January 23, 1978 - 9:00 AM - County Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes (Special)

Meeting of Boardof Commissioners for the County of JohnstonJanuary 23, 1978,The Johnston County Board of Commissioners met in special called sessionJanuary 23, 1978, at 9 oclock am, in the Commissioners Room of the JohnstonCounty Courthouse, Smithfield, North Carolina, with the following members presentNorman C Denning, Chairman, Frank B Holding, Vice Chairman, Howard BentoJ E Rogerson and John M Booker, DVMMembers Absent NoneThe Chairman called the meeting,to order and the followingbusiness wastransactedRepresenting the Town of Smithfield Hugh Talton, Manager, and Robert ASpence, Sr, Town AttorneyRepresenting the Town of Selma Ken Collings, Town Manager, and CraigJones, Town AttorneyRepresenting Ragsdale Engineers Tom Moore, Tim Broome and Gene Cobb,EngineersThe Chairman called on Kramer Jackson, County Administrator, to brief theBoard on the Aeration Basin # 2 Wall failure at the Waste Treatment Facilitylocated in SmithfieldMr Jackson presented the following summary of eventsExcavation for the new aeration basin begin in OctoberThe Town of Smithfield prepared a deed on the Sewage Treatment Plant andproperty on October 14 The deed was later delivered to the County AttorneySaturday, November 12, contractor excavated earth next to aeration basin# 2 without the approval of the engineerAt 2OO pm, the contractors personnel and the towns treatment plantoperator noticed the wall shaking and noticed that leakage developed in the wallAt approximately 300 pm, the contractors employee stopped work andleft the siteAt approximately 845 pm, November 12, the east wall of Aeration Basin# 2 collapsedTown personnel and the engineers responded on Saturday night and restoredtreatment by using the remaining aeration basinOn Sunday, November 13 the Towns employees and the engineers worked topump out failed pit area; to assess damage On Monday, November 14, the County Administrator, Smithfields Town Manageand Smithfields attorney visited the site to view the damageLater the same day, the County Administrator, Town Manager, County Attorneand the Town Attorney met in the office of Spence and Spence to discuss what actioshould be takenBoth attorneys agreed, and recommended, an independent study be undertakento determine the reason for the wall failure It was felt this action to be in thbest interest of all parties concerned,It was agreed by all present that the county and town should jointly makedecisions as to what action to follow during the emergency period to protect theremaining aeration basinThe Town Manager telephoned the League of Municipalities and the CountyAdministrator telephoned the Association of County Commissioners seeking a list ofqualified engineering firms to do an independent studyOn November 15, the Town Manager and the County Administrator agreed toask Research Engineers, Inc, to do the studySmithfield Mayor Wallace and Commissioner Holding were advised of thesituation and kept informed through the remainder of the actions takenIrii?IErJanuary 23, 1978 ContThrough observation and engineering ana;lysjlsF it became apparent thatthe east wall of the remaining basin was in danger of collapsing All partiesconsulted agreed that the wall should be protected from fallingOn November 16, shoring of the wall was begin and by November 23, theshoring was completed,On November 23 Aeration Basin No, 1 was returned to service andtreatment approaching secondary was resumed,From November 23 until December 9, Ragsdale Engineers investigatedvarious alternatives for restoring the lost aeration capacity and constructingnew aeration capacityOn December 14 a meeting was held in the Courthouse which was attendedby representatives from the County, Towns of Smithfield and Selma, Ragsdale EngineerInc The facts concerning the wall failure were discussed and Ragsdale Engineerspresented alternatives and costs for future aeration facilities The groupauthorized the County Administrator and representatives of Ragsdale Engineers tomeet with EPA in Atlanta and to review the basin wall failure, discussalternativesfor aeration facilities construction and request grant participation in constructionOn December 21, the County Administrator, Town Manager, and the Engineemet with EPA to discuss the events,On December 23 the forementioned men met with representatives of theDivision of Environmental Management to discuss the same points reviewed with EPAand make an on -site inspection of the failureOn January 4, a representative of EPA reviewed the damaged wall on -siteand subsequentlymet with State Officials, Administrator, and Town Manager inRaleighOn January 5, EPA and