All right. Good evening, Lunberg. Uh, today is May 26. It is 6 PM. This is the Lunberg Water District Special Commissioners meeting. Uh, we're going to start by saying the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Uh the superintendent will give anformational presentation to the residents and the board. Mr. McNamera.
>> Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, uh and the main start is uh investing in the future of our water system. Uh the presentation is meant to provide information about the proposed investment into Lunberg's water treatment and distribution system. The district is asking under the special
meeting article for voters to decide on appropriating funding for a $47 million project. Okay. So why are we doing this treatment? Uh the current drinking water regulation in Massachusetts for PAS 6 is 20 parts per trillion. For those of you
who do not know what PAS 6 is, PAS 6 are a group of man-made chemicals often called forever chemicals that can remain in the environment in water supply for long periods of time. PAS has been linked to potential health effects including increased cholesterol levels,
liver and kidney issues, immune system impacts, thyroid problems, and certain types of cancer. Uh on April of uh 2024, the EPA created a new drinking water standard that set legal limits for P4 and P4 at four parts per trillion in
public water systems to help protect public health. Just last week, the EPA announced that the maximum contamination level for P4 and POS will remain unchanged. Massachusetts does not need to adopt the EPA regulations separately because federal drinking water regulations
automatically apply to public water systems in Massachusetts through the Safe Drinking Water Act. Full compliance with the federal PFOA and PFOS limits is currently scheduled for 2029, although the EPA has proposed extending
some deadlines to 2031 for certain PAS compounds and eligible systems. uh small and disadvantaged will most likely get the uh extension. Uh Lunar is considered small but not disadvantaged. Uh also just so everybody's aware, the American
Waterworks Association uh filed a lawsuit against EPA uh in June of 2024 to uh fight the levels EPA proposed. On uh May 18th, 2026, the EPA announced
plans to rewrite parts of the PAS rules to address legal and procedural concerns and make the regulations more defensible. If if Lunberg is not in compliance by the deadline dates, Lun Lunberg will not likely be allowed to
use the source of water. So Lunberg's current PAS and PO levels uh there are current levels of POA and POS in in Lunberg's water. These are specific to EPA's regulations.
Uh we usually talk P6 numbers for Lunberg. These are specific to the new EPA uh regulations. The P PFOS has remained pretty level and consistent through through our range of testing. Uh but the POA has been steadily increasing
as time goes on. Uh PO and POS can get into drinking water from industrial facilities, firefighting foam, landfills, wastewater discharge, and consumer products where the chemicals can seep into groundwater, rivers, and and public water supplies. So on the
chart, you can see uh there's the three sources uh Lancaster Ravwells on the PFOS annual average. They seem to be doing okay. They're staying under the four parts per trillion. Uh the PFOA, uh at the beginning when I first tested it
was it was doing okay. Uh but the last year it exceeded the four pot. So it's 6.53 is the maximum. Uh the Keing well uh same the PFOS uh is 1.44. So that that's okay on the on the new
regulation, but the P4 levels same thing. And we've been seeing those increase as the years go on. And then there's the hickory fails. uh both on uh we've only done actually only done a few samples and they've fill them both. So on the uh treatments needed uh that this
doesn't discuss any of the manganesees levels which is a whole another separate issue. Uh Lancaster AB and Hickor Hills needs PAS treatment and also the removal of iron and manganesees. Uh Keings just requires uh PAS only.
So going to next what's what's the goal? uh cleaner, safer drinking water is the main goal with meeting all federal and state drinking water standards. We also want to improve the reliability and system flexibility. To do to to do this,
we'll be running raw raw water transmission mains between the three well sites, connecting them to the new centralized water treatment plant. If a new source of water is developed, that too could be connected to this well. Having multiple sources to operate from
will improve flexibility and relieve some of the pre pressure on our existing sources. The best management management practice is to operate wells on a schedule and not pull from one source continuously. This will also assist us with hard water challenges and the new
treatment plant process would allow us the ability to dilute water reducing hardness. So what is the plan? Currently, all of Lunberg sources have their own treatment process at their current location. With
a centralized plant, all of the water will be treated at one location. If we utilize UV light that destroys biological impurities, it will help us eliminate the addition of chlorine in high doses. Only a small dose will be needed to add extra protection.
