CCMinutes - 05/19/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman asked Ms. Smith to acknowledge the MWMC members that were present. She introduced them to the council. Mr. Pap~ asked if there was tertiary treatment. Ms. Smith responded that the plant was a secondary plant, but the installation of tertiary filtration was necessary to meet the new requirements. Matt Noeson, Project Manager for CH2M Hill, explained that the tertiary filters would enable the plant to handle 30 million gallons more per day over the 20-year study period, but not 100 percent of the plant flow would be filtered during that time. In response to another question from Mr. Pap~, Eugene Wasterwater Paint Manager Dave Breitenstein stated that ambient water quality tests were conducted both downstream and upstream of the plant. He reported that the plant did not have a significant impact downstream. Ms. Smith clarified, in response to Mr. Pap~, that Mouse was the hydraulic modeling software that determined how the system behaved in peak wet weather. Mr. Pap~ noted there was a process for improvement of porous sewer line and wondered if making the lines impervious to stormwater would eliminate some of the need for improvements. Mr. Corey affirmed the plan took into consideration the wet weather flow and identified strategies for reduction inflow. Ms. Smith added that the desired outcome of the wet weather flow management plan was to come up with the most cost- effective combination of system rehabilitation and building capacity at the plant. She said it had been determined that system rehabilitation was not cost-effective. Ms. Smith affirmed for Mr. Pap~ that the City of Springfield was contributing its proportionate share. Mr. Kelly noted that CH2M Hill had allegedly analyzed the system earlier and determined that there was much dry weather capacity left, but that more recent analysis said there was none left. He asserted this resulted from a change in the methodology. Ms. Smith attributed the change to new discharge requirements for how the effluent was treated and also to an increase in load. Mr. Noeson stated that there had been a series of changes that had occurred since 1996, when the study had been conducted, not the least of which was an increase in population in the area of about 10 to 11 percent. Also, he said a limit had been included on the release of ammonia, and meeting the new limit required twice the amount of tanking. Mr. Kelly asked how this related to Goal 11. Dave Jewett, legal counsel for the MWMC, responded that in order to comply with Goal 11, facilities had to be constructed that would meet the requirements. In response to another question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Jewett stated that adoption of the facility plan and the related 20-year project list was not a land use decision, as per ORS 223.297(s). He related that part of the statute required that a City adopt a facilities plan and project list prior to development of a systems development charge (SDC). Ms. Smith added that there was a separate process proposed to the MetroPlan and the Public Facilities Plan to update information on the wastewater treatment system pursuant to Oregon administrative rules. She underscored that this was a separate process, to be brought before the council after having been considered by the Planning Commission. Compliance with Goal 11 was ongoing. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 19, 2004 Page 2 Work Session