Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-051 Intergov Agrmt - WWTPCITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL ASHLAND, OREGON g7520 telephone (oocle 50:3) 482-:3211 February 20, 1991 Martin W. Loring, Manager Wastewater Finance Water Quality Division Department of Environmental Quality 811 SW sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Dear Mr. Loring, On behalf of the City of Ashland, I am pleased to accept the Advance for Facilities Planning. We are returning two signed c-~es o~ tn~--lnitiai payment ~equest for $60,000, and agree accept the payment with the following conditions: 1. The schedule of payments and target dates for submittal of products to DEQ shall be as set forth in Part E of the application. 2. The maximum amount of the Planning Advance shall be $260,755 or the actual payments made by the city of Ashland to consultants to carry out the work, and only the work, set forth in Part E of our application, whichever is less. 3. Within 30 days of the approval of the Final Facilities Plan by DEQ (as per Part E, 5.5) the City of Ashland will submit to DEQ documentation of the actual payments made to consultants to prepare the Facilities Plan in order that the amount of the Final Pa~ent can be computed. The city of Ashland is pleased to receive financial support for our facilities planning effort from the DEQ. We look forward to receiving our first payment from the EPA in four to six weeks. Yours Sincerely, Steven M. Hall Director Public Works DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY February 4, 1991 Mr. Steven M. Hall Public Works Director City of Ashland 1175 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Facilities Planning Advance Dear Mr. Hall: Please be advised that the city of Ashland's application for an Advance for Facilities Planning has been approved. A copy of the Intergovernmental Agreement and other parts of the application are enclosed for your records. Also enclosed are three copies of the initial payment request in the amount of $60,000. Please sign and date two of the copies and return them to us. Keep one copy for reference. We will forward the payment request to EPA for processing. You can expect that it will be four to six weeks before you receive the payment. The Planning Advance is awarded subject to the following conditions: The schedule of payments and target dates for submittal of products to DEQ shall be as set forth in Part E of the application. The maximum amount of the Planning Advance shall be $260,755 or the actual payments made by the City of Ashland to consultants to carry out the work, and only the work, set forth in Part E of the application, whichever is less. Within 30 days of the approval of the Final Facilities Plan by DEQ (as per Part E, 5.5) the City of Ashland will submit to DEQ documentation of the actual payments made to consultants to prepare the Facilities Plan in order that the amount of the Final Payment can be computed. 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 (503) 229-5696 DEQ-1 ~ Page 2 Please send us a letter which explicitly states the City's acceptance of these conditions. The Department is pleased to be able to provide financial support for your facilities planning effort. We look forward to working with the City of Ashland on the development of a plan that meets the City's long-term sewage treatment needs and protects the quality of the state's water. Please contact Richard Santner at 229-5219 if you have any questions. S in~rel~, Martin W.0Lo~in~3, Manager Wastewater Finance Water Quality Division MWL:crw CG~WC7765 cc: Pamela J. Barlow, Ashland Ruby Lane, DEQ Dennis Belsky, DEQ Richard Santner, DEQ Barbara Burton, DEQ Richard Nichols, DEQ RESOLUTION NO. 90- ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON AUTHORZZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO SIGN ALL APPLICATIONS, AGREEMENTS AND AMENDMENTS, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATING TO ADVANCES FOR WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLANNING. WHEREAS, the Ashland City Council intends to develop a plan for wastewater collection, treatment and disposal for the City of Ashland, Oregon; such plan being necessary to determine the needs of the area for health, safety, and well being of the people; and WHEREAS, the plan is to be developed in accordance with the requirements of Public Law 92-500 and 95-217, and will set forth facilities required to be constructed to serve the needs of the area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city Council of the City of Ashland, Oregon that the Public Works Director is duly authorized to sign applications, agreements and amendments, and other documents relating to wastewater facilities planning. 'i~he foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Ashland City Council on the /~Z~_ day of 1990. Nan E. ~ranklin City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this /~?~day of , 1990. Catherine M. Golden Mayor FACILITIES PLANNING FOR WAST~ATER TP. EAT~ENT WOP~g The Department of Environmental Quality, hereinafter referred to as DEQ, and Cit_v of Ashlandr Ore~on , hereinafter referred to as the "Advance Recipient", mutually agree to cooperatively utilize a portion of the funds .available to the State of Oregon from the U.S. Environmental Protection /Agency's Municipal Waste Water Treatment Construction Grants Program for the ,t purpose of preparing a Facilities Plan for Wastewater Treatment Works, as authorized by Section 201(1)(2)(A) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended. WHEREAS, DEQ has been authorized to provide advances for facilities planning; and ~EREAS, the Advance Recipient has requested such an advance; and ~EREAS, the DEQ has determined that the Advance Recipient is appropriate to utilize these funds, in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rules 340-53-010(8),(25) and -025(2) and -030(2); and ~EREAS, the Advance Recipient agrees to diligently pursue the completion of a Facilities Plan. THEREFOR£, the DEQ agrees to authorize the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to pay an amount not to exceed $ 260,755 to the Advance Recipient for the. performance of the proposed work. NOW, Therefore, the p~rties of this agreement in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises herein, agree to the following provisions. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. APPLICABLE STATE LAW This agreement shall be deemed to have been made, executed and delivered within the State of Oregon, and it is expressly agreed by the parties that it shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Oregon. This agreement, including all appendices designated here and the Advance Recipient's Application for Advance, as approved by DEQ, contains all the terms and conditions agreed to by the parties, and all such appendices are either appended hereto or available for inspection by the Advance Recipient at the DEQ office. WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS CGkWH368~ (10/89) TIME OF PERFORMAiqCE The work and service shall be diligently pursued in such a sequence as to assure its expeditious completion in accordance with the checkpoint project funds expended by the Advance Recipient and shall permit DEQ and any federal agency which provides or has responsibility for any part of said funds to inspect, audit and copy such records at the Advance Recipient's offices at any reasonable time. