Q & A's

As envisioned, this project’s design is estimated to be completed at the end of the third quarter of 2024, with a procurement process and recommendations for contract award in the fourth quarter of 2024.  The project is estimated to be completed in the first quarter of 2025. 

There is no evidence that the letter was or was not sent.  Regardless, no evidence supports that LUB’s construction of the ground storage tank (resulting from the 2020 contract with LUB) meets the Main Village’s storage requirement.  See the answer to Question No. 19 below on why water storage is needed.   

The format for the TASS agreements is “take or pay,” with a 3 million gallon per month minimum and 10 million gallons per maximum for the Loudon County supply and a 1 million gallon minimum and 10 million gallons per month maximum for Monroe County. 

Yes.  However, since there is no internal metering of the Tellico Village wastewater system, the TVPOA’s means of reporting wastewater flows to TDEC is based on metering owned by our wholesale suppliers and monthly invoices paid to LUB and TASS.  Meters malfunction, so the more accurate and industry-standard means of measuring wastewater flows is to use pump draw-down tests and assess wastewater flows based on pump run times.  For the studies Jacobs has completed for Tellico Village, they have used pump draw-down tests.   

There are hand-written notes from PSAC members and some TVPOA correspondence sent to Kahite residents. However, nothing could be located documenting the work completed concerning locations or residences that still need additional work. 

No.  The nearest Roto-Rooter is in Athens, TN (actually 6 miles south of Athens).  They have four large trucks (3,500 gallons capacity) and one small truck (2,000 gallons capacity).  In a wet weather event, they’ll be called by Tellico Village, LUB, and LCUB (Lenoir City Utility Board).  Everyone will need them, and they will not have adequate capacity to solve everyone’s problems.  Even if Tellico Village is the only utility that needs them, a truck pumping (generously) 350 gallons per minute will fill in 10 minutes.  Sometimes, they must haul the waste to Cleveland, TN.  If they’re lucky enough to go no further than a round trip to Loudon, their assistance is limited to approximately 3,500 gallons per hour.  The difference (for instance) between what the Main Pumping Station can pump and what it receives is 150 gallons per minute.  Equating Roto-Rooter with a solution to excess wastewater flows is putting a band-aid on a bullet hole.   

As discussed in the Public Services Advisory Committee, Finance Advisory Committee, and public Board meetings, inspections on individual collection tanks require time and labor.  Perhaps volunteers can be a force multiplier, but there are limitations with availability and other time commitments with volunteers.  The decision to inspect and/or commence any meaningful remediation at the individual collection tanks is a topic of Advisory Committees, and the Board of Directors is aware.  To undertake that task, it would procedurally start with recommendations from the TVPOA staff to the board or board direction to the committees in the inverse.  Realistically, the earliest this process could commence would be budget considerations for Fiscal Year 2025. 

The only statement the TVPOA has made is that no decision has been made regarding whose expense repairs to the collection tanks would fall on.  That is not an incorrect statement.  Given the possible magnitude of expense and the inconvenience property owners would experience, the decision to place the expense on property owners would require Board approval. 

It is essential to provide further consideration to the implications of this inquiry.  As it stands, the Board of Directors has approved an $80/month Water/Sewer Infrastructure Fee to, in part, address Inflow and Infiltration.  That is the Board of Director’s direction.  Consider the implication of burdening property owners with remediating Inflow and Infiltration on their property along with the Water/Wastewater Infrastructure fee.     

The videos do not make that statement.  There are instances where property owners have had wastewater back up into their homes.  No correction seems required.   

The impetus behind this question is the assumption that if wastewater is pumped more consistently, odor control measures are unnecessary.  To contrive this assumption, one must ignore that wastewater arrives in pumping station wet wells in a septic state because it has sat in household tanks for several days (in the case of liquids) and perhaps weeks in the case of solids.  Hydrogen sulfide and other gases exist long before the wastewater arrives at a neighborhood pumping station.   

Furthermore, the industry standard for designing wastewater odor control systems is 12 air changes per hour in the wet well.  Variable frequency drive pumps do not affect air changes at that frequency.  Hence, there is a need for vapor phase odor control systems that remove and filter hydrogen sulfide and other gases in the air.   

