May 15, 2000 Meeting Minutes
University of
Idaho, McClure Hall Rm. 411
Jay Becker (UI), Steve Busch (Moscow), Robert Hengst (WSU), Larry Kirkland (Chair-UI), Juliet McKenna (PBAC), Gary Presol (Moscow), Derek Pohle (Whitman County), Tom Scallorn (Moscow), Loreca Stauber (Latah County), Tom Townsend (Latah County), Mark Workman (Pullman)
Craig Benjamin (Vice-Chair-WSU), Sue Hinz (Pullman), Les Wigen (Whitman County)
Kevin Brackney (UI), Bill French (citizen, Moscow), Steve Gilbert (Parametrix, Inc.), Geoff Hannaford (UI student), Bob Haynes (IDWR), Denise Ortiz (Pullman resident), Bob Rosain (Parametrix, Inc.), Kathleen Warnick (citizen, Moscow)
Chair Larry Kirkland called the meeting to order at 2:35 PM. Minutes were approved with the following changes:
Item 3. D. Pohle noted that had he been present, he would have voted “no” on the proposal to double each entity’s annual contribution to PBAC operating budget and that he spent considerable time convincing the Whitman County Commissioners to continue with their original $2,000 contribution. M. Workman clarified that after 1/1/01, Pullman would contribute $8,000 per year to the PBAC operating budget. L. Stauber noted that Latah County Commissioners will continue to contribute at the $2,000 level, and will not be doubling their annual contribution.
Item 4b. M. Workman clarified that John Bush is a subcontractor to Golder Associates, not the City of Pullman.
T. Townsend motioned to approve the minutes with changes; M. Workman seconded; motion passed unanimously.
Parametrix summarized findings of March workshops at WSU (summarized previously in the March PBAC minutes). Workshop participants concluded that, after conservation, the WSU wastewater reuse project was the most viable project to reduce the demand for groundwater from the Grande Ronde aquifer. Parametrix noted that in 1998, the Washington Department of Ecology initially approved the concept of wastewater reuse as part of the City of Pullman General Sewer Plan. Furthermore, Ecology and Department of Health support this type of project and there are several state loan/grant programs that are available for wastewater reuse projects. A study done in 1993 for the proposed WSU golf course did not identify any water right conflicts on the wastewater flow that currently is discharged into the South Fork of the Palouse River.
Highlights of the initial phase of the proposed project include: upgrading treatment at the Pullman wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to comply with Department of Health regulations for reuse; 12-16” pipelines conveying up to 2 million gallons per day from the WWTP to WSU along Terre View Drive to WSU; high priority irrigated areas include Pullman High School, Jefferson Elementary School, WSU playing fields, and WSU golf course; and construction of two reservoirs at WSU and on Military Hill. The proposed project would be implemented in five phases over 5 years to irrigate a total of several hundred acres and has a total project cost of $7.08 million.
Concerns voiced include:
T. Townsend wanted to know why WSU is not considering a pipeline from the Moscow WWTP to WSU’s campus, as a way to avoid the costs of pumping water from Pullman WWTP uphill to WSU’s campus. Parametrix had not considered this option, but pointed out that friction losses along the 8-10 mile pipeline would likely make pumping necessary anyway, and L.K. pointed out that effluent would not always be available in the summer since it is used at UI.
S. Busch wanted to know if a cost-benefit analysis was performed for this project. Parametrix said that the cost of the project is not justified compared to the current cost to pump groundwater. Based on current definitions of the cost of groundwater, it is cheaper to pump groundwater than it is to construct and operate this project.
K. Brackney was concerned about the accumulation of salts and other chemicals in irrigated areas. Parametrix has studied this problem and although it is not generally a concern, it may be a site-specific issue and must be monitored in any area where reclaimed water is applied.
L. Stauber was concerned that this project is simply a means to expand the WSU golf course, a project she opposes because she does not believe it is ecologically sound.
G. Presol motioned to write a letter to WSU stating that PBAC supports the concept of this project to be included in WSU’s budget package to Washington legislature. J. Becker seconded. Motion passed with one opposed (L. Stauber).
L. Kirkland presented
a list of tasks for discussion, which was distributed with the April
Minutes. He is seeking input on
priorities and in developing a timeline from PBAC members. The following comments were put forth:
S. Busch said he agreed with the list of tasks presented. No additions or subtractions were suggested. In response to a question from M. Workman, L. Kirkland said the list was in proposed chronological order. S. Busch thinks an economic study of alternative sources of water is important. He pointed out that there are benefits to planning now for a future problem. He also wondered if PBAC and its entities should begin budgeting for acquiring additional water rights. G. Presol said it now makes sense to take a new look at the 1989 US Army Corps of Engineers report (see item 4a, below).
In the absence of other comments, L. Kirkland said that this list will be discussed further at the June meeting.
L. Kirkland summarized the findings from his April 26, 2000 meeting with the COE (Brayton Willis of the new Boise District Office, Dave Reese and Surya Bhamidipaty of the Walla Walla Office) and IDWR (Norm Young, Administrator of Water Resource Management in Boise, and Bob Haynes of the Northern Regional Office in Coeur d'Alene).