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and appropriate federal regulations. In the event that U.S. EPA awards a construction grant to the Advance Recipient, all such records shall be maintained for a period of three years after the approved date of EPA°s final payment for construction. In the event that the U.S. EPA does not award a construction grant to the Advance Recipient, all much records shall be maintained for a period of three years after the disbursement of the advance funds. If litigation, a claim, an administrative appeal or an audit is begun before the end of the three year period, the Advance Recipient shall maintain all records until the litigation, claim, appeal or audit is completed or resolved. 9. ASSIGNMENT OF INTEREST The Advance Recipient shall not subcontract or assign any interest in this agreement and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without the prior written approval of DEQ. OREGON DEPARTM~ OF ENVIRONMENTAL Construction g~ants Section ADVANCE RECIPIENT Authorized Signatory Date /0/,, _.,T~.GOVEP~MEb~T~L AGREEMENT WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS CG~WH3684 (10/89) ?.age Z of 3 PAR.T ~ TERMS, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS By signature below, the applicant hereby certifies, assures and agrees to comply with the following terms, assurances, and conditions in carrying out his responsibilities. FAILURE TO ADHERE TO THESE TERMS, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS SHALL BE CAUSE FOR REJECTION OF FUTURE U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PRdTECTION AGENCY GRANT APPLICATIONS, ISSUANCE OF STOP-WORK ORDERS, OR ANY oTHER REMEDIES AVAILABLE UNDER THE I.~WS OF THE STATE OF OREGON. The advance recipient will maintain an adequate system for financial management; property management, and audit. Further, it will give the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or any duly authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all books, records, papers or document as they may require. o The advance recipient will ensure that facilities plans prepared fully or partially with these advance funds will comply with current EPA requirements for such products. o The advance recipient will submit to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) the following items as applicable: a. Facilities Plans: (1) An overall plan of study as specified in Part E prior to initiation of work on the facilities plan. (2) A draft facilities plan prior to local adoption of the plan. (3) A final adopted facilities plan. b. Other: Written progress reports when deemed appropriate or when requested by DEQ. The advance recipient will, within sixty (60) days of notification by DEQ, repay the advance. o The advance recipient understands that payment of the advance will be in accordance with the schedule and checkpoints agreed upon and specified in Part E of this agreement. The advance recipient understands that the DEQ may require repaymenn of the advance when: mo Progress on the proposed planning work has not progressed satisfactorily or it fails to comply with EPA requirements four ~ - facilities plans. PART B -- TERM, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS CG~UH3682 (10/89) PART C ESTIMATED PROJECT CONSTRUCTION(1) COST SUMMARY Cost to Serve Existing Cost to Serve Existing Facility Type end Future Population Population Only 1. New Treatment Facilities Secondary process upgrade, add Treatment Plant Upgrade nutrient removal and tert/ary Treatment Plant Expansion filtration - $13,800,000 2. New Interceptors Enlarged Interceptors $200,000 3. New Collection System 4. Sewer Line Rehabilitation/ (2) Replacement $400,000 5. Inflow/Infiltration Correction Conveyance, outfall, new 6. Effluent Disposal Facilities diffusers- $500,000 Sludge digestion, thickening, 7. Sludge Treatment and storage, transport, and Disposal Facilities equipment - $ 7, 100,000 8. Other (Specify) 9. TOTAL $22,000,000 (¢22 million) Cost Estimating Assumptions. This Construction cost estimate presents costs associated with treatment and disposal of the current wastewater flows and loads for the City of Ashland. No allowances are included for engineering, administration, land purchases, or for facilities to accommodate growth. The estimate assumes construction occurs in the fall of 1993 when the Engineering News Record (ENR) index is expected to be 5166. The current ENR index is 4769. The above costs can be brought back ito 1991 dollars by multiplying the 1993 costs by the ratio of ~769/5166. The following cost information is presented in the order shown on the Part C- Estimated Project Construction Cost form provided by the state. New treatment costs are generated by first considering the cost to upgrade the existing secondary treatment facility. The cost associated with adding nutrient removal and filtration are added to the basic secondary treatment costs. Estimated construction costs are then provided for new sewer interceptors, collection system rehabilitation, effluent disposal facilities, and sludge treatment and disposal facilities. New Treatment Facilities. New treatment costs include both cost to upgrade the existing secondary process and costs to add nutrient removal and filtration. A. Upgrade Existing Secondary Treatment Processes. Costs for secondary treatment upgrade at $3.50 per gallon per day (gpd), based upon existing average dry weather flow fo 1.8 million gallons per day (mgd). Three to four dollars p e r gallon is a typical range of cost applied to major wastewater treatment plant upgrades. Escalating this cost 8 percent to the design year 1993 results in a cost of $6,800,000. B. Addition of Nutrient Removal and Filtration. Costs for addition of nutrient removal and filtration at $1.60 per gpd peak weekly flow. This unit cost was determined from evaluation of construction and preconstruction cost estimates from other advanced wastewater facilities. The existing peak weekly flow is 4.05 mgd. Escalating this cost 8 percent to the 1993 construction year results in a cost of $7,000,000. New Interceptors/Sewer Line Rehabilitation. Current data indicates that sewage collection system infiltration and inflow is not excessive. The facilities plan will recommend that the plant flow monitoring equipment be checked for accuracy. An amount of $600,000 is allocated for collection system replacement and rehabilitation in the event that such work is proven necessary. Effluent Disposal Facilities. $500,000 is included for new outfall and diffusers in Bear Creek. PAR_T D FACILITIES PI~ ADVANCE COMI~TION ~iffic~e: C-A $ mil Next Lower Cost** Difference:2 m. il $ 20 mil .G ELigible $ 22 mil Next Highen C=t** · $ 25 mil ~ Al [o~ance Percent** · 2.1930 AL lo~ance Percent** > 2.0990 Difference: ..