This proposed solution of installing variable frequency drive pumps has been vetted by two specific Public Services Advisory Committee members with a combined 80 years of civil water and wastewater experience.  It has also been vetted with Jacobs Engineering.  No one believes installing variable frequency drive pumps will solve odor control by themselves.  It simply doesn’t resonate with others with considerable field experience.   

Jacobs Engineering is not required to affix an engineering stamp on reports (unless in some instances when they are being submitted to a State or Federal agency).  Formal and final design documents will be stamped for procurement and construction engineering purposes.   

To date, TVPOA Public Works staff has completed roof drain testing on 5.5 homes.  A typical house has seven drains, so approximately 38 drains have been tested.  No drains have been identified, either connected to the tank, the sewer lateral from the house, or the hole in which the tank is installed.  The total time invested in roof drain testing is approximately 12 hours (2 people for 6 hours).  TVPOA Public Works staff has continued to ask residential contractors if they have seen (or even heard) of roof drains being connected to the tank, the sewer lateral, or the whole in which the tank is installed. There continues to be a resounding response along the lines of “Never done it, never seen it done, never even heard of it!” 

The issue of labor and expense (amount and who bears the expense), the time required, and the targeted outcomes will be considered during the 2025 Budget process.   

This is being done!  Big thanks to resident Bob Bilodeau for manufacturing a homemade electrical meter at his own expense and working with Public Works to install it on the electrical panel that services the pump and tank.  Mr. Bilodeau has gathered about three months of data and shared the outcome.  In short, the goal is to attempt to reconcile pump run times with how much wastewater is leaving the tank.  Preliminarily, there are some indications that this reveals some helpful data.  However, when the data is most critical (during a wet weather event) is also when the data is most unreliable because if the wastewater main is full, the pump may be working, but no wastewater is leaving the tank.  But rest assured, no ideas or volunteer efforts by residents are being ignored. 

Perhaps.  Sewer tank alarms can indicate a lot of things.  They could be a result of significant I&I in the tank.  Or, they could be indicative of a malfunctioning pump, float switch, or electrical components.  Isolating I&I as the culprit for an alarm isn’t simple.  It’s a clue, but it isn’t as definitive as one might hope. 

Some may recall that resident John Oldsen asked a question at the May Town Hall meeting regarding estimated wastewater flows in Kahite, which are equated to excessive water usage.  To his credit, Mr. Oldsen identified a shortcoming in the TAP video presentations that deserve correction.  In short, Mr. Oldsen articulated a dry-weather inflow of 118 gallons per minute on one of the slides.  That specific row should have been noted as “projected future build-out” dry-weather inflow.  In that light, as a projected future build-out estimate, the water consumption equates with something more reasonable and along the lines of an industry standard of 100 gallons per person in the household. 

This question stems from a comment offered by a resident who is an engineer.  The comment is as follows: 

“As a closing to the comments and questions, one should understand not only the role of representing a public agency but also the “Engineering Consultant.”  TVPOA has hired Jacobs Engineering to be the engineering consultant for both the water and sewer issues.  Their scope is to present solutions to complex issues in TV.  During the May 30th Town Hall meeting, it was stated that problems are solved by a step-by-step process.  Some of the early Jacob’s reports did state the problems on both the sewer and water issues, with solutions.  However, during this process, it is apparent that Jacobs was instructed with the solution/s to the problems.  One example is the requirement of a water tank on the north end of the village, then switched to booster pumps, that switched again to an elevated tank near the existing ground storage tank. 

POA Public Works Staff and PSAC members must understand their role in the process.  They should not have a consultant mindset when reviewing reports or drawings.  I understand some of the PSAC members are spending hours and hours reviewing Jacobs reports, i.e. performing QA/QC.  If I had a consultant send me a report in my previous position with a public agency that required such review, it would be sent back to the consultant with no payment as the work was not completed per requirements of the contract.” 

