Committee commits to pursuing RFP for alternative water sources
By:
Jamie Hult, Staff writer
The water development committee will move forward with finding alternative water sources for residents.
The volunteer group of Brandon citizens voted Jan. 3 to put a Request for Proposal (RFP) before city council for approval. City administrator Bryan Read and city engineer Paul Sanow, who are also on the committee, will lead drafting of the RFP. The water group will work over the next few weeks to define the scope of the request for additional water sources and language before committee chair Don Wells presents the RFP to fellow city council members in the coming weeks.
Alternative water sources may include Minnehaha Community Water Corp. and additional wells in the Big Sioux and Splitrock aquifers.
Jay Gilbertson with East Dakota Water Development District was one of several hydrologists and geologists at the committee’s Dec. 19 water committee meeting. EDWDD has existed since 1963 as a regional resource for communities and water systems to develop facility plans and secure grant money.
Gilbertson attended the Jan. 3 meeting as well and said he was willing to serve as counsel.
“The experience could be of use to you as you move forward and decide what to do,” he said.
The committee discussed using the 2013 water improvements study performed by Stockwell Engineers as a foundation for identifying water needs today.
Committee member Jason Kjenstad said the 2013 water study, which looks at 20 years of projected growth, doesn’t present a big enough picture – the next 40 to 50 years.
“If you look out 20 years and you spend $30 million to get there, then you look at 40 years and it’s three-quarters of the cost to go through Minnehaha Rural Water Corp. or Sioux Falls and we don’t need to do all this development on our own, that’s what’s important to me as somebody that’s going to pay the bill every month,” Kjenstad said. “I just want to know we made the right decisions and are paying the cheapest amount – well, not the cheapest amount, but the right amount.”
Jon Brown of Stockwell said the 2017 updates to that study – which include a bigger water treatment facility – are in draft form and could be completed within a month. The committee discussed having Stockwell complete the 2017 updates and obtaining a peer review of the plan from another firm.
Tim Wakefield requested documents of water projects in which the city has entered contracts for and dollar amounts the city has committed toward each project. The committee will review those documents to get a better understanding of the city’s investments in the proposed projects that are now on moratorium and allow them to evaluate, as Wakefield – a member of the committee - said, “risk versus reward.”
Mindy Hansen stressed Brandon’s need for more elevated water storage, which the two proposed 1.25 million-gallon water towers would provide.
“We need to get the water towers constructed so we don’t have the issue smaller towns have when their water plant goes out and they have to use all their above-ground storage to fight a fire,” said Hansen, a committee member. “There’s not an area in town that meets the recommended PSI for fighting a fire.”
The committee also discussed well repair and replacement.
Public Works Director Rollie Hoeke spoke about a check valve replacement needed for well 6 – the city’s primary water source – and the goal to drill well 8.
Well 8, located near well 6 in Aspen Park, has been designed but not drilled. The city put out bids for construction in October but rejected offers when the water project moratorium went into place shortly after. Read said the bids could be easily repackaged and re-advertised with the committee’s approval. He said the estimated cost to bring well 8 online is $1 million.
Hoeke said the city’s goal is to phase out well 6 and make well 6 the backup for well 8.
“We know we need the water, and this could help us in the sense of giving us a back-up that could be treated without more cost to the city because it’s being taken out of the same aquifer,” Hoeke said. “If something happens tomorrow with well 6, all I got to rely on is well 3.”
Well 3 produces a limited amount of untreated water and was used three days in July.
The committee discussed the pros and cons of doing a full upgrade to well 6 or minor repairs that would allow it to continue operating as a backup. They also discussed additional test drilling and taking a closer look at the quality of quantity of water well 8 can produce.
“If you compare us to other communities, we are way behind the 8 ball as far as the amount of water we can pump to citizens,” Wells said.
Stockwell said well 8 would produce about 200,000 gallons of water per minute – on par with well 6. Well 8 would be built similarly to well 6 but slightly bigger, Brown said.
The committee questioned if drilling a similar well in the same vicinity made sense. Several said the redundancy was logical.
“If well 6 goes down and without well 8, Brandon is in a world of hurt,” said committee member Patrick Deering.
Wakefield said he wasn’t comfortable moving forward with well 8 without an aquifer test and the most recent radium test results on well 6.
“It seems premature to move forward with 8 until we know what we’re getting out of well 6 today,” Wakefield said. “I’m on the fence about well 8. I’m right there with Rollie saying we don’t have a back-up and we need a back-up, so that part of me says, ‘Holy smokes, let’s put that sucker in and let’s get it done,’ but without knowing what we have and what potential is there, it’s hard for me to say.”
“To be honest, I kind of agree,” Wells said. “I feel we may have moved forward too quickly on well 7. Let’s not make that same mistake again with well 8.”
Kjenstad brought up the need for cost comparisons. He said the city should get the exact water capacity Minnehaha Community Water Corp. could provide Brandon and at what cost.
“Because what if it’s cheaper than drilling more wells?” Kjenstad said.
The committee discussed the plan to blend water from well 6 with well 7 to diffuse well 7’s radium content and produce drinking water within the EPA’s acceptable standards.
Gilbertson said quantity and quality must both be considered.
“What the DNR will let you do is not the same as what you should do or what the public expects you to do,” he said.
The committee took no action on well 8 but agreed that all necessary repairs to existing water infrastructure should be made without its approval.
The committee also agreed that the moratorium did not apply to the sanitary sewer trunk main project at Holly Boulevard and Dogwood Street, and the city will move forward on upgrading that looping system.
On behalf of the committee, Sanow and Read agreed to begin drafting an RFP to examine Brandon’s current and alternative water sources, but both stressed the committee needs to hone in on exactly what it’s asking for first.
“I think we can sit down and take a look at what’s been proposed in past contracts and come up with something,” Sanow said. “I don’t want to walk away from this without direction. We need to be detailed.”
Committee member Pat Hammond suggested the group make a list of water issues, or problems, they hope to address and work from that list at their meetings. Wells added that to the agenda for the committee’s next meeting, which is set for 6 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 16, at City Hall.
