WMAC Meeting Minutes July 22, 2010

Attendees:  David Crosby, Chair; Anne Carney, David Hearne, Paul Lauenstein, Bob Weeks

Guests:  Eric Hooper – Superintendent, DPW

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM

0.        The minutes of the meeting of July 15, 2010 were unanimously approved as amended

1.       Town Watering Ban Update – Eric explained that the unaccounted for pumped water  for the last three month is:

April – 3 M gallons or 9%; May – 12 M gallons or 25%; June – 11 M gallons or 21%.  He indicated that there were three possible reasons for the large discrepancies. There could also be a combination of the following

a.       A leak

b.      Under reporting of residential usage (billing)

c.       Over reporting of pumping of master meters

Eric said that he did not feel there was anything wrong with the meter data and that it should be accurate and consistent.  However, the meters will be recalibrated just to be sure.  Radio meters will be checked as well to be sure that the number picked up is the same number as on the box inside.  Some spot checking has been done already and there doesn’t appear to be a problem.  He also stated that the department has been very aggressive in fixing any of the small leaks that have been found.  The main reason to believe it is a big leak is that the tanks are being monitored from 1AM to 4AM when there is minimal draw down and the tanks are not recovering as they should.  The department will call in the leak detection personnel again and the shutting valve approach will continue.   The water ban will continue at least until August 1st and probably beyond.  The water ban will stay on until the leak is fixed.

Discussion continued on how much the budget will be affected by the ban since the Town will be selling less water at the higher rate.  This shows up the problem of top loading the rate structure.  Once the revenues catch up to the water ban the issue of revenue has to be reviewed.

Before getting into agenda item #2, Paul read an e-mail from Len Sekuler that was a response to Paul’s question of how the ranking for the consequences of failure gives assets that will be more expensive to fix a higher score or priority. Len’s response basically stated that the financial loss criteria should be assigned based on the amount of financial loss if there is a failure. 

2.       Continue evaluation of Sharon Water Capital Projects.

Project #7 was subdivided into 7, 7a, 7b

#7- Pleasant Street area (1,350 feet at an estimated cost of$220,000).  Weighted condition      score for probability of failure is 2.5; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.4

#7a – Replace and abandon water mains in South Pleasant Street and Forest Road (1,500 feet at an estimated cost of $250,000).  Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.5; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.4

#7b – North Main Street (abandon 11,000 feet at an estimated cost of $550,000) Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.8

Project #9 was subdivided into 9, 9a and 9b

#9 – Beach Street area (3,425 at an estimated cost of $565,000) Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.3

#9a – Abandon water mains on Billings Street, Depot Street and South Main Street (12,150 feet at an estimated cost of $610,000) Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 2.0

#9b – Abandon water main in Cedar Street and East Foxboro Street (2,200 feet at an estimated cost of $110,000. Weighted condition score for probability of failure is2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.2.

Project # 10 was subdivided into 10, 10a and 10b

#10 – Morse Street (1,780 feet at an estimated cost of $295,000) Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 3.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.2

#10a –  Abandon water mains on Norwood Street and Upland Road (6,600 feet at an estimated cost of $330,000). Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.2

#10b – Abandon water main in Walpole Street (3,100 feet at an estimated cost of $155,000) Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.0; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.20.

#20 – Well Pump Station – Valve, SCADA improvements at all pump stations. It involves making chemical feed tied in with production feed at an estimated cost of $221,000.  Weighted condition score for probability of failure is 2.5; weighted criticality score for consequence of failure is 1.5.

Eric stated that he was not in favor of leaving old mains in place and that when the term “abandon” was used it meant capping the stub.

David Hearne stated that he felt the committee should revisit its policy on AC since it seems the committee is changing how it views “old pipe”.  Just because it is old doesn’t necessarily mean it needs replacement and maybe there needs to be an adjustment in the time-line.

The water ban issue was revisited with Eric stating again that he felt there was a leak and not a meter problem.  However, everything will be looked at again.

The next meeting will be August 12, 2010.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Anne Carney