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