-1 and the adoption of Section 22a-471-1 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies. The proposed regulations, Section 22a-471-1 and 2, define the procedures in which the Department will administer grant assistance to Connecticut nunicipalities and water companies for the evaluation of groundwater contamination problems and the design and construction of long-term potable water supplies. These procedures include determination of eligibility, grant application materials, engineering report requirements, - administrative program elements, required provisions of construction contracts, construction contract procurement requirements, advertising requirements and grant requirements for water companies. The following is a discussion of issues raised in testimony at the hearing or submitted prior to the hearing and the Hearing officer's recommendations pertaining to the issues: 1. The Connecticut Construction Industries Association, Inc. through its December 3, 1985, letter supports the regulations as proposed. No changes are necessary due to this letter. Phone: 165 Capitol Avenue • Hartford,Connecticut o61o6 2 2. The Town of Hamden, through Mayor Peter F. Villano's letter of November 14, 1985, objected to the proposed regulations as applying only to future projects. This would restrict grant assistance to communities such as Hamden which proceeded to resolve a problem before the regulations were prepared. The regulations were, in fact prepared with future projects in mind. This was because there were no known projects which qualified fully for grant assistance and that had completed a project by providing long-term potable water. It is still not certain that Hamden would qualify for funding under P.A. 85-407. If Hamden or any other community ultimately qualifies and the community did not fully comply with the proposed regulations, relief from the regulations can be provided by Section 22a-471-1(n) Deviations. - "The Commissioner is authorized to approve deviations from requirements of these regulations when he determines that such deviations are essential to effect necessary grant actions or when special circumstances make such deviations in the best interest of the State." Section 22a-471-a(n) would allow Hamden to receive a grant if it qualifies under the statute but fails to comply with the proposed regulations. Thus, no changes to the regulations are necessary. 3. Comments were also received from the Office of Policy & Management on December 16, 1985. In addition to several typographical omissions, reference to the Conservation and Development Policies Plan was requested to be added to Section 22a-471-1(f) (1) (B). This reference has been included. 4. Questions concerning the applicability of the requirements of construction contract provisions contained in Section 22a-471-1 (h) were raised by DEP staff prior to going to the public hearing. Since the completion of the public hearing, clarification of the requirements for construction contract provisions has been received. The clarification has resulted in several -- deletions and corrections to proper statutory reference. No additional requirements were added. 5. The Connecticut Water Ccupany submitted comments on December 16, 1986, through a letter signed by Mr. Kenneth W. Kells, Vice President - Design & Construction. Their comments and my response to each follows: (a) Section (e) (2) Comment "Requires discretion in its application. By limiting capacity for new connections, there is no allowance for the spread of the existing or future contamination from another source. Consideration should be made for problems in adjacent towns or areas where the extension of these relatively high cost facilities is the only logical long term solution and duplication is not cost effective. Consideration of a utility's long range plan for service to areas beyond the contaminated zone should be made and allowed with appropriate assignment of costs." 