There are some apparent gaps in congruity within the Jacobs reports that could leave something to the imagination.  However, to conclude that those gaps result from PSAC giving direction is perhaps the wildest of leaps.  To come to that conclusion, one must disregard that in five years, Board seats have changed, Executive Directors/CEOs have changed, and three Directors of Public Works have transitioned.  Different ideas have been explored (for which there are studies and documentation from Jacobs).  Some ideas have been abandoned (for valid reasons), and new opportunities have been researched.  Exploring new/different ideas didn’t occur over months or years.  It has taken at least five years to get where we are.  While the reports may not close the gaps and document the decisions and reasons that brought a change in direction, the assertion that resident volunteers somehow “seized the reigns” or “hijacked” the process requires dismissing several other valid possibilities. There’s no problem with disagreeing.  Expressing disagreement with conspiracy theories and disregarding the efforts of experienced, qualified professionals who happen to be resident volunteers is reckless and irresponsible. Most importantly, as Director of Public Works, I have never witnessed a member of PSAC instruct Jacobs to do or not do anything.  If I witnessed it, I would put a stop to it.  

I do believe PSAC members understand their role very clearly.  I have never witnessed any review of Jacob’s work with a “consultant mindset.”  To the contrary, PSAC members challenge Jacobs.  As Director of Public Works, I’m confident I understand my role very clearly.  I have fired consultants and withheld payment numerous times.  My sole interest is that of Tellico Village.   

From my perspective, it is apparent that a great deal of time and effort has been invested in reviewing the available information on the TVPOA website.  I don’t think these perspectives lack an unwillingness to read and investigate.  However, the assertions made do lack for not having asked questions (of PSAC and TVPOA staff) to confirm or deny preconceived notions.   

Yes.  Perhaps the most pivotal element of the contract is included in Section 5 from the TVPOA/LUB contract:  

That section precludes two things.  First and foremost, the main portion of Tellico Village has a daily maximum of 3.2 million gallons.  However, the hourly flows (almost 4.6 million gallons daily) address the peaking demands.  So, for interval periods in every 24 hours, we can draw at a rate of nearly 4.6 million gallons.  However, the daily limit is still 3.2 million gallons from LUB.  In addition to the LUB supply, TASS can supply approximately 500,000 gallons of water to the main Village, bringing the total daily availability to 3.7 million gallons.   

To be clear, there is no evidence that LUB is not meeting its contractual obligations.  On a heavy irrigation day, the main Village uses between 2.2 million and 2.5 million gallons daily.   

The question that seems to be brought up is, why is there a need for an elevated water storage tank if we are not using what is available?  The simple answer addresses the peaking factor resulting from irrigation demand.  It is widely understood that water usage isn’t linear.  If one were to attempt to ration our water supply, we would have just over 154,000 gallons per hour to use in a 24-hour period.  But, there are peaks that need to be supplied with water.  So, to address the peaking demand, consider the model below that attempts to realistically distribute water usage over 24 hours based on a significant irrigation load: 

• Between 12 a.m. and 4 a.m., we use 2% of daily total water use.
• Between 4 a.m. and 11 a.m., we use 68% of daily total water use.
• Between 11 a.m. and 7 p.m., we use 20% of daily total water use.
• Between 7 p.m. and 12 a.m., we use 10% of daily total water use

The model above equates with Public Works staff’s operational experience wherein we can see how much the level in the existing 500,000 gallon ground storage tank drops between 4 a.m. and 11 a.m.  It may not be a perfect model, but it is verifiable.  Now, let’s apply that theoretical distribution of consumption to a known heavy consumption day:  June 25, 2024 (2,293,532 gallons consumed combined from LUB and TASS in 24 hours, our 2nd highest day of consumption in the month). 

Supplying the demand between 5 a.m. and 11 a.m. requires storage because it exceeds an hourly availability of the 3.2 million gallon daily total.  Absent storage, pressure will begin to suffer significantly at higher elevations.   

Now, let’s apply that same distribution model with the addition of 750 more homes in the main Village with a daily irrigation demand of 750 gallons per day (a typical irrigation cycle results in 1,920 gallons divided by 3 for the number of days irrigating).  The peak demand then grows from 2,293,532 gallons to 2,856,032 gallons per day.   

Again, supplying the demand between 5 a.m. and 11 a.m. requires storage at an estimated amount in excess of 860,000.   

So, to conclude, the 2020 LUB contract likely secured a source and quantity of water through buildout.  That is a comfortable conclusion.  However, the requirement to store water to meet peak demand was not addressed with the 2020 LUB contract.

