Empowering Tellico Village 7

An emergency meeting was held on Friday last week to discuss the sewer and water debacle, and a DEBACLE IT IS!!! Jeff B. just posted the results of that meeting on ND. I’m going to give you a bit more here without overwhelming anyone. There are a lot of things to understand, so I will do my best.

Two representatives from Jacobs Engineering were present at the meeting, as were POA board members Steve Schneider, Ed Grollemond, Joel Reed, Mike Lackey (via Zoom from CA), and Matt Benoit (interim TV General Manager). Two PSAC members, Scott McCrea TV Project Manager and Gary Zika (concerned TV resident Sewer and Water Expert), also attended. Seems like all the stakeholders were present.

1. Why did the Jacobs's plan include a 750,000-gallon backup waste tank? TURNS OUT, THEY WERE DIRECTED TO DESIGN A STAND-ALONE PLAN by the POA board and PSAC. Who made this decision for a standalone system? Certainly not the OWNERS, the residents…US! It was never passed by the residents. When was that decision made and by whom? Anyway, Jacobs were told to disregard any LUB improvements or input. Although not a waste issue but a water issue that explains why the large tank and pump station on Watt Cemetery Road was not included. The fresh water tank and lift station that we paid for and LUB installed for TV.

2. Jacobs was also directed to ignore Tellico Village's INFILTRATION & INFLOW problem with our resident tanks in our backyards. I suspect they concluded this issue could not be resolved without major financial resources and therefore ignored. A target cost of $40M was communicated by one of the Legacy board members. This cost “guess” of course is absolutely ridiculous. It was further confirmed by Chet Pilsbury at a POA meeting in 2024. Someone made this decision despite Jacobs telling us in their October 2021 report that I&I was a major issue.

3. Mr. Reed and Mr. Zika came to the meeting prepared with minute-by-minute data from LUB showing flow rates for Tellico Village. This data proved that Jacobs had erred in the dry flow calculation (the average flow vs. peak flow). They also confirmed that LUB meters (turns flow on and off to their system) waste flows from Tellico Village and other surrounding areas to ensure their treatment system has the capacity to handle it. These two critical items play a very large role in whether or not Tellico Village or the LUB system would have a spill. Removing any capacity in either system would create conditions that would lead to a spill.

4. So, what did Jacobs do…they designed a lift station with a 40% reduction ion our wet well capacity. That’s huge! Here is the problem with that. In the morning when everyone is getting ready for their day, we are at our normal peak morning flows. At this time our existing wet well gives us over 22 minutes of flexible storage. This new Jacobs design with a 40% reduction in the size of the wet well gives us only 11 minutes of storage. With this new wet well, if LUB restricts our flow for over 10 minutes, the new wet well will overflow.

5. The same reasoning as above, a normal morning peak flow, but now we have a rain event at the same time. The present wet well gives us 11 minutes of storage. Jacobs new wet well design will give us less than 5 minutes of storage.

6. Further, the plan for this lift station is in the same location as the now eliminated POOP Tank. Their plan required that the land around it be cleared. This means all the trees would be removed. It also removed the current berm intended to protect the lake against any spill. Instead, it included a catch basin for the purpose of collecting the rain water and funneling it into the lake. The surrounding land would be graded towards this catch basin. So, if a spill did occur (and with a 40% smaller wet well there was certainly a greater risk for one) it would be caught in this basin already full of rainwater. The likelihood of spilling sewage into the lake is increased. GREAT PLAN!

7. Even so, Jacobs moved ahead and sent these faulty design plans to 4 contractors for bid. However, only one of the four contractors ended up bidding on it. Why? Was it the last-minute corrections to add a bypass pumping configuration or the unprofessional "white out" changes to the contract? Whatever the reason, the single bid that was received was 240% higher than the Jacobs estimate. That’s $5 million more than the original estimate. If I were to see these bid documents, I would do everything in my power to ensure that there is more than enough discretionary money included in the proposal to protect my company. Maybe that’s why it was 240% higher than Jacobs estimate. And why only one contractor bid.

8. If Jacobs would have continued and contracted with this supplier, we would have paid for a plan that simply doesn’t work. The new design with 40% less capacity, means we would have a greater risk of a spill.

9. Proof of all of this was given by Gary Zika, who was the only one present who had Jacobs lift station drawings and time to study them…. PSAC had not EVEN seen the drawings.

I have had lots of exposure and experience to RFQ (Request for Quote) documents and supplier contracts in my career. As a supplier representative for 31 years, I know that the very first rule of this process is to not tell the supplier how to do it. NEVER! INSTEAD, tell them what the problem is. This project was designed for failure from the very beginning, and I think that was because someone decided they knew better than the suppliers. Who in the POA and PSAC was so arrogant, so pompous, so hubris that they thought they knew more than an experienced supplier? These suppliers have far more experience than you do. They know their processes and tools much better than you do. AND they have the latest information, technical knowledge, skill and on hand experience than you do. This project was doomed from the start! Garbage in garbage out. OR

Someone wanted to have a standalone system. One we would have to maintain for its life. A system that would remove our supplier LUB from the equation. A system that would not be eligible for any state money. Its only funding source your pocket book! Who wanted this solution? Who made this decision regarding our largest asset without resident input?