3 Section(e) (2) provides that no grant award shall be made for drinking water facilities that would provide capacity for new connections or other development to be located in environmentally sensitive land. This position is consistant with the State of Connecticut's Conservation & Development Policies Plan in regard to State funding assistance. This section does not preclude consideration of problems in adjacent towns and consideration of a utility's long range plan for service to areas beyond the contaminated zone. If a utility can, in fact, produce a copy of a long range plan it can be considered in the selection of a long-term solution, but capacity for development of environmentally sensitive lands would still be disallowed. Additional capacity for non-environmentally sensitive land would be allowed provided an appropriate assignment of costs can be arranged. On the issue of appropriate assignment of costs, it has been discussed that if the water utilities are willing to pay for the incremental cost increase to increase the pipe size, then the large pipe size to benefit the water utilities can b�kzuilt��sev�er, this position is extremely unequitable For examp e, 12 inch water main will-conveyy_percent more flow than an.8 inch water a 0mrit main.i The incremental�"construction cost in one actu project was only ZI more to construct the 12 inch line than the 8 inch line. For only 20% of the cost, the water utilities are purchasing 60% of the flow capacity. This is not equitable and must be changed. The benefit of economy of scale should be shared by all parties. Therefore, it is proposed that Section 22a-471-1(g) (3) (I) be changed, and it is proposed that the water utilities pay twice the value established as the incremental cost. It previously read as follows: (I) The incremental cost of a potable water supply facility that provides capacity beyond that necessary to serve the area of contaminated wells or the area of potential contamination. The new, proposed language is as follows: (I) For those potable water supply facilities that may provide capacity beyond that necessary to serve the area of contaminated wells or the area of potential contamination, unallowable project costs shall be established in accordance with the following principle: The hydraulic capacity of the larger pipe size shall be compared with the hydraulic capacity of the minimum pipe size necessary to serve the contaminated wells or the area of potential contamination. The unallowable project costs as a percentage of the total project costs shall be determined by multiplying the percentage incremental hydraulic capacity by two-thirds. In the example cited earlier the water utility would pay for two thirds mulitplied by the incremental hydraulic capacity or .667 x 60%. Therefore, 40% of the cost of the project would be paid for by the water utility to purchase 60% of the hydraulic capacity. This is still a cost savings to the water utilities, but also one to the individual taxpayers as well as the State. This will also allow the limited State funds in the potable water grant program to reach more projects. If a water utility was not willing to finance twice the incremental cost, the small size main adequate to serve only the area of contaminated groundwater would be constructed. v u s IG 4 Proposed Additional Sentence (e) (2) "Consideration will be made for congruity with a utility's long range plan for service and the potential for the spread of existing or future contamination with appropriate cost sharing." _ This concept is already allowed in the proposed regulations, therefore, no changes to the regulations are proposed. The camient reflects a misunderstanding of the intent of section 22a-471-1(e) (2) . This section is restrictive for the purposes of protecting environmentally sensitive lands only and creates no conflects with a water utility's plan unless that plan is to encourage develop ent of environmentally sensitive land. (g)3(F) Comment "Preparation of applications and permits should be a reimbursable expense." The preparation of applications and permits is a minor project cost and is an unallowable cost under the similar sewerage construction grants program. A decision was made to deem these costs unallowable and no revision to this decision is necessary. (h) (18) Proposed Additional Item "In lieu of the above (Subsections 1-17) a utility supervised and administered construction contract in a form similar to those used by utilities for DOT highway relocations of utility facilities." The intent of this caLUL nt is that there may be a more cost - effective means of accomplishing the work. The intent of the comment is applauded, but the proposed standard contract with a continuing contractor could potentially violate state statutes. If in a specific project a water utility, through the municipality, can recommend contract revisions that can reduce the project costs and not violate any state statutes, then Section 22-471-1(n) Deviations can be utilized. This would be decided on a project by project basis. Therefore, no changes are recommended to the proposed regulations. William R. Hoqan Hearing Officer WRH:jdc i AI'4 4' a aaa �✓ ooa NNN NNN NNN f xxx �f Y1. 