the SRF for loan. Um, the district applied for a $41 million SRF loan for 30 years with a 2.2% interest rate. Mass D, who oversees the funding, adds an extra.15%
as an admin administrative fee. We've included in this article an additional 6 million to construct the raw water transmission main from Keings to the new treatment plant. If this article passes, it will fund the treatment of all
available sources in Lunberg. So, the available costs, what you know, what what will the cost be? So, the the project uh would will be financed over a 30-year loan. Uh water rates would increase gradually over the time as the project moves
forward. There's different pricing options. Tier one, tier two, and tier three will will be reviews. These are the current block rates that we currently have which we can modify as needed. Uh minimum minimum users will see an increase in the area of $75 to
$100 per quarter. Average households users will have an increase in the area $125 to $150. High-end water use will see an increase in the area of $225 plus. Those are usually the irrigation people with the very green grass. And just for a
reference, uh this is cheaper than a cup of the highest is cheaper than a cup of coffee at uh Dunkin Donuts. And all these costs uh are tied to everything, every pod, the the loan and the maintenance cost that will be needed in the future. So if the vote passes, uh
engineering and final design work will continue through 2026. State approval is expected in early 2027. uh construction contracts must be awarded by June of 2027 and residents will see gradual uh rate increases as
the uh project progresses. So, if the the vote does not pass, uh the board will not support reapplying for SRF SRF funding in 2026 and will continue studying water treatment options. Uh future PAS regulations,
legal decisions, and additional testing could affect the final scope and timing of treatment requirements. The new four part pots petroleum regulation will expand SRF eligibility to Lancaster and Keing wells. Construction costs and
interest rates may increase over time. Future state funding availability will be uncertain. Uh EPA has announced additional federal financial assistance. Uh they're they're putting $1 billion and but that's for 148,000 public
drinking water supplies across the nation. And uh that's that's not a whole lot of money to each each individual town. So that that really is really nothing to help the cause. But on the uh PAS regulations and legals, uh one of
the main concerns is no one knows what Massachusetts will do. Will they set increased deadlines? Will they will they will they go by what EPA has? Uh will will Lunar be able to extend get the extended time to go to the 2031? So, there's a lot of questions up in the air
on that and and if the project is voted down then then we'll see where that goes. Uh uh also on on the construction costs uh I mentioned slightly interest rates may increase over time. Uh
over the last 10 years has anybody seen the construction costs go down. So I I kind of think construction cost will I'm not not trying to scare anybody say it's going to go crazy but you know I can't imagine it's going to go any lower or be the same. It's probably a slight increase. And then with the uh interest
financing, we went from 0 to 2% or 2.2%. Uh so who who knows where the future will go on the interest rates. Uh and usually the the word that everybody keeps using crystal ball. No, no one has to see what the actual future's going to bring. So, uh, my little final statement
on all this is, uh, you know, you know, you we're hearing looking at the Facebook stuff like that, uh, complaints that this was just voted in, uh, tried to go for a vote a couple years ago when it was voted down. Why are we doing this again? And, uh, I think the people need to understand the situation for the
water district. uh uh sanitary survey uh is going to have a uh corrective action plan in it to address uh PAS and iron and manganesees. So I mean Lunberg has always had a problem with manganesees. We've tried it was probably eight years
ago we tried to do a pilot test uh for for the uh some of the wells on Lancaster Rav. It was voted down but uh so I mean this has been an ongoing problem. So now it's actually getting to the point where we're at the levels where a corrective action plan needs to take place. So I'm not trying to scare
anybody if you vote no, which is fine. You guys vote however everybody feels that they should vote. Uh and that that's fine. Uh just just be ready though that uh somewhere in the future this vote will be coming back very soon because Lunberg must install a treatment
plant or come up with some other ways of diluting or coming up with some some way of uh meeting the regulations the EPA and and mass EPA regulations. So uh that's all I got and uh >> All right. Uh thank you very much Mr.
Mcamera for that presentation. Um, I'll go around the board to see if anybody else has some input or not. I just want to put my two cents in. Um, you know, us as water commissioners here and the superintendent, you it is our
due dilutable water to the residents of Lunberg. Um, as Mr. Mcmar just stated there's a lot of EP regulations sanitary survey that dictates what we must do. What we have been trying to do over here on this side of the table is come up with the best
case plan to push out to the residents that we feel will work best. I understand that there's many different opinions on that and whatnot, but it does get a little frustrating to see some of the negative uh comments back when we're simply trying to do what is best for the community and comply with
the regulations that we must comply with. So, that's what I have to say about it. Do you have anything, Mr.? >> Yes, staying staying with the uh theformational presentation. Um I had a couple of questions I um uh regarding
information. Um what caught my eye here is um the um the where is it? Uh the levels the average levels that you put in for each each of the wells. >> Yep. >> Uh what what what was the level put in
for Hickory Hills uh in the SRF uh application? >> Uh they they usually give the range. So it would be the same some uh 20 they used the PAS 6 it was I think 20 29 to 37. >> Yeah. So so it it wasn't wasn't these numbers the if we use these numbers we
probably wouldn't even be eligible. >> Uh that is true. Correct. Yes. Because they we go we're still using the PAS 6 numbers for the access to the SRF funding. So yes, Hickory Hills is is the one that gets this SRF funding
possibility. Um you also mentioned uh litigation. Can you can you expand on the litig the litigation? >> The litigate that's a that's a tough one. Uh when you when you look at the
details uh the the the class the lawsuits and all the interaction back and forth there's hundreds and hundreds of pages. So everybody kind of picks picks little pieces of it. Uh so we're we're going by mostly that the the EPA just came out