Without a second opinion, TV POA and PSAC had no way to know if this plan would work or fail! Additionally, there were no competitive bids, so there was no way to know if Jacobs's quote and plan were at a fair price. I don't even buy a used $10,000 car without competitive prices, and yet, we were ready to spend $36,000,000 with the potential to increase without a competitive plan or price.

Then the LEGACY Board and 2 others now gone, decided to pass a fee to pay for this garbage. Imagine if they came to the residents with this proposal for an assessment as our C&Rs require. Well, on that they were right. WE WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED A SINGLE SOURCE SOLUTION. So, they asked our lawyer if they could use the FEE process, thereby, bypassing the TV residents. They also knew the residents would most likely push back on a FEE process and demand an Assessment. So, they went and got a second legal opinion, then had our lawyer pen a letter to us all saying it’s all legal and the second opinion confirms it. SO, MOVE ON!

· Implement TAP 2.0. NOW! End the contract with Jacobs, send them home, and refuse to give them any more money.

· We've already lost at least $500,000 on a tank that won't be built. That's a sunk cost, and it's water under the bridge.

· Support the LUB plan to install another 12-inch line under the Tennessee River.

o We can try to redirect the $2.1 million grant from TDEC, which we were going to use to pay for the tank that won't be built.

Just one other point. It’s time to stop the $80 fee. The original TAP plan is more confused now than ever. We have no idea of the cost. We don’t even know what’s in it at this point.

Mike and Gary have estimated that pump upgrades and a few other improvements to solve our problems will cost about $10m, a far cry from the $36,000,000 the POA board is trying to collect from us. We have at least 2 votes to stop it right now. Maybe John Orr will come along as well. His reasons for voting "NO" last July are still in play, even more so now... that leaves one more vote needed. I asked Marty Inkrott at the last POA meeting, and he decided to stay with the legacy board... he even thought my asking the question was badgering him. Well, Marty, your plan is falling apart. Isn’t it time you stepped up?

Our Mission....To communicate critical village news in a fair, clear, truthful and concise manner of key issues that impact YOU.

Publisher: Mark Werner

A Response to the Recent Telegram….

I have reviewed the Telegram publication that tries to refute the EMPOWERING TELLICO VILLAGE NEWSLETTER. From the Telegram I presented to Mr. Gary Zika a list of questions… Gary is not subject to an NDA like the board members. So, he is free to share what was discussed. Gary takes incredible notes. He has more than 3 binders filled with information he has collected over the last 16 months relative to our Sewer and Water system. I believe he and Mr. Lackey is the most knowledgeable individual in the village on our system. Certainly, no one on the board or on PSAC has this level experience or knowledge.

Statements from the Telegram (source unknown)

FROM the Telegram…. The design of the Main Pumping Station provided by Jacobs Engineering is sound and defendable.

FROM Mr. Zika…The design of the Main Lift Station has two major flaws size of the wet well and size of the pumps.

1. The wet well in this new lift station design is significantly smaller, 40% smaller capacity than what we have now. This will increase the risk of overflows. The current larger wet well gives us 22 minutes of flexible storage when LUB is shutting us down because their pumps are working. This new design gives us only 10 minutes of flexible storage.

2. Why does LUB shut us down? It’s a capacity issue. Mr. Reed and Mr. Zika came to this meeting with LUB flow data that shows LUB is metering peak morning flows into their sewer system. They do this by shutting off flow from Tellico Village, to allow flow from the surrounding areas. Then they shut off the surrounding areas flow, to allow flow from Tellico Village. The data showed that TV was shut off during high flow events, mornings and rain events numerous times some shut offs up to 14 minutes long.

3. The new station pumps in this design are 1,500 GPM pumps. LUB can’t take 1,500 GPM flow from Tellico Village. The pumps in this new station are too big. Jacobs stated they can be controlled by the new system to a to a lower 1,100 GPM.

4. Why didn’t Jacobs just design a larger wet well and use smaller pumps? The pumps are actually too small for our peak flows with a wet weather event. Jacobs acknowledge that the amount of flow, but did not take into account both normal peak flows at build out and wet weather events. Both of these items, the pumps and the wet well were acknowledged in the meeting. The wet well could be designed to a larger capacity and still be in compliance with all codes and regulations. LUB is working on a plan to accept the higher flow rates from Village and if the POA reduces the I&I the 1,500 GPM would work in the future.

FROM the Telegram…The proposed Main Pumping Station is engineered to perform its intended function without the need for a separate holding tank

FROM Mr. Zika

1. This Main Pumping Station is a component of a system, that includes a second lift station and a storage tank. If the tank is removed and the wet well reduced in size the lift station bid design will have a higher risk of overflows.

2. Despite the comment in the Telegram mentioned above “the original system will not function without the need for a separate holding tank. One legacy board member commented in the meeting, “the future storage tank would be down the road 3 to 5 miles”. OK, IN WHO’S BACKYARD!