~ .094 ~tm:]· III: , ® .4 x .094 .038 IV: D - I = A[lo~ar~e Percent 2.1930..038 =2.1_5_5% ALLowance %r J $ ALLowence ELigible Co~t, B x 100 ' 2.155 s _~_~ u_u_u ~.uuu x lOO S11~ VI: $ AtLowence x .55 = $ Advance $ 5!4_,_10_0 x .55 = $ _260_,_75_5 * From Part C, Column III, Line 9 ** From Table 1 PAF. T D -- FACILITIES PLANNING ADVANCE COMPUTATION CG/WH3686A (10/89) Page section will also describe the strategies and time period requirements for developing a financing plan and interagency agreements. The engineer will incorporate this section prepared by the City into the program plan. c. Available options: Define what options are potentially available for achieving the WLA's for the treatment plant. Prepare brief description of each. These options will include, but are not limited to: i. Discharge to irrigation canals. ii. Irrigation on City-owned lands. iii. Transport effluent to Medford. iv. Biological nutrient removal. v. Combination of alternatives. vi. High-lime treatment. vii. Move outfall upstream above east lateral TID diversion. viii. De-nitrification. ix. Flow management. x. Ozonation. xi. Marsh treatment. xii. Phosphate ban. xiii. Pure oxygen treatment. d. Selection for review - Define criteria, or the time period for developing the criteria, used for the selection of options for review. This component will define when the available options will be selected for further review. e. options review: Describe the strategies that will be used and the time period necessary for evaluating the technical merit and cost-benefit of the reviewed options. This component should describe the strategies and methods to: i. Cost-benefit analysis: including the design assumptions which relate to the cost-benefit analysis. ii. Select and describe the evaluation criteria. iii. Collect and evaluate additional in-stream data. iv. Conduct necessary pilot projects. v. Evaluate the selected methods. vi. Evaluate the potential of options as interim goals and analyzing the results. vii. 5, 20 year and "ultimate growth" options. viii. Develope implementation time for each potential option including prerequisites for implementation. ix. Environmental evaluation: including the evaluation of physical (including groundwater where relevant), historic, archaeological and other environmental impacts. 4 citizen's concerns included in the Draft Program Plan. Capital and operation and maintenance costs will not be provided for each option at this stage. Costs from established cost curves which show order-of-magnitude estimates may be used for options which cannot be adequately evaluated by application of the other screening criteria. A maximum of four options will be retained for detailed ~ /' evaluation and comparison. 2~3 City staff and the consulting engineers to meet to review preliminary results of the screening procedure. 2.4 Select and describe evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria shall follow standard facilities planning format and shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Capital, operation, and maintenance costs. b. Reliability. c. Implementability. d. Flexibility. e. Adverse and beneficial environmental impacts. 2.5 Prepare draft facilities plan chapters. Draft chapters will be prepared on study area characteristics, existing wastewater system, wastewater flows and loads, regulatory requirements, and selection of alternatives. Other facilities plan chapters including the introduction, summary and recommendations, evaluation of alternatives, and description of the recommended plan will be prepared in subsequent tasks of the project. 2.6 Consultant to present draft facilities plan to City staff and Council at a City Council meeting. Public input to be received at this informational meeting. This product would be submitted to the Department of Environmental Quality to meet the Environmental Quality commission's May, 1991 review deadline. The target date for submission of the draft facilities plan to the DEQ for review is May 1, 1991. 4.3 alternatives will be evaluated assuming two summer 7Q10 flow levels - a low flow and a high flow assumption. Sizing of treatment facilities will be based upon the treatment levels required at these two base flows. Sludge Management Plan: Solids Stream Treatment. , a Provide projections of biological and chemical sludge quantities expected from the screened treatment alternatives. For the alternatives with disposal to Bear Creek, two levels of sludge production will be estimated assuming two levels of treatment. be Evaluate sludge thickening, stabilization, de-watering, and storage options. Design data will be determined, preliminary layouts and facility sized will be provided. Specific sites available for the construction of sludge treatment and storage facilities will be evaluated, including a groundwater analysis where relevant. Capital and O&M costs will be provided for comparison. Ce Evaluate future sludge utilization/disposal options including municipal and agricultural land application. Evaluation to include groundwater analysis. 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 Summary of Viable Alternatives. Prepare Draft Facility Plan Chapter on Alternative Development and Evaluation. Submit initial Draft Facilities Plan to DEQ for review and approval. Present Draft Facility Plan Chapter on Alternative Development and Evaluation to City Staff and the City Council. As per the EQC's requirement, the deadline for the draft facility plan will depend on whether discharge or non- discharge options will be pursued. The timing would be as follows: Scenario 1: If the alternatives selected do not include discharge to Bear Creek, the draft facility plan will be submitted by September 1, 1991. Scenario 2: If the alternatives selected do include discharge to Bear Creek and require time for additional studies, the draft facility plan will be submitted May of 1992. CITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 telephone (code 503) 482-3211 February 20, 1991 Martin W. Loring, Manager Wastewater Finance Water Quality Division Department of Environmental Quality 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Dear Mr. Loring, On behalf of the City of Ashland, I am pleased to accept the Advance for Facilities Planning. We are returning two signed cop----~es oK th~--initiak payment ~equest for $60,000, and agree accept the payment with the following conditions: 1. The schedule of payments and target dates for submittal of products to DEQ shall be as set forth in Part E of the application. 