Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2 - Draft Proposal - Carter Lake Pipeline ProjectDRAFT - For Discussian ~~='RABiSTAFF CC~NSENSLIS PR~PC~SAL Carter Lake Pipeline Project September 12, 2047 ~A~Rr'1B supports the water quality goals ~nd operational benefits of the pi•oposed Carter L~ke pipeline, hou~ever, it is concerned about the priority of the Carter Lake Pipeline relative to other utility funding needs and other t~~ater quality and security threats. ~~4'RAB also stated conceins about the proposed rate impacts of financing construction of the pipeline even ~~vith the proposed federal funding. WRAB and staff have discussed the best ~~ay to continue preliminary ~rork related to pipeline planning and preliminary engineering and permitting and right of ~-1y acquisition, while evaluating utility capital improvement and operating priorities with the goal of minimizing the need for rate increases to the extent practical. The follot~~ing represents the joint proposal of WRAB and staff. 1. Funds should be reallocated from existing accounts or added to the 2Q08 Water and Wastewater Utility funds budgets to fund an independent, third party assessment of Utility operations to be completed in 2U08. The estirnated cost is $60,f~00. This assessment should be conducted with the goal of evaluating potential efficiencies, cost savings and industry best managetnent practices in Utilities operations and capital project management to determine if future rate increases needed to finance the Carter Lake pipeline or other utility activities can be minimized. An example of an independent assessment is the At~'t~'A,~'~~VEF QualServe Program, which includes third party evaluation through a peer-review assessment. Staff and WRAB will jointly agree on a third pat-ty assessment progr~m. 2. Compile and prioi•itize a 20 year projection of utility capital improvements and system rehabilitation and replacement, including water u1d sewerline and water meter replacement programs. 3. Project rate increases required to fund the 20 year CIP and operations. 4. Develop altei-natives, using the independent third party assessment as a resource, to keep the projected future rate increases at a reasonable level. 5. Continue to pursue federal funds for the Carter Lake pipeline project, explaining to Colorado's congressional delegation that this funding is needed to keep rate increases to reasonable levels. 6. Communicate to Lefthand ~?Vater District that the city is interested in construction of the pipeline after prioritization of the CLP with other capital needs, and funding issues ha~~e been addressed. 7. Identify needed projects and the funding to bring the Barker Reservoir ~~atershed to a comparable level of ~~ater cluality protection and security achieved at the Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Plant through the construction of the Carter Lake Pipeline. Examples of projects are addressing the Town of Nederland sewage discharge through bypass or process upgrades, septic systems and storrnwater Y-unoff from roads and developed areas, and security risks to Kossler Reservoit• and the Barker/Kossler gi•avity pipeline. 8. Continue to implement, where practical and cost-effective, selected measures along the Boulder Feeder Canal to address the largest, most intensively developed or agricultural Carter Lake Pipeline Proposal areas draining to the Boulder Feeder Canal. These could include the installation of culverts to carry first flush flows over the canal or stormwater BMPs for these areas. 9. Evaluate whether minor additional treatment barriers or process improvements at the Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Plant, such as included in the WRAB June motion or the Black & Veatch recommendations are needed and cost-effective if the Carter Lake Pipeline can be constructed in the next 14 years and selective bypasses and BMPs are constructed on the Boulder Feeder Canal. 10. Include funds in the 2448 tA~ater Utility Capital Improvement Project budget for only the following activities and components of the Carter Lake pipeline project: a. The minimal amount of preliminary engineering, permitting activities and ROW acquisition to keep the project progressing. There shall be no final engineering design. b. The Carter Lake Pipeline LEAP can be started if it can be shown that the LEAP would likely be valid for a period of at least 5 years.