3. This newly designed lift station was bid, at $5,000,000 over Jacobs estimate of $3.1M. This “overbid” by the only bidder, is a big red flag. It tells me the supplier is saying, “I REALLY DON’T WANT THIS JOB, BUT WE WILL BID IT BECAUSE JACOBS IS ASKING …. OR…they are saying this design is complicated and the drawings ambiguous. They indeed are with a deleted second lift station and storage tank and other parts “whited out”. That makes it difficult to understand and infers Jacobs is not sure it will work. Payments for rework are always a contested issue (my experience). This most likely led to this supplier’s extremely high quote.

4. WE DO NOT need an $5,000,000 storage tank, even the recent Telegram said it. We certainly don’t need a $8,600,000 brand-new lift station, both total an estimated cost of over $13,600,000.

5. Reworking the current main lift station installing variable speed controls, new piping and meters as per TAP 2.0 will be more than adequate and its only about $3m in cost.

6. All regulations and system requirements can be met with the above modifications, for ~$3.1m.

7. Then why in the world did the original design include a 750,000-gal $5,000,000 storage tank and a brand-new lift station now quoted at about $8,600,000 a combined cost of ~$13,600,000? They are NOT NEEDED!!!

FROM the Telegram…Has TDEC reviewed and approved the design drawings, including all associated calculations?

FROM Mr. Zika

TDEC does not approve drawings for functionality. The TDEC requirement is that the submitted drawings need only be signed and sealed by an engineer. TDEC assumes the engineer has done all the research for the project and therefore ensures its functionality (that it will work). The engineer who signs and seals the drawings has the ALL liability for the work and its functionality. So simply because TDEC approved the drawings adds no assurance that the design will indeed work.

The root cause of the problem of our lift stations overflowing during rain events is inflow and infiltration (I&I) stated numerous times by Mr. Zika and shared numerous times with the LEGACY BOARD and PSAC. JACOBS identified it in their December 14, 2021 report that I&I is the cause of capacity issues with the sewer system. So why did we not begin working on I&I in 2022? Because Jacobs was told by the POA, that I&I could not be fixed, and to allow for it in their design.

Mr. Zika goes on saying….

1. We must continue to work to reduce the I&I.

2. We must work with LUB to increase the capacity of their system to accept amounts greater than the 1,100 GPM.

3. I advised to the board over a year ago, it’s time to cancel all work with Jacobs and obtain new engineers to work on TV problems. TV does not need high priced Jacobs designs to fix the normal maintenance type issues here in TV.

4. Finally, the POA needs to stop issuing instructions to the engineers. Two major instructions in the past have been one that POA cannot fix the I&I and two that nothing can be done to improve the capacity of LUB in receiving greater amounts of sewage. TV does not live in a silo in regards to water supply and sewerage treatment. TV relies on both TASS and LUB to supply fresh water and to treat our sewage. Both TASS and LUB are our partners and very qualified to help solve our problems.

So, I guess it comes down to who you trust Mr. Gary Zika or the LEGACY Board.

The Legacy board will undoubtedly try to discredit Mr. Zika’s account of this meeting. The information was supposed to remain private (secret). This meeting waqs closed to the Tellico Village residents. Mr. Reed and Mr. Lackey have signed an NDA so they are not permitted to openly speak of this meeting. So, any information released (via the Telegram, legal letters, special Memos, etc.) to the residents can be cleansed and SPUN by the Legacy Board to support their agenda, narrative, plans or actions to date.

Fortunately for the residents and unfortunately for the Legacy Board, Mr. Zika has not signed an NDA. OPPS! So, he is free to talk about the meeting. My guess is if Mr. Reed and Lackey could speak openly, they would support all that Mr. Zika has said in this Newsletter. All of this can be solved by having open meetings. Then we (residents) could have attended and we would have been able to decided for ourselves. But the board makes the rules! We are not governed by any “Sunshine Rules”. These meetings should be open to the public. They are not employee related. This is information we need to know. The board could open them up, but they don’t. So what is the Legacy Board hiding? So who do you trust a Legacy Board that continually has closed (secret) meetings. So we can't hear the discussion and make up pour opwn minds. or a rfesident who haas "skin in the game", takes his own time to investigate and has the resume to prove his excellence in this industry......

From this publisher’s (Mark Werner) notes….

The “delays” in this project mentioned in the Telegram that effect the grant are the responsibility PSAC and the LEGACY board. They moved forward on a plan that does not meet the stated objectives (reference videos still on web site). They are not caused by the board’s concern to meet the concerns of the residents. That made me chuckle!

THIS HAS BEEN STATED NUMEROUS TIMES by this Newsletter and board Member Mike Lackey and Gary Zika. IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY LUB…. FACT… LUB is working right now to install an additional main line across Watts Bar (Tennessee River) as per their consent decree. They have asked their engineering supplier to provide drawings and they are currently working on funding. The target date is 2027. This would alleviate all flow and capacity issues even if we do not solve the I&I. In addition, the I&I into our backyard tanks costs us over $100K per year to treat AND it’s rain water!