2. The maximum amount of the Planning Advance shall be $260,755 or the actual payments made by the City of Ashland to consultants to carry out the work, and only the work, set forth in Part E of our application, whichever is less. 3. Within 30 days of the approval of the Final Facilities Plan by DEQ (as per Part E, 5.5) the City of Ashland will submit to DEQ documentation of the actual payments made to consultants to prepare the Facilities Plan in order that the amount of the Final Pa~ent can be computed. The city of Ashland is pleased to receive financial support for our facilities planning effort from the DEQ. We look forward to receiving our first payment from the EPA in four to six weeks. Yours Sincerely, Steven M. Hall Director Public Works DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY February 4, 1991 Mr. Steven M. Hall Public Works Director City of Ashland 1175 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Facilities Planning Advance Dear Mr. Hall: Please be advised that the City of Ashland's application for an Advance for Facilities Planning has been approved. A copy of the Intergovernmental Agreement and other parts of the application are enclosed for your records. Also enclosed are three copies of the initial payment request in the amount of $60,000. Please sign and date two of the copies and return them to us. Keep one copy for reference. We will forward the payment request to EPA for processing. You can expect that it will be four to six weeks before you receive the payment. The Planning Advance is awarded subject to the following conditions: The schedule of payments and target dates for submittal of products to DEQ shall be as set forth in Part E of the application. The maximum amount of the Planning Advance shall be $260,755 or the actual payments made by the City of Ashland to consultants to carry out the work, and only the work, set forth in Part E of the application, whichever is less. Within 30 days of the approval of the Final Facilities Plan by DEQ (as per Part E, 5.5) the City of Ashland will submit to DEQ documentation of the actual payments made to consultants to prepare the Facilities Plan in order that the amount of the Final Payment can be computed. 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 (503) 229-5696 DEQd ~ Page 2 Please send us a letter which explicitly states the City's acceptance of these conditions. The Department is pleased to be able to provide financial support for your facilities planning effort. We look forward to working with the City of Ashland on the development of a plan that meets the City's long-term sewage treatment needs and protects the quality of the state's water. Please contact Richard Santner at 229-5219 if you have any questions. S in~c~ere ly~, Martin W. JL0~ing~3, Manager Wastewater Finance Water Quality Division MWL:crw CG~WC7765 cc: Pamela J. Barlow, Ashland Ruby Lane, DEQ Dennis Belsky, DEQ Richard Santner, DEQ Barbara Burton, DEQ Richard Nichols, DEQ RESOLUTION NO. 90- ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO SIGN ALL APPLICATIONS, AGREEMENTS AND AMENDMENTS, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATING TO ADVA/~CES FOR WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLANNING. WHEREAS, the Ashland City Council intends to develop a plan for wastewater collection, treatment and disposal for the City of Ashland, Oregon; such plan being necessary to determine the needs of the area for health, safety, and well being of the people; and WHEREAS, the plan is to be developed in accordance with the requirements of Public Law 92-500 and 95-217, and will set forth facilities required to be constructed to serve the needs of the area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ashland, Oregon that the Public Works Director is duly authorized to sign applications, agreements and amendments, and other documents relating to wastewater facilities planning. The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular iaeeting of the Ashland City Council on the/ _~Aeday of ~ .~_ 1990. City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this /~?~day of Mayor FOR FACILITIES PLANNING FOR WASTE~ATER TREATMENT WORKS The Department of Environmental Quality, hereinafter referred to as DEQ, and City of Ashland, Ore~on , hereinafter referred to as the "Advance Recipient", mutually agree to cooperatively utilize a portion of the funds .available to the State of Oregon from the U.S. Environmental Protection A~ency's Municipal Waste Water Treatment Construction Grants Program for the purpose of preparing a Facilities Plan for Wastewater Treatment Works as authorized by Section 201(1)(2)(A) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended. WHEREAS, DEQ has been authorized to provide advances for facilities planning; and ~EREAS, the Advance Recipient has requested such an advance; and r~EREAS, the DEQ has determined that the Advance Recipient is appropriate to utilize these funds, in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rules 340-53-010(8),(25) and -025(2) and -030(2); and ~EREAS, the Advance Recipient agrees to diligently pursue the completion of a Facilities Plan. THEREFORE, the DEQ agrees to authorize the U.S. Environmental Proteccion Agency to pay an amount not to exceed $ 260,755 to the Advance Recipient for the performance of the proposed work. NOW, Therefore, the p~rties of this agreement in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises herein, agree to the following provisions. GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE STATE LAW This agreement shall be deemed to have been made, executed and delivered within the State of Oregon, and it is expressly agreed by the parties that it shall be construed according to the laws of the State o~ Oregon. This agreement, including all appendices designated here and the Advance Recipient's Application for Advance, as approved by DEQ, contains all the terms and conditions agreed to by the parties, and all such appendices are either appended hereto or available for inspection by the Advance Recipient at the DEQ office. TIME OF PERFORMANCE The work and service shall be diligently pursued in such a sequence as to assure its expeditious completion in accordance with the checkpoint WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS CGkP~I3684 (10/89) and dates specified in Part E of the Application for Advance. Completion date shall be no later than July 1, 1992 INSPECTION ~ND REVIEW O~.WORI~ DEQ may review and inspect all aspects of the work undertaken as a part of this agreement. In addition, the Advance Recipient shall meet with the staff of DEQ during the project period at times and places as may be mutually agreed for the purpose of reviewing the services and work performed under this agreement. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of the work shall include that specifically provided in the Advance Recipient's Application for Advance, as approved by DEQ. REPAYMENT OF ADV~NC~ In the event that U.S. EPA awards a grant to the Advance Recipient for construction of wastewater treatment works, the amount previously advanced for planning related to those treatment works will be subtracted from that grant. In the event that the Advance Recipient does not make reasonable progress toward the completion and submittal of a Facilities Plan in accordance with the Schedule set forth in Part E of the Application for Advance, and in the event that after written notice by DEQ stating such lack of progress the Advance Recipient does not improve per- formance, the Advance Recipient will repay the advance to U.S. EPA within sixty (60) days of a written demand by DEQ. METHOD AND AMOUNT OF ADVANCE Advance payments shall be made available to the Advance Recipient only after demonstration that the checkpoints specified in Part E of the Application for Advance have been reached. Advance Payments shall be requested on U.S. EPA Standard Form 271 and submitted to DEQ. The advance amount is specifically identified in this Agreement and is not intended to constitute a reimbursement of the Advance Recipient's COSTS. OWNERSHIP OF DATA The ownership of records, data and information acquired, developed, collected, and documented under this Agreement shall be vested solely with the Advance Recipient. The Advance Recipient shall provide three copies of completed documents to DEQ and such additional copies of data, records and information as requested by DEQ. RECORDS The Advance Recipient shall prepare and maintain sufficient accounts and records in relation to the project herein to permit complete audit of any and all projec~ costs incurred, both direct and indirect, and iNTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT -- WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS CG~WH3684 (10/89) Page 2 of 3 i project funds expended by the Advance Recipient and shall permit DEQ and any federal agency which provides or has responsibility for any part of said funds to inspect, audit and copy such records at the Advance Recipient's offices at any reasonable time. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and appropriate federal regulations. In the event that U.S. EPA awards a construction grant to the Advance Recipient, all such records shall be maintained for a period of three years after the approved date of EPA°s final payment for construction. In the event that the U.S. EPA does not award a construction grant To the Advance Recipient, all such records shall be maintained for a period of three years after the disbursement of the advance funds. If litigation, a claim, an administrative appeal or an audit is begun before the end of the three year period, the Advance Recipient shall maintain all records until the litigation, claim, appeal or audit is completed or resolved. 9. ASSIGNMENT OF INTEREST The Advance Recipient shall not subcontract or assign any interest in this agreement and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without the prior written approval of UEQ. o coN ns 'mm o¥, mwz .om,, r Construction G~ants Section Date V-~ ~ t ¢~ ADVANCE RECIPIENT Authorized Signatory i:;TEKGOVEP2~MENTAL AGREEMENT WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS CGkWH3684 (10/89) ?.age 3 of i PART A APPLICATION FOP, ADVANCE OF AI.I.OWANCE FOR USE CNLY Project ~.: Target Cert. Date: ~wnt Date: FACILITIES PLANNING FOP, WASTE~ATER TRF~TMENT ~ORKS Legal Name: City of Ashland Ashland 97520 (City) (Zip Code) Contact: Steven M. Hall (Name) APPLICANT Address: 20 E~ Main Street (Street) Jackson 482-3211 (County) (Telephone) Public Works Director (Title) CO?kMUNITY POPULATION: 16~310 POPULATION TO BE SERVED BY PROPOSED PROJECT: 16,310 (2015 ~ro~ected:22,000) GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (Construction, expansion, rehabiliCacion of treatment pianO, interceptors, disposal facili~ies, e~c. -- fill ouc projec~ summary, Parc C) The proposed sewage treatment plant alternative will employ advanced wastewater treatment technologies to achieve an effluent that could be discharged to Bear Creek year round. See Part C, Narrative. Estimated Date Project will be S~arted' (Construction) Estimated Date Project will be Completed: 12-31-94 12-31-93 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST: (Nog including land acquisition, engineering, legal, and adminisr, racion) $ 22,000,000 CG~WH3681 (10/89) PARTB TERMS, ASSURANCES , AND CONDITIONS By signature below, the applicant hereby certifies, assures and agrees to comply with the following terms, assurances, and conditions in carrying out his responsibilities. FAILURE TO ADHERE TO THESE TERMS, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS SHALL BE CAUSE FOR REJECTION OF FUTURE U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY GRANT APPLICATIONS, ISSUANCE OF STOP-WORK ORDERS, OR ANY oTHER REMEDIES AVAILABLE UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF OREGON. The advance recipient will maintain an adequate system for financial management; property management, and audit. Further, it will give the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or any duly authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all books, records, papers or document as they may require. o The advance recipient will ensure that facilities plans prepared fully or partially with these advance funds will comply with current EPA requirements for such products. , The advance recipient will submit to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) the following items as applicable: a. Facilities Plans: (1) An overall plan of study as specified in Part E prior to initiation of work on the facilities plan. (2) A draft facilities plan prior to local adoption of the plan. (3). A final adopted facilities plan. b. Other: Written progress reports when deemed appropriate or when requested by DEQ. The advance recipient will, within sixty (60) days of notification by DEQ, repay the advance. The advance recipient understands that payment of the advance will be in accordance with the schedule and checkpoints agreed upon and specified in Part E of this agreement. The advance recipient understands that the DEQ may require repaymenn of the advance when' Progress on the proposed planning work has not progressed satisfactorily or it fails to comply wi~h EPA requirem~Bt~_fo~ PART B -- TERM, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS CGkWH3682 (10/89) bo The advance recipient has failed to accept an EPA grant for construction of the proposed facilities when available. Co The advance recipient is in any other way in violation of the terms of the agreement. 7. CERTIFICATION -- I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, data in this application are true and correct, the document has i ~een duly authorized by the governing body of the applicant and the / ,,'applicant will comply wi~h the terms, conditions, and assurances if , advance assistance is awarded. Contact: Steven M. Hall Public Works Director (Name) (Title) Date Signed: January 30, 1991 PART B -- TERM, ASSURANCES, AND CONDITIONS CG%WH3682 (10/89) PART C ESTIMATED PROJECT CONSTRUCTION(1) COST SUMMARY Cost to Serve Existing Cost to Serve Existing Facility Type end Future Population Population Only 1. New Treatment Facilities Secondary process upgrade, add Treatment Plant Upgrade nutrient re/nova/and tertiary Treatment Plant Expansion filtration - $13,800,000 2. New Interceptors Enlarged Interceptors $200,000 3. New Collection System 4. Sewer Line Rehabilitation/ (2) Replacement $400,000 15. Inflow/Infiltration Correction Conveyance, outfal/, new 6. Effluent Disposal Facilities diffusers- $500,000 Sludge digestion, thickening, 7. Sludge Treatment and storage, transport, and Disposal Facilities equ/p/nent - $ 7, 100,000 8. Other (Specify) 9. TOTAL $22.000,000 (¢22 mil/ion) i WATER QUALt'r¥ ~ ,, ~,,m DLi':"[. OF F..t¢,'iP, Ob/I,l£l,l~'A~. ~L/.