STAFF REPORT
Operations Committee, December 6, 2007
Update on Cross Connection Control Program (PWUT08-13)
Consideration of proposed changes to the Cross Connection Control Program
Speaker: Mr. Mike Bajorek
From: Mike Bajorek, Interim Director of Public Works and Utilities
Prepared by: Scot Berry, Operations Analyst Public Works and Utilities
Approved by: William B. Coleman, Jr., Town Manager
Approved by: Benjamin T. Shivar, Assistant Town Manager
At the May 3, 2007, Operations Committee meeting the Public Works and Utilities Department presented Staff Report PWUT07-21 which provided an update on the purpose, status and recent lessons learned concerning the Cross Connection Control Program. At that time the Operations Committee requested that staff research inspection procedures, and bring a recommendation back to the Operations Committee.
Cross Connection Program Background
A cross-connection is a connection of a potable water system to a non-potable system or to a private water system which has questionable water quality. If certain conditions occur simultaneously, backflow from that non-potable system or the water system with questionable water quality to the public water system may occur simply because the public water system looses water pressure.
A cross connection control program provides protection of the public water system from contamination by preventing non-potable water or water of questionable quality from backflowing through any water service connection into the public water system. The key feature for providing this protection is the backflow prevention device on a water service. The backflow prevention device, when present, is located on the customer’s side of the water meter.
The cross connection program in Cary was originally codified in November 2003. The ordinance was implemented in response to both federal and state regulations. Specifically, our program was developed to meet the requirements of the Rules Governing Public Water Systems – NC Administrative Code Title 15A, NCDENR – Subchapter 18c, paragraph .0406(b) and Appendix B – Figure 2, and Subchapter 18d.
These regulations established minimum requirements for water suppliers. According to these regulations, a wide variety of facilities require backflow prevention. Two (2) of the broadest categories include “commercial establishments” and “lawn sprinkler systems without chemical injection or booster pumps”. Additionally, the same regulations state that backflow prevention assemblies must be located in a place where it is “… regularly accessible for regular testing, maintenance and inspection.”
In February 2005, staff provided Council an update on the program which included a detailed description, status, and estimated impacts to property owners.
Proposed Changes
Two proposed changes to the current cross-connection control process are recommended to improve the rate of compliance - and service delivery. All single family residential irrigation customers are required to have a backflow assembly installed and tested annually. Staff recommends contracting out the inspection and testing program on residential devices.
The range in the size and type of the device for non-residential applications are much greater, resulting in a more costly and time-consuming test. In addition, the test procedure requires a water service interruption, which the non-residential property should have more direct control over scheduling and accessibility to the facility. Many commercial devices are in locked vaults, requiring access to the facility, whereas residential devices are located near the meter, with easy access. To ensure non-residential compliance, staff has developed an administrative approach of notifying customers of their due dates and proposes an amended penalty fee schedule with escalating penalties for those in non-compliance similar to the existing industrial pretreatment program.
Single-Family Residential Irrigation Systems – Contracted Testing:
Currently, residential irrigation customers are sent a letter outlining the requirement to have their backflow prevention assemblies inspected annually by a certified technician and to forward the completed test report to the Town. As staff initiated the residential irrigation portion of the program it became evident that requiring residential irrigation customers to contact approved backflow prevention assembly technicians is somewhat burdensome for the customer. We are also finding that there is a wide variance in the cost of inspection depending on the testing company chosen.
In order to reduce this burden, provide a set price for all customers and help ensure compliance with the program, staff recommends that the Town contract with certified technicians to perform the annual backflow testing and perform required minor repairs to the backflow device for all single-family residential customers with automatic irrigation systems.
If a backflow device is damaged beyond the point of repair the customer will be responsible for replacement of their backflow prevention device. For example, backflow devices that are not winterized may freeze and break. This type of damage typically requires a new backflow device to be installed and would be the homeowner’s responsibility. Residential customers may choose to “opt out” and not participate in this program and continue to have their backflow device tested by a certified technician of their choice. Based on initial research, the price for this service would be approximately $45. In addition administrative costs, such as postage and repair kits for backflow devices, would increase the average cost per inspection to approximately $50 to recover costs necessary to administer the program.
If Town Council approves this approach, staff would develop a communications plan, answers to anticipated frequently asked questions and procedural details in December. The Town would issue an RFP for backflow testing and repair in January. The Town would notify customers of the process in February and give customers approximately one month to “opt out” of the program and have their backflow tested by a certified backflow testing technician of their choice. Starting in March the Town would coordinate with the contractor to test backflows at all single-family residences that have automatic irrigation systems.
Civil Penalty Supplement:
In an effort to encourage compliance with the Town of Cary’s Cross Connection Control Ordinance, the following Civil Penalty supplement has been developed. While the Town Ordinance allows for penalties up to $10,000 per occurrence, staff recommends a supplemental schedule that can be more fairly enforced for first time violations and grow as the severity of the violation increases. However, should a customer continually and repetitively violate the ordinance, staff will be able to implement a progression of fines that could result in the maximum penalty. The Town currently utilizes a similar structure for the Pretreatment Program.
|
Non-Compliance Activity |
Tier / Penalty |
|
Failure to respond to second notification of program requirements and/or plan to comply with Ordinance. |
Tier 1: $300 |
|
Failure to comply with agreed upon plan of correcting stated/presented violation within prescribed time frame. Also, repetitive Tier 1 violations may result in a Tier 2 penalty. |
Tier 2: $500 |
|
Failure to test/repair existing system or repetitively require notification to meet test deadlines |
Tier 3: $750 |
|
A 3rd or 4th either repetitive or concurrent violation of the program ordinance and requirements. |
Tier 4: $1,000 |
Financial Impact: Assuming $50 is going to be the average cost per inspection and anticipated inspections of Cary and Morrisville irrigation customers number 6,300, the remainder of FY08 will incur expenses of approximately $315,000 and revenue will increase by $315,000.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends moving forward with the creation of a program to contract out residential single-family irrigation backflow testing and approval of an appropriation amount of $315,000 to the Operations Division contracted services account, with the associated recognition of offsetting revenues of $315,000 to the utility fund cross connection control revenue account. Additionally, staff recommends implementing the civil penalty supplement for non-compliance.