Norm Young pointed out that IDWR remains concerned about the possibility of groundwater mining in the Palouse Basin. He added that IDWR has loan or a grant funds available that could serve as matching (non-federal) funds ($5 to $10,000, typically). The best way to obtain funding from the State of Idaho is to get our proposal into the Governor by September. A sponsoring state agency needs to be identified, and it is important to pursue funding from Washington state as well.
According to Brayton Willis, COE, there are several sources of funding from the USCOE:
· The 1989 Reconnaissance Report of the Palouse River Basin was done under Congressional authorization and left the door open to pick up where this study left off to update the cost estimates. This report is a flood control study, not a water supply investigation, and any update would need to be structured as a flood control study.
· Challenge 21 grant program comes from the federal Clean Water Act. This is a new authorization which directs the COE to work with local sponsors to develop a water supply solution to flood control problems. Because $500,000 is directed to each state, if interested, we should apply for funds from both Washington and Idaho. We need to initiate the process with a letter of interest. Projects require at least 35% non-federal funds.
·
Planning
Assistance Studies (PAS) – authorized under the Water Resource Development Act (WRDA).
Limited to small projects, PBAC needs to send a letter indicating their
scope of work and interest in obtaining funds and assistance from the COE
·
All these
programs need a specific entity that can acquire land, negotiate easements,
tax, and carry out administrative duties to enter into agreement with the
COE. This could be a Conservancy
District, a Groundwater Management Agency (GWMA), or a Water District.
·
The focus
of the COE is changing to provide maximum benefits to society in the long-term:
now 17% of the Corps budget addresses environmental issues and in a few years
it is expected to be 30%.
·
It may be
possible to join up with a flood control/recharge project on Paradise Creek in
conjunction with the Natural Resource Conservation Service project for restoration
of the creek channel.
L.
Kirkland estimated work could begin this fall, and PBAC may be required to
provide matching funds of perhaps $10,000 and Bob Haynes noted that IDWR
loan/grant program may provide matching funds.
After some discussion, it was agreed to write a letter of interest, but
not to commit funds until we have more information. S. Busch motioned to write a letter to the COE stating the PBAC
interest and M. Workman seconded; motion passed unanimously.
Geoff Hannaford, UI Environmental Science intern, presented the findings of a semester of research on Moscow’s fire hydrant flushing program, in which he looked for ways to reduce the amount of water flushed from the hydrants each year. Hydrants are flushed to prevent (or in response to) consumers complaints about “brown” water, which represents a build up of iron and manganese precipitates in distribution lines. Geoff concluded consumer complaints are primarily in three areas in the northeast and southern parts of Moscow, which is where most flushing occurs. Water lines in these residential areas have a lot of “dead-ends”, which accumulate precipitates because water does not flush through them. Geoff recommended “looping” new lines through an area to eliminate the build-up that occurs in dead-end lines, thus reducing the need to flush hydrants.
Pullman – Well No. 7 drilling begins May 15. Ron Cooper, Pullman Water Superintendent is retiring on June 30.
Whitman County – Colfax airport well drilling is complete to 405 feet; Derek Pohle stated that samples were collected every 5 feet for use by PBAC; a pump test will take place in June and PBAC will be notified so nearby wells can be monitored.
L. Kirkland has previously proposed implementing a program on the Palouse to subsidize the purchase of low-flush (including power flush) toilets to conserve water. He has installed a power flush toilet (uses <1.6 gallon/flush) that could be purchased for $120, a price comparable to other toilets on the market. L. Kirkland added that he is concerned Moscow’s new graywater ordinance is cost-prohibitive. In recently trying to build a graywater system at his home, he found that in order to comply with the ordinance and the Universal Plumbing Code, it would cost him in excess of $4,000. He wondered if other communities have passed similar ordinances that are less costly to implement.
Several applications have been received and J. McKenna will be making a decision on the conservation coordinator position by the end of the month. This person will be available to help all entities equally in their conservation and public outreach efforts for the summer and entities should provide ideas.
During the month of May, Juliet has given presentations at the Sierra Club meeting in Moscow and at a Pullman City Council meeting. Additional presentations are scheduled for the Whitman County Commissioners and the Moscow City Council Public Works Committee on May 22, 2000. A TV reporter from KLEW will be interviewing Kent Keller, Jim Osiensky, and Juliet on the water supply in our basin and research into the problem. [The segment aired on Wednesday, May 24, 2000]. Numerous local newspaper articles covered these events and events surrounding Groundwater Awareness Week during the month of May.
Additional copies are available.
This will be brought up at a later meeting as part of an overall budget request for conservation and public outreach activities for the next year.
Comments or suggested changes should be given to Juliet by 6/1/00.
None
June 15, 2000
at 2:30 pm in
McClure Hall
Room 411.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Juliet M. McKenna
Executive Secretary/Technical Advisor