Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutContracts-PLWSD JOINT POWERS BOARD - 2001-2005Kin J. Trout Aaron H. Nemec William L. Smith David T. Krueck Robert M. Adelson Rob H. Shockley Denise L. Rosen LAW OFFICES OF TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC 12400 West Overland Road Post Office Box 9695 Boise, Idaho 83707-3695 Telephone (208) 376-4461 • Facsimile (208) 376-4481 www.trout-law.com August 23, 2005 Jerry Vevig Chairperson Board of Directors Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District 201 Jacob Street McCall, Idaho 83638 kjtrout@trout-law.com anemec@trout-law.com wmIsmith@trout-law.com dtkrueck@u-out-law.com radelson@trout-law.com rshockley@trout-law.com drosen@trout-law.com Re: Sewer Treatment System Dear Mr. Vevig: I am writing to you on behalf of the City of McCall ("City") to respond to the letter sent by William Killen to Lindley Kirkpatrick dated August 19, 2005. The City's passage of Resolution 05-15 was not intended to limit the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District's ("Sewer District") purported rights and duties under the Cooperative Agreement and its Amendments. Resolution 05-15 was adopted for the purpose of addressing the obvious limitations of the existing sewer treatment system, and fosters growth which comports to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City strongly disagrees with the Sewer District's continued misrepresentation that the City is exceeding its,capacity rights in the sewer treatment system. The Sewer District has failed to submit any credible evidence to support this allegation despite repeated requests for such an analysis. The Sewer District has claimed that it possesses such evidence, and apparently is measuring flow allocations .to determine the capacity being used by the City and the Sewer District. The Fifth Amendment expressly provides that allocation of capacity in the treatment facility from 1988 into the future is determined by equivalent dwelling units, not flow allocations. The City is again requesting that if the Sewer District has evidence that the City is exceeding its allocated capacity, based on equivalent dwelling units for the City and the Sewer District, please provide me with this analysis. The City refuses to ignore the looming crisis with the treatment system, as to do so would be irresponsible planning. The Sewer District falsely claims that it has capacity in the sewer treatment system, and, therefore, has the right to issue will serve letters to future customers. The LAW OFFICES OF TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC Mr. Jerry Vevig Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District August 23, 2005 Page 2 Sewer District ignores the engineering analysis which has been provided to both the City and the Sewer District from no less than three different engineering firms, including the Sewer District's own engineer, J-U-B Engineering, concluding that the sewer treatment system is near capacity and cannot meet future growth for the twenty year planning cycle the treatment system was originally designed to serve. The City will not exclude the Sewer District's potential customers from Resolution 05- 15. The City has, and will continue, to reach out to the Sewer District seeking constructive, not combative, solutions to resolve the limitations that faces all users in the existing sewer treatment system. Mr. Killen's threats on behalf of the Sewer District contained in his letter are not persuasive, nor will such threats dissuade the City from fulfilling its duties to the citizens of McCall and the surrounding area. Mr. Killen's and the Sewer District's rhetoric will not create additional capacity for a single user in the sewer treatment system as it exists today. Resolution 05-15 anticipates changes in the building permit distribution process as new information becomes available. I invite you to share information about sewer capacity improvements as such information becomes available to the Sewer District. We encourage the Sewer District to adopt and participate with the City in a cooperative and collaborative effort toward objective solutions to this looming problem. Sincerely, TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC Kim J. Trout Cc: Charles Ariss, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality McCall City Council Lindley Kirkpatrick, City of McCall Roger Millar, City of McCall Bill Keating, City of McCall William M. Killen John C. Hucks PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER iINA) SEWER DISTRICT 201 JAco1) Stwel McCalE, Idaho B3638 oflicv I 1 • iaX 208-6 46l Pt nad: pirw5d4cithnk.net July 28, 2005 Mayor and C:ounkal Members: The Btxtrd and staff of the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District arc aware of the issues currently facing the sewer treatment facility. We have offered on several occasions to meet with City representatives to develop a coordinated approach to dealing with the problem, but to date the City has not responded. The draft Resolution 05-15 rnakes no reference to the Cooperative Agreement or its agreed upon allocation of treatment capacity between the City and the District. To be consistent with the allocation formula set forth in the Cooperative Agreement, one th ird. of any allocation of annual hook, ups should be reserved to the District, and this provision should be reflected in the resolution for guidance to the various bodies involved in the process. Additionally, some provision should be included to provide for recovery by the District of the City's over, ut ilization of the total capacity to date. The terms of the Cooperative Agreement and the amendments thereto also require that operational decisions regarding the facility be. made jointly between the City and