DEM agreed to participate in the cost of thedivision wall shoring cost, cleanup and demolition cost, and construction of thelowest cost alternative for aeration facilities subject to the County agreeing toreimburse government for any monetary damage realized through litigation, shouldlitigation be undertaken fiend ofumaryAfter the collapse W R Britt, County Attorney and Robert A Spence,Sr, Smithfield Town Attorney, after conferring with the Town Managers and CountyAdministrator, recommended that an independent engineering firm assess this failureResearch Engineers, Inc, was employed and reported that the sewage plants wallshad been poorly designed and constructed , when it was built fifteen years ago andwhen the back fill was removed to construct the new basin, the lateral resistenceof the soil was lost The engineers report also stated that examination of thestructural plans for AB2 should have caused suspicion about the integrity of theeast wall, especially in view of the amount of reinforcement called for in the newwallTim Broome of Ragsdale Engineers advised that other walls could havefailed if they had not been shored up and with the wall restoration the plant willbe much betterIt is estimated it will cost approximately 117,000 to repair thedamaged aeration basin wall, with State and Federal Government grants expected tocover 872 percent, and the countys 122 percent share is to be reclaimed in userschargesCommissioner Frank B Holding commented in his opinion everyone involveis aware of the situation, and since the county is the lead agency in the 201 Waste-water Project, we are involved Commissioner Holding further stated he does notthink the towns Smithfield and Selma or the county, or the users, will be anyworse off financially , because of this accident as it will all net out in thefinal analysisIn further discussion, Commissioner Howard Benton and CommissionerJohn M Booker expressed concern regarding liability elsewhere other than localresponsibilityW R Britt, County Attorney, commented that many professional peopleare involved and he could not recommend any legal action be taken at this time MrBritt further indicated that the engineers report does not spell out specificallythe actual cause of the wall failureU402January 23, 1978 ContChairman Denning and the Board of Commjssioners, after a lengthy discussioinstructed W Btwhateshouldnbeldoneoandtreporptebackato thelBoarrde nat theAttorneys, to determineFebruary 6th board meeting with recommendationsThe Board of Commissioners also instructed the engineers to make a monthlyreport on the,201 Wastewater Project so the board will be aware of the progress ofthis project2, Moccasin Creek Drainage District - Assessment ComplaintsMrs Walter Lois Evans, Mr Walter_Evans, C W Strickland, Mr J EEvans, Lebert Crumpler and Chester Braswell met with the Board of Commissionersrequesting a financial statement for the Moccasin Creek Drainage Districtexpenditures Mrs Evans advised the Board of Commissioners they had been unableto get the information requested from the Drainage District Board or attorneyMrs Evans also stated they do not feel they are being treated fairly and areconcerned about how the assessment monies of property owners of the Moccasin Creek;Drainage District are being spentThese people also stated they are very unhappy with the Moccasin CreekDrainage District maintenance assessmentCommissioner Howard Benton asked if the watershed had enhanced the propertyany Mrs Evans replied that it had not improved their property nor solved thedrainage problem Mrs Evans referring to Board minutes of March 3, 1969, item# 14 asked the Board of Commissioners if they are not responsible for maintainingthe Moccasin Creek Drainage District Chairman Denning explained that the Boardof County Commissioners agreed to be the sponsoring agency in order for thedrainage ditch to be dug, however, could not agree to spend taxpayers money tomaintain a drainage ditch in a certain area of the county Chairman Denningfurther explained the Board of Commissioners had in the past helped with themaintenance on two different occasions Commissioner Frank B Holding indicatedthat it is not impractical on occasions to supplementadministration of theMoccasin Creek Drainage District ProjectThe Board discussed this matter at length and expressed concern TheBoard advised Mrs Evans and the other property owners present they would takea look at the drainage ditch in an effort to see what they could do to help ifanythingUpon a motion by Commissioner John M Booker, duly seconded by CommissioneFrank B Holding and carried unanimously, the Board adjourned;W-VAR FI W 0-At - -rNorman C, Denning, ChairmanEleanor N Creech, Clerk