~LITY Part C Narrative City of Ashland, Oregon PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed sewage treatment plant alternative will employ iadvanced wastewater treatment technologies to achieve an effluent that could be discharged to Bear Creek year round. This will require removal of phosphorus to a concentration of below 0.08 mg/1 during critical low flow periods in Bear Creek. After conventional headworks and grit removal, the process will begin with chemical coagulation to remove an initial increment of phosphorus in the primary clarifiers. This will be followed by biological oxidation and nutrient removal processes utilizing separate anaerobic, anoxic, and aerobic activated sludge reactors. Each reactor will contribute a step in the process of further phosphorus removal, conversion of ammonia to nitrate, and oxidation of BOD. After secondary clarification, the wastewater will pass through tertiary chemical coagulation and clarification, providing the third step in phosphorous removal. Tertiary filters will be required as the final polishing step for removal of both particulate BOD and phosphorus. Before discharge to Bear Creek, the effluent would be disinfected. If chlorination is the selected methods of disinfection, the effluent would have to be dechlorinated before discharge. To prevent recycle of nutrients back into the flow scheme, primary and secondary sludges will be thickened outside the main process flow, anaerobically digested, and pumped into a facultative sludge lagoon (FSL). No digester or FSL supernatant would be returned to the plant flow. Tertiary chemical sludge would be pumped directly to the FSL and would be applied to land with the other stabilized sludges. PROJECT COSTS The advanced wastewater treatment, alternative uses a highly sophisticated process train of which there are no full-scale examples. The Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) in the Portland area has demonstrated some of the major process components at full scale and has pilot tested others. The USA is currently in the design phase of advanced treatment facilities for the Rock Creek and Durham facilities which have discharge permits similar to Ashland's. Construction cost estimates are available for these projects. Construction costs are available from other advanced treatment facilities which utilize similar technology but do not have permit limits as stringent as Ashland's. Cost Estimatinq Assumptions. This Construction cost estimate presents costs associated with treatment and disposal of the current wastewater flows and loads for the City of Ashland. No allowances are included for engineering, administration, land purchases, or for facilities to accommodate growth. The estimate assumes construction occurs in the fall of 1993 when the Engineering News Record (ENR) index is expected to be 5166. The current ENR index is 4769. The above costs can be brought back itD 1991 dollars by multiplying the 1993 costs by the ratio of 4'769/5166. The following cost information is presented in the order shown on the Part C- Estimated Project Construction Cost form provided by the state. New treatment costs are generated by first considering the cost to upgrade the existing secondary treatment facility. The cost associated with adding nutrient removal and filtration are added to the basic secondary treatment costs. Estimated construction costs are then provided for new sewer interceptors, collection system rehabilitation, effluent disposal facilities, and sludge treatment and disposal facilities. New Treatment Facilities. New treatment costs include both cost to upgrade the existing secondary process and costs to add nutrient removal and filtration. A. Upgrade Existing Secondary Treatment Processes. Costs for secondary treatment upgrade at $3.50 per gallon per day (gpd), based upon existing average dry weather flow fo 1.8 million gallons per day (mgd). Three to four dollars p e r gallon is a typical range of cost applied to major wastewater treatment plant upgrades. Escalating this cost 8 percent to the design year 1993 results in a cost of $6,800,000. B. Addition of Nutrient Removal and Filtration. Costs for addition of nutrient removal and filtration at $1.60 per gpd peak weekly flow. This unit cost was determined from evaluation of construction and preconstruction cost estimates from other advanced wastewater facilities. The existing peak weekly flow is 4.05 mgd. Escalating this cost 8 percent to the 1993 construction year results in a cost of $7,000,000. New Interceptors/Sewer Line Rehabilitation. Current data indicates that sewage collection system infiltration and inflow is not excessive. The facilities plan will recommend that the plant flow monitoring equipment be checked for accuracy. An amount of $600,000 is allocated for collection system replacement and rehabilitation in the event that such work is proven necessary. Effluent Disposal Facilities. $500,000 is included for new outfall and diffusers in Bear Creek. Sludge Treatment and Disposal Facilities. Costs to rehabilitate and expand the anaerobic sludge treatment system, primary, and waste activated sludge thickening and sludge storage and handling facilities are shown below. Facilities are sized to handle sludge volumes projected for the year 2015. 1. Anaerobic sludge digestion. New 63,000 cu ft digester required to handle present and future loads. Major modifications to the digester con- trol area are included along with structural and mechanical modifications to the existing anaerobic digester. $3,300,000 2. Primary Sludge Gravity Thickening. Two 18 ft diameter covered units. $ 300,000 3. Waste Activated Sludge Thickening. A system $1,200,000 with two 1 meter belts is assumed with chem- ical feed and housing with odor control. 4. Facultative Sludge Lagoon for Storage. Thrge $3i-200,000 acres with liner, site piping, and aerators. 5. Sludge Handling Equipment. Includes sludge $1,300,000 dredge, sludge pumping station and force main. Total estimated sludge treatment, storage, and handling costs for the year 2015: $9,600,000 This cost must be downscaled by the ratio of the present to projected future year 2015 population to identify costs to accommodate existing population. This ratio is 16,310/22,000 = 0.74. Total estimated sludge treatment, storage and handling costs for present population is 0.74 x $9,600,000 = $7,100,000. PARTD FACILITIES PLANNING ADVANCE COMPUTATION / ~iqfir~flce: C-A ~5 $ mil , Next Lower Cost" Difference:2 ra. il B-AQ ~ $ 20 mil Et Igibte Co~t* $ 22 mil ~ At Joyance Percent** 2.1930 Next #Jgher Co~t" $ 25 mil ~ ~ A[ [o~ance Percent** 2.0990 Difference: D- -~ .094 .4 x .094 · .038 Siu, IV: D - I = A[t(mam:e Percent 2.1930..038 =2.1_5_5x $ ELigible Co~t, B x 100 · S ALLowance 2.155 lOO alu. VT: S ALLot,mnce x .55 · S Advance s _4!4.