last week with that new where they're going to hold those P FOS and P forward numbers and that's where they they said they were going to give the billion dollars which it really should be a trillion dollars and this will be something way higher. Uh so that's that's up in the air. I'm not sure where
this where this will actually play out and and then even where will mass DP because Massachusetts is typically more stringent than the EPA and a lot of these regulations. So, no one knows where they'll be. >> And actually, this this came up as a discussion today with with one of the slides I did with
>> legal action taking place. Will Massachusetts give the same dates for for complying? >> Yeah. I I just like to stay with what we know. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Um the the litigation is is the litigation
oppo in opposition of the EPA's four parts per trillion on those two. Is that is that correct? >> Uh yes, there was six of them. They they definitely were against four of them. Two of them from what I understand. I thought they were kind of okay with those, but they want they reckon they
would were hoping for a higher level that they were >> Yeah, they were looking they were looking for 10 and and that's what is in fact on what's being litigated instead of 410. Um then I had it. Oh yeah. Uh
if you mention here that Keading would be uh if it went down to four, Keading and Lancaster would be uh eligible for a uh SRF SRF grant. >> Correct. um if they're eligible for an SRF grant, do
you think the combination of uh uh Kadings, Lancaster, and Hickory Hills, if we went in again next year for an SRF? Do you think the uh the 41 million to take a to take one number because that's a number that
we're looking at now would cover Keings as well? >> In my opinion, yes, I do believe so. >> Okay. And the importance of that is because if it does cover Kings, we'll get the SRF. In fact, that would be a less expensive way to go because the interest rates would be far below the
bond rates for the same reason it's more expensive now to add it if it goes in and we get the money. So, I wanted I wanted to be clear about that as well. Um, that's all I had. >> Mr. Bush,
>> Mr. Chairman, so that could go either way. um with all the people applying, we could not be eligible for it. So, I think uh the plan that the superintendent has come up with is is the best plan we can right now.
And if the voters decide they don't want to move forward with that plan, then we have to look at something else. Um I'm going to put go on the record because um this has come back before. I am not against
moving forward for SRF application this season. If it makes sense because if something comes up that is going to benefit the district and the the water takers in the district, then I'm going to go for that because I don't want any
opportunity to pass us by. And then the voters have a choice whether they want to accept that opportunity or not. So, um, I think you did a great job for the I'm sorry I was a little late, but you did a great job for what you did put
together. Uh, and, uh, I think it was in the best interest of the district and the voters of the district to put together some sort of a plan as you stated because we are going to need treatment in the future. >> Okay. Just just on the financing side of things. So, we did do the emerging
contaminant grant. We put in for the full 41 million. we will not get 41 million but who knows what we'll get but we did a we did put in for it uh when we uh constructed the heings well uh it was President Obama he did a stimulus
package at that time so this was I think it was 20 2009 when the construction phase was going on and the access that we ended up getting was almost $700,000 and that was huge because that was a full million dollar project so that was a that was you know good good good percentage of the project uh that
funding source came through the SRF program. So I think where we already did the emerging contaminant application, we did the SRF application. I think we are in a the correct position
uh for obtaining any other financial assistance that may come from federal, state or wherever it is. So it and so for me, if this gets voted down, that's fine. whatever whatever people want to do. I think maybe the the SRF for the future would be something that needs to
be really thought out and maybe pursued immediately or maybe maybe down the road. But but I think that somehow those two are the uh revenue of this money coming back to us. So, just to be clear,
applying for SRF funding, being approved for SRF funding, opens us up for other funding possibilities that we would not get had we not been a part of the SRF program. >> Uh, I cannot guarantee any of that, but I mean, in the past that was true. I
can't say that's true currently right now, but but when I spoke to Mass D last week, they I asked them about the money that they're putting in and they they said the same thing. The merging contaminant uh grant or SRF is the access route to that. So, I'm
>> to to just to to add to that real quick, just so the the public's aware, even when we apply for SRF uh funding, we do not spend one dime of any money until there is a public twothirds vote to approve things. Us applying for an SRF,
etc., that just just says we're eligible. We then come up with a plan, present to the public, and the public needs to approve it. So there's no uh you know by us applying to these SRF really it's it's it's us doing our due diligence to preserve that money. If the
residents feel that that's not what they want to do at that time or if it is they feel this is a great idea then the SRF is re rewarded awarded to us. Ju uh just a point of clarity on the emerging uh emerging uh contaminants grant that is
not linked to SRF and there's money available. I I sent you that information. >> Yes, I actually applied separately for that. >> SRF. It's >> Yep. I applied separately for that and actually DP was the one that because our application was much older. It was more for a master plan for the PAS
>> and uh Mass D called me and said that we need to renew that application and do for the actual construction project and I the highest there's a big print out of which towns got the most money and I want to say that the most I ever saw was I think Pepil I think they they got $5
million. So So it I mean five million is a it's a it's a nice little nice little assistant. So all right well uh we thank you for that informational presentation and uh at this time I would take a motion >> we have a meeting tomorrow for anybody that wants you to
>> well we do have a meeting tomorrow night but I don't know when this will get aired. >> Oh I got since you might give a date because since they might watch this at some later time >> there there will be there will there will be a meeting at 4 p.m. Wednesday the 27th which is tomorrow for us
whenever you may see this. I move to adjurnn. >> All right. >> All right.