District, since both entities have operational authority and responsibilities. Any analysis directed by the resolution needs to include active participation by the District and its engineers to avoid duplication of work and waste of public monies, The District's Board of Directors respectfully asks the McCall Mayor and Council Members to honor the Cooperative Agreement and preserve the District's one third allocation of system capacity. The following language has been suggested by District counsel- 'W1-1 F.: E.AS the City of McCall and the Payette (Aim Rearm amid Muer and Sewer .1„)istrict-, pursuant to their Cooperative Agreement, have allocated treatment capacity 23 to the City and I/3 to the District. any limirat ion on futurehookups shall adhere to this allocation Additionally, and so long as any restriction on hookups COMM/ICS. the District shall be entitled annually, and cumulatively if needed, to meet the needs of us patrons, to //4 of the City s 2/3 share to reflect the over -allocation of the treatment- facility's capacity to the City through the current claw, uu 11 such time US their cumulative share reaches I/3oj thc total capacity: Section 2 of the resolution would be modified to reflect the foregoing. 1,Ve also request that adoption of this resolution be delayed for two weeks to allow for a more formal response to be prepared by the District, It is our desire to work cooperatively with the City to resolve the issues at the wastewater treatment facility: consistent with the rights and needs of all interested parties and customers. Sincerely. rryVevig. Bo rd Chair cc: City Manager City Community Development Director LAW OFFICES OF TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC 12400 West Overland Road Post Office Box 9695 Boise, Idaho 83707-3695 Telephone (208) 376-4461 • Facsimile (208) 376-4481 www.trout-law.com Kim J. Trout Aaron H. Nemec William L. Smith David T. Krueck Robert M. Adelson Rob H. Shockley Denise L. Rosen July 5, 2005 William M. Killen, P.A. 734 S. Coral Place Boise, Idaho 83705 kjtrout@trout-law.com anemec@trout-law.com wmismith@trout-law.com dtkrueck@trout-law.com radelson@trout-law.com rshockley@trout-law.com drosen@trout-law.com Re: Sewer Treatment System Dear Bill: I am in receipt of your June 17, 2005, correspondence, and have the following response on behalf of the City of McCall. I have reviewed the Cooperative Agreement and the various Amendments to it. Although I understand the claims of the Sewer District, the City respectfully disagrees with the District's view. It appears that the District seeks the claimed benefit of `ownership', yet wants to avoid the `costs' of ownership, opting instead to seek a reduced cost for its 'use' of the system. The City is merely exercising its ownership rights and operating responsibilities for the sewer treatment system. The City is not seeking to set user fees for the Sewer District's patrons, but rather, will be setting fees for the District as a user. The City is, however, in the process of reviewing fees it charges to its customers, and upon completion, will share this information with the Sewer District. Following completion of this analysis, I think it would be worthwhile to have representatives for the City and the Sewer District meet to discuss their ongoing relationship and use of the City's sewer treatment system. This should clarify any misunderstanding you may have regarding my previous correspondence. I look forward to meeting with you to discuss this in greater detail. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. LAW OFFICES OF TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC Mr. William M. Killen July 5, 2005 Page 2 Sincerely, TROUT & NEMEC, PLLC Kim J. Trout Cc: Charles Ariss, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality McCall City Council McCall City Manager McCall City Planner McCall Public Works Director rj-U13 June 14, 2005 Lindley Kirkpatrick, City Manager City of McCall 216 E. Park St. McCall, ID 83638 Jerry Vevig, Chairman Payette Lake Water and Sewer District 201 Jacob McCall, ID 83638 RE: Work for the City of McCall and the PLWSD J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS Regional Office 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 208-376-7330 Fax: 208-323-9336 www.jub.com Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick and Mr. Vevig: As you know, J-U-B Engineers has been working with both the City of McCaII and the Payette Lake Water and Sewer District (District) on wastewater treatment and disposal issues for many years (in fact, J-U-B has been the District Engineer for nearly 30 years and has been actively involved in City treatment issues for the last 10 or so). During that time, the interests of the City and the District were generally in alignment toward the task of meeting the needs of your patrons based on requirements of DEQ and other agencies. Based on recent developments, however, it is apparent now that there may be some conflict developing between the City and District, which may put J-U-B in an awkward position. It is therefore our intent to continue working as the District Engineer for the PLWSD and to not pursue any further water or wastewater assignments from the City of McCall — until such time as the issues precipitating your conflict have been resolved. To our knowledge, we have two ongoing tasks with the City, both related to the wastewater system. We'd like to provide resolution to those as follows: 1) J-Ditch, Phase 2 - Post Construction Work. With your permission, we will continue to work on the leakage issue since we have intimate knowledge of the historical background and data needs for that assignment. It's our understanding that all other issues related to the construction of the project have been resolved. 2) J-Ditch, Phase 