~_1o_o x .~5 = s _2 6 o.~ _7 5_5 * From Part C, Column III, Line 9 ** From Table 1 ?AKT D -- FACILITIES PLANNING ADVANCE COMPUTATION CG/WH3686A (10/89) Page Part E SCOPE OF WORK FOR FACILITIES PLANNING City of Ashland, Oregon OUTLINE Phase I: Project Planning; Preparing the project plan; developing options and selecting criteria. Payment at the start of Phase I: $60,000. 1.1 Plan Strategy. a. City staff and Consultant to meet to prepare the overall plan of study for the Facilities Planning project. i. Issues. ii. Alternatives. iii. Strategies. Describe the designation of Bear Creek as a water quality limited stream and the conclusions and studies of the DEQ/EQC that resulted in this designation. Describe the TMDL's and WLA's set by the DEQ. c. Compile documentation on I/I. de Public Participation Plan. i Describe public relations activities. ii. Describe the range of input to be received. iii. Describe public groups to be contacted. iv. Describe how public input will be incorporated into facilities planning. 1.2 Facilities Plan Context Setting. a. Assessment: Describe existing conditions; to include the evaluation of the existing sewage treatment plant facility and procedures, and the existing sewer system. Description of existing I/I flows to include dry and wet weather flows. Define criteria to be used to evaluate existing I/I flows. Determine if I/I is excessive. If so, describe the effort required to achieve the WLA's under the seasonal time period requirements. b. Institutional description: The City will describe the present agencies involved with alternatives and the agreement that may be required to achieve Wl._~'s. This section will also describe the strategies and time period requirements for developing a financing plan and interagency agreements. The engineer will incorporate this section prepared by the city into the program plan. c. Available options: Define what options are potentially available for achieving the WLA's for the treatment plant. Prepare brief description of each. These options will include, but are not limited to: i. Discharge to irrigation canals. ii. Irrigation on City-owned lands. iii. Transport effluent to Medford. iv. Biological nutrient removal. v. Combination of alternatives. vi. High-lime treatment. vii. Move outfall upstream above east lateral TID diversion. viii. De-nitrification. ix. Flow management. x. Ozonation. xi. Marsh treatment. xii. Phosphate ban. xiii. Pure oxygen treatment. d. Selection for review - Define criteria, or the time period for developing the criteria, used for the selection of options for review. This component will define when the available options will be selected for further review. e. Options review: Describe the strategies that will be used and the time period neCessary for evaluating the technical merit and cost-benefit of the reviewed options. This component should describe the strategies and methods to: i. Cost-benefit analysis: including the design assumptions which relate to the cost-benefit analysis. ii. Select and describe the evaluation criteria. iii. Collect and evaluate additional in-stream data. iv. Conduct necessary pilot projects. v. Evaluate the selected methods. vi. Evaluate the potential of options as interim goals and analyzing the results. vii. 5, 20 year and "ultimate growth" options. viii. Develope implementation time for each potential option including prerequisites for implementation. ix. Environmental evaluation: including the evaluation of physical (including groundwater where relevant), historic, archaeological and other environmental impacts. f. option selection: Describe the strategies that will be used and the time at which the final selection of an option(s), and potential interim options for the treatment plant will occur. g. Time schedule: Define the key decision dates, the steps required to achieve these dates, and the time required to achieve regulatory agency approvals. i. Defining options. ii. Describe strategies. iii. Complete option evaluation. iv. Complete pilot projects. v. Complete technical analysis. vi. Complete cost/benefit analysis. vii. Conduct Initial Public Hearings. viii. Option(s) selection. ix. Achievement of interim limits if appropriate. x. Submission of comprehensive facilities plan. xi. Co-operative agreements with other agencies. xii. Final compliance. FURTHER ANALYSIS 2.1 Develop Available Options: by determining which options will be evaluated in detail and defining the criteria which will be used to evaluate them. Necessary background information will be collected including a description of the flows and loads, groundwater impact where applicable and regulatory framework. Available options will be described and appropriate options selected for detailed evaluation. This will include the following subtasks: Describe study area characteristics (environmental conditions). The sewerage study area will be defined and the physical and socioeconomic environment will be described. b. Project wastewater flows and loads. c. _Use existing information to describe existing system. Summarize waste load allocations and regulatory requirements. e. Define wastewater treatment and reuse options. 2.2 Develop and apply screening criteria: These criteria will be selected by the City and the City's Engineer and will incorporate public input. The criteria will be used in a pass/fail screening of possible options. The screening will include the technical, regulatory, institutional, legal and citizen's concerns included in the Draft Program Plan. Capital and operation and maintenance costs will not be provided for each option at this stage. Costs from established cost curves which show order-of-magnitude estimates may be used for options which cannot be adequately evaluated by application of the other screening criteria. A maximum of four options will be retained for detailed J , evaluation and comparison 2~3 city staff and the consulting engineers to meet to review preliminary results of the screening procedure. 2.4 Select and describe evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria shall follow standard facilities planning format and shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Capital, operation, and maintenance costs. b. Reliability. c. Implementability. d. Flexibility. e. Adverse and beneficial environmental impacts. 2.5 Prepare draft facilities plan chapters. Draft chapters will be prepared on study area characteristics, existing wastewater system, wastewater flows and loads, regulatory requirements, and selection of alternatives. Other facilities plan chapters including the introduction, summary and recommendations, evaluation of alternatives, and description of the recommended plan will be prepared in subsequent tasks of the project. 