Search Demo
Back to Simsbury town documents

Minutes

Water Pollution Control - Minutes - May 14, 2026

May 14, 2026

A public record published by the Town of Simsbury (simsbury-ct.gov). mySimsbury indexes it and makes it readable; it is not the official copy. View the original file.

Water Pollution Control Authority
Page 1 of 3
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
May 14, 2026
Subject to Approval
CALL TO ORDER
There being a quorum present, Mr. Paul Gilmore, Chairman, called the regular meeting of the Water Pollution
Control Authority to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held via Zoom and will be available to view on
Simsbury Community Media.
☒ Mr. Paul Gilmore
☒ Mr. Ed Kelly
☐ Mr. Jacques Brignac
☒ Mrs. Abby Lawrence
☒ Mr. Jay Sheehan
☒ Mr. Lucian Dragulski
☐ Dr. Michael Park
GUESTS
Simsbury Water Pollution Control: Michael LeClaire, Assistant Superintendent
Simsbury Engineering Department: Thomas J. Roy, PE, Director of Public Works, Town Engineer
Minutes Recorder: Jessica Campbell, Administrative Secretary
Public Guest(s): Ellen Gilbert, Simsbury Resident
1. SAFETY BRIEF
Chairman Gilmore advised drivers to remain patient and cautious due to ongoing road construction and
roadside lawn maintenance activity creating traffic pinch points. Although these conditions may slightly
delay commutes, he emphasized the importance of safety for both drivers and outdoor workers.
2. ELDERLY / DISABLED SEWER USE RELIEF APPLICATIONS: DISCUSSION AND
POSSIBLE ACTION
Mr. Roy reported that the Sewer Relief Fund program received three applications this year from
residents over the age of 65 seeking assistance based on financial need. Two applicants met the program
requirements, while one applicant exceeded the income threshold based on information reported through
the assessor’s office. In accordance with established procedures, the recommendation was made for
Mary Ann Klein to receive a 20% discount and Joyce Carlos to receive a 50% discount. Sharon Wilson
did not qualify due to reported income exceeding eligibility limits.
Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the applications as recommended by staff; Mrs. Lawrence
seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
3. SUMMER RECESS ACTION: MOTION THAT THE CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN
BE EMPOWERED TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
AUTHORITY ON ALL ROUTINE ISSUES BROUGHT BEFORE THEM OVER THE
SUMMER RECESS OF JULY AND AUGUST 2026
Chairman Gilmore explained that this authorization is granted annually and is limited to routine, non-
substantive matters. He emphasized that any issue requiring significant discussion or action would
instead be addressed through a special session of the board.
Mrs. Lawrence made a motion to allow the Chairman and Vice Chairman be empowered to act on
behalf of the Water Pollution Control Authority on all routine issues brought before them over the
Water Pollution Control Authority
Page 2 of 3
summer recess of July and August 2026; Mr. Sheehan seconded the motion, which passed
unanimously.
4. STATUS REPORT ON SEWER EXTENSION PROJECTS, ETC.
Mr. Roy reported on sewer extension activity in the Michael Road area. Interest cards have been
distributed to residents, and several responses have already been received, with additional responses
expected over the summer. A public hearing is anticipated in the fall. Mr. Roy noted that an
informational meeting had previously been held with area residents to explain the process, and residents
expressed continued interest in pursuing the sewer extension project.
Mr. Roy shared the Cambridge Court development was identified as the only project currently showing
significant activity. The development had previously stalled due to issues involving the developer, but a
new developer has since taken over and construction has resumed, with several new foundations already
installed. Although the sewer infrastructure has been in place for several years, the WPCA has not yet
accepted the sewer system. Mr. Roy further explained that under the established process, sewer
acceptance occurs one year after roadway acceptance, so further action on the matter is still some time
away.
5. TREATMENT FACILITY REPORT
Mr. LeClaire reported that all permit compliance requirements were met for April, with lower plant
flows attributed to dry weather conditions. He noted that AECOM has been contracted to assist with
renewal of the NPDES permit, though state action is delayed pending EPA PFAS regulations.
He also shared that operational updates included the anticipated delivery of the new septage receiving
facility, completion of upgrades to the septage tank air diffuser system, and ongoing installation of the
wash system. The WPCA also issued a request for proposals to evaluate energy-saving improvements to
the aeration system. Additional capital projects include planned replacement of aging rooftop HVAC
units and influent pumps with more efficient equipment, while existing pumps will be retained as
emergency spares. Mr. LeClaire also reported that interviews for the open operator position were
conducted on May 8th.
6. CORRESPONDENCE: NONE
7. APRIL MEETING MINUTES – POSSIBLE APPROVAL
Mr. Sheehan made a motion to approve the April meeting minutes. Mrs. Lawrence seconded the
motion, with Mr. Dragulski abstaining. The vote carried.
A resident from Talcott Acres, Ellen Gilbert, stated that she attended the meeting to better understand
the board’s process, particularly due to the proposed Talcott Mountain South development near her
neighborhood. Although the project was not discussed during the meeting, Ms. Gilbert expressed
interest in learning more about any potential impacts as the process moves forward. Ms. Gilbert thanked
the board for allowing her to observe the meeting and for the opportunity to speak.
Mr. Sheehan explained the general process for reviewing new development projects from the WPCA’s
perspective. He stated that developments first proceed through the town’s zoning and planning review
process before being evaluated by the authority for sewer capacity. The WPCA then determines whether
the existing sewer system can accommodate the projected flows. If upgrades or adjustments are
required, such as larger pipes or infrastructure improvements, those costs are typically the responsibility
of the applicant. If sufficient capacity is unavailable, the authority would deny the request. Mr. Sheehan
Water Pollution Control Authority
Page 3 of 3
emphasized that the WPCA’s role is strictly technical and engineering-based, without political
considerations.
Ms. Gilbert asked about reported issues with older sewer pipes identified by a third-party evaluator and
inquired who would be responsible for replacing them. Chairman Gilmore explained that responsibility
depends on the location and ownership of the infrastructure. He stated that pipes that are part of the
WPCA’s system fall under the authority’s maintenance responsibility. However, connecting pipes or
infrastructure associated with sewer extensions are typically the responsibility of the landowner or, in
some cases, a developer if they still retain obligations under the project.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Sheehan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:28 p.m.; Mr. Kelly seconded the motion,
which was unanimously approved, and the meeting was adjourned.
_________________________
Paul Gilmore, Chairman
function msSignOut() { fetch('/api/auth/signout', { method: 'POST', credentials: 'same-origin' }) .catch(function () {}) .then(function () { window.location.href = '/'; }); }