No, only utility users will be responsible for paying the $80 water and sewer infrastructure fee. Lot owners will be required to pay this fee when they obtain a permit to build a house. The fee will be applied retroactively, so if a lot owner obtains a permit two years from now, they will owe 24 months’ worth of fees at $80 per month, totaling $1,920 for the water and sewer infrastructure.

The videos produced by Public Works and available at TAP—Video Library—Tellico Village Property Owners Association (tellicovillagepoa.org) clearly outline the risks and alternatives that have been identified and studied, as well as the solutions to be delivered with the proposed projects. If you have not already watched those videos, I suspect the answers to your questions are included within.

TVPOA Public Works staff responds to emergencies (water and sewer line breaks and pumping station outages) on a routine basis. Residents affected by the emergency are typically notified in person and with door hangers. For wider-scale emergencies, Public Works staff communicates with Beth Kuberka’s Communications team, which employs wider-scale communication strategies.

TVPOA Public Works staff is well-trained with experienced operators.  The Supervisor and his assistant carry the highest water and wastewater certifications available for the water distribution and wastewater collection systems operated by Tellico Village.  The heavy equipment and operators are contracted with Tellico Dirt Works. 

A proposed plan and alternatives have been prepared for the CEO and Board of Directors.  It is under consideration. 

The proposed Elevated Water Storage Tank project includes these improvements. However, with increased demand, pressure isn’t static. In any case, Public Works staff can assess where pressure is likely suffering based on ground storage tank water levels. 

Tellico Village complies with the standard in place when fire hydrants were installed (which is 1,000’ radius).  Public Works maintains an inventory of hydrant locations, testing, and pressures.  It would not be an industry practice to publish such information.  State law does not allow the installation of fire hydrants on anything less than a 6” waterline.  Presently, areas that would be candidates for hydrant installation are on waterlines less than 6”.  Tellico Village, Public Works staff, stays in regular communication with the Volunteer Fire Department, and they have access to the same inventory of hydrants and pressure. 

Ideally, dead ends should be eliminated to ensure chlorine residuals.  However, every water system has them.  Waterline installation is estimated at approximately $150 to $300/linear foot and is generally not cost-effective unless achieved with new customers.  That’s why testing and flushing is the typical practice.  Tellico Village Public Works ensures testing to TDEC and flushing maintenance practices.

My advice on that topic would be “be careful what you wish for.” Assuming LUB could be convinced to undertake a wastewater capacity improvement program (while also engaged in a $80 million water treatment project), expect those improvements to alleviate their capacity to be proportionately passed on to Tellico Village through higher wholesale distribution rates. 

The line is pressurized. Cameras and “pigging” (typical assessment techniques) cannot be used.

Tellico Village has no water distribution or sewer collection line capacity issues.  Most of the water distribution and wastewater collection systems use PVC pipes.  It can last 100 years.  Most water and wastewater leaks in Tellico Village result from substandard installation, not pipe deterioration. 

No.

At the same link provided above, go to the video of the June 25, 2024, Town Hall meeting.  At about the 36:41-minute mark, slides 11 and 12 answer this question. 

It has shortcomings (particularly during wet weather events when the pump may be operating, but the wastewater may not be leaving the tank). 

Tellico Village water meters are not capable of inhibiting or throttling consumption.  Public Works cost of installing a separate irrigation meter is approximately $1,000.  The resident would then have to pay to have their irrigation system and backflow preventer attached to the new irrigation meter (unknown cost).  Also, go to https://www.tellicovillagepoa.org/tap/ and review question #1, “Why are irrigation restrictions not put in place to reduce the peak hourly summer demand?” for an explanation of the difficulties associated with irrigation restrictions. 

The $80 Water & Sewer Asset Fee is part of your water and sewer utility bill. If it is not paid by the due date, as per our policy, your water service runs the risk of being shut off and a $75 reconnection fee will be required. This notice is on every water & sewer bill. You can view a sample here. 

No. The $80 TAP fee is a fixed monthly charge included in the utility bill and billed based on the property’s billing cycle. The POA cannot prorate this fee in the event of a home sale during the billing cycle. Any proration of the TAP fee must be arranged between the buyer and seller as part of the sales agreement and addressed at closing.