6 f2G NNN v F/ tVPo �� S J t�m7jm uv�� vg5 = 37 °la z N1 s V Y �y �1 = o --5 1 1.W4ILn UTr I Sb D - � -yQ- Xd �►u;�� - ram." 6�,_-�o v _ g1 3`1 T - -- t �IW -7LV d AYJ1/ Cal Is; s Is A"10,P07 fZzo 0� e. 4 4/ f 41f '00, MEMORANDUM April 9 , 1986 To : Mr . Richard J . Sartor Town Manager Re : Survey of Surrounding Towns - Public Water Installation in EDB-Affected Areas The State of Connecticut has required that all Towns in the area (East Windsor , Simsbury , Somers , Ellington , and Enfield) secure an engineering study to determine the feasibility of public water installation in EDB-affected areas . The following is the result of my survey regarding number of residents affected by EDBs , and current status of engineering study : East Windsor - Approximately 385 residents - Engineering study should be completed within next 3 to 4 weeks . Simsbury - 165 residents - Simsbury will soon be commencing work on the installation of public water . Somers - Approximately 600 residents (200 . families) expecting approval from State within the next 4 weeks . The Town of Somers , however , has two water companies--both of which are seeking to provide the service . Enfield - 80 residents - Town of Enfield has a responsible party for the pollution ; and the residents are being provided with bottled water by this party . No engineering studies have been done , as yet . Ellington - 250 residents - Connecticut Water Company provides water in this area and , therefore , conducted all necessary studies and engineering . Ellington has just about completed installation of public water in affected areas . Robert Deptula Environmental Health Officer RD: prb 1 S TRON6• S f• out ' i h Windsor, \ .- `�•%� •O qQ al ° High Sch v. p Sind and Grovel ' ,\ q o J -+11t - _ `/ - `-' - - \ - Pam' 1 o' I µ `✓ /• 3AS \ / ='•-} `....- Q, � mot--,- �!11,' �I; \ • \ �� `� �- Sanand Gra a kif'o,l..\ 350 o r _Wap .n4. 10 BM ow• / _ I \ v i- 133O " _••° o ° i�� o c�_ -:\✓���` ,---^-��`,r-='l,S ��-- ,!r., �/ loo��i 111\�•,° �.��\���"., \ i/.��. \ kvallpond, c •° a % d C o .'i [3 \ (` 0 2'_ 00 /,, b / ��\ o��..� - 'J-. \\ O)) ,emu. • l,,,r J�'il /� !22 _�` J , 1 �'j I I ^-i •�--. o ,'� � Z '— �� e '� I (( 1 / /, � /� \ 1• � 0-7 it J/ Hill ly /00 lo • �✓/ �� / Gp _Qi r/ u ��/ � / !'o Il�lry� 1, �I \\��2yo � �1\ .\ 55 C o `� ! - , ��� Tug ••� ,11-3 \�`= %,, /?� �+I\✓ 11 \ �' i� HAMUD x q ii a CAI 1, I ) �' / i .. /✓ Z. ......... i / �/45 rI 1 '1;`� ° • OI\ /moo t-,__=_cJL=i-- \ �\ /'J ;!(l1'\`/ so San an it .'t T/ '(Pits J'It t Q 0 Flo �n1�� , a l %9 a o �� , NTERCHA GE 93 1 /! � \`' �r _ { , 10 t B"uct{lailt�`� •' ; p 'r �1 p�" `^ a��) j �� � nrorthwe' p ���=G���:�r�1 I ✓// �� �� \ ' 1 , / - __ °n o •N'• ICY , oENN-C I- s ii ENTgAC i. Sand aid rave{ ' l� _✓,.I � a Di sa16-0 �� � A ,o x2 � /I/^:y�I' / � fit. ���� •1l � .i �---- Ty i /•j^.,,\/)' l � /'. 'L' ) -\.� `•�� o`"�//i \� �2 90 'in`, "o"wr \ WDOO�p 17 L�12 , Iw 11\ +� �\\ ✓,,r�, � � `\I1 Et C'a olic V� r�� . • �j.,0 osch o \. •:l l�� A� JI li I t I -�i .p. -�, --_ i �� �0.,- G II,II/�\ ,� /\o p�". I} •aT�N \� ''\•\_ ,` `ro \\ '•'/ �Z i , = OG \ � � ._ .: �� \i p✓,!/I/ / H '"� �' �� � �` \� j�/ Sch % _ �, ---- S7• , - :ry egwrtai TeCleh>a.al erAh // 1 l j = ice',`=,°°•%0' i' ' c ����\O;\ '�l—I /5, mr oce \ Nal £-� Hds. s ;i,, '...•}+F.RG ANGE' f IJ/ �t`�4i�1 '� "off• Res ry 1 ;\ �".50 / 9 owe( �r\?' -J� R�7s�- ie 1 �r L 77 1 o o nres ` \\ ,gyp \ I Cern rp I \\\1 y r 1 St Ja I Laurel Lake fit. i�r�� -— ��r r',\ ere 69 ^�-!� 0 ._\¢¢e� c erplanck 1II1 I I I IL_. \\ �.• / /f - != J //8 o sa a.�, 0� `•.hSch , I11�-Il ^..-. i� 1 ' 1 „ �`--��I{ 178�1 �l \3 w r Assumption t \ �• ,� I� C� �" _ . .� - r.� t..J ! `ti �.�•4 'SeIL�%"'s aiMI QaE ,.;r / • al MM , est Cem. ° :7 •• .y.,.-r=a i I .1 (0�11- 11� _,��r+r W 58 L 5 ' N 9, ! l„ g 67)