2.6 Consultant to present draft facilities plan to City staff and Council at a City Council meeting. Public input to be received at this informational meeting. This product would be submitted to the Department of Environmental Quality to meet the Environmental Quality Commission's May, 1991 review deadline. The target date for submission of the draft facilities plan to the DEQ for review is May 1, 1991. 5 Phase II: Data Collection and Field Investigations Payment at the start of Phase II: $60,000. 3.1 3.2 3.3 Determine if I/I is excessive. a. City to compile existing in house TV-ing data, flow-data and system investigations; City to perform in-house TV-ing and smoke testing where empirical evidence demonstrates a need for additional investigation. b. If indicated, develop opportunities for the resolution of excessive I/I and evaluate the cost effectiveness of alternatives. c. If I/I is not excessive,'provide documentation of the determination. Installation of Bear Creak flow monitor. a. Select flow monitoring site and method. b. Perform on-going preliminary analysis. c. Collect and collate dry and wet weather flow data and compare flow data at Ashland with weather data, flow data at Medford, and irrigation flows to estimate statistical variation of flows in Bear Creek. Perform desk-top analysis using existing data to provide recommendations regarding specific instream studies. Options for instream study include, but are not limited to, those included in the Draft Program Plan. Phase III: 4.1 Development and Evaluation of Alternatives Alternative Development: the alternatives remaining following the screening process are described in detail. Design data will be determined, preliminary layouts and facility sizes will be identified. Elements common to a number of alternatives will be identified. 4.2 Liquid Stream Evaluation will use the criteria defined in 2.2 and will evaluate treatment alternatives for the liquid portion of the sewage flows. Capital and O&M costs will be provided for comparison. The required level of treatment for the alternatives discharging into Bear Creek cannot be identified until summer flows are estimated in 1991. To be able to proceed with the analysis, the Bear Creek discharge 4.3 6 alternatives will be evaluated assuming two summer 7Q10 flow levels - a low flow and a high flow assumption. Sizing of treatment facilities will be based upon the treatment levels required at these two base flows. Sludge Management Plan: Solids Stream Treatment. Se Provide projections of biological and chemical sludge quantities expected from the screened treatment alternatives. For the alternatives with disposal to Bear Creek, two levels of sludge production will be estimated assuming two levels of treatment. Evaluate sludge thickening, stabilization, de-watering, and storage options. Design data will be determined, preliminary layouts and facility sized will be provided. Specific sites available for the construction of sludge treatment and storage facilities will be evaluated, including a groundwater analysis where relevant. Capital and O&M costs will be provided for comparison. Evaluate future sludge utilization/disposal options including municipal and agricultural land application. Evaluation to include groundwater analysis. 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 Summary of Viable Alternatives. Prepare Draft Facility Plan Chapter on Alternative Development and Evaluation. Submit initial Draft Facilities Plan to DEQ for review and approval. Present Draft Facility Plan Chapter on Alternative Development and Evaluation to City Staff and the City Council. As per the EQC's requirement, the deadline for the draft facility plan will depend on whether discharge or non- discharge options will be pursued. The timing would be as follows: Scenario 1: If the alternatives selected do not include discharge to Bear Creek, the draft facility plan will be submitted by September 1, 1991. Scenario 2: If the alternatives selected dO include discharge to Bear Creek and require time for additional studies, the draft facility plan will be submitted May of 1992. Phase IV: Public Hearing and Finalization of Facilities Plan 5.1 Select recommended plan. Assess environmental effect of options. Prepare detailed cost estimates. Ce Evaluate non-cost factors: environmental flexibility, environmental reliability, environmental implementability. d. Make selection. e. Describe selection. 5.2 Advertise and hold public hearing on selected alternative. a. Prepare responses to public hearing comments and include in Facilities Plan. 5.3 Develop recommended program and implementation schedule. 5.4 Finalize Facilities Plan. 5.5 Submit Final Facilities Plan to the DEQ for approval. As per the EQC's requirement, the deadline for the final facility plan will depend on whether discharge or non-discharge options will be pursued. The timing would be as follows: scenario 1: If the alternatives selected do not include discharge to Bear Creek, the final facility plan will be submitted by November, 1991. Scenario 2: If the alternatives selected .do include discharge to Bear Creek and require time for additional studies, the draft facility plan will be submitted July of 1992. Final Payment upon approval of Final Facilities Plan by DEQ: Remaining costs only; in an amount up to but not exceeding the grant allowance. )UTi. AY REPORT AND REQUEST FOR REIMBURSE- *ENT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS (See instructions on back) FEDERAL SPONSORING AGENCY AND ORGANIZATIONAL ELEMENT TO WHICH THIS REPORT IS SUBMITfED U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION 7. RECIPIENT ACCOUNT OR OTHEr- NUMBER IDENTI~ING NUMBER 93-0584915 C-410744-01 RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION ;0. and treet : tare and :lP Code: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 811S.W. Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Approved by Office of Management and Budget, No. 80-R0181 1. TYPE OF REQUEST "'!~ [] F,NAL ..ART,AL l / 4. FEDERAL GRANT OR OTHER J IDENTIFYING NUMBER ASSIGNEDI BY FEDERAL AGENCY J C-410000-0l [ (Ashland fl) PEIIlOO COVERED BY THIS REPORT FROM (Month, day, y¢~r) TO (Month, d~¥, y~r) PAG..1.E OF I 1 PAGES 2. BASIS OF REQUEST [] CASH [] ACCRUAL 5. PARTIAL ['AYMENT REQUEST NO. 10. PAYEE ( Where check tl~ould be sent if different than item 9) City of Ashland No.a.~ 20 E. Main Street Street : City, Street~n~ Ashland, OR 97520 ZIP Code: STATUS OF FUNDS PROGRAMS--FUNCTIONS---ACTIVITIES CLASSIFICATION (a) Authorized (~) -- (¢) This TOTAL Grant Amount Prior Payment ,. Administrative expense $ $ $ 60,000 $ ~. Preliminary expense :. Land, structures, right-of-way I. Architectural engineering basic fees ~. Other architectural engineering fees · Project inspection fees :. Land development ~. Relocation expense Relocation payments to individuals and businesses Demolition and removal Construction and project improvement cost · Equipment n. Miscellaneous cost ~. Total cumulative to date (sum of lines a thru m) ~. Deductions for program income ,. Net cumulative to date (Line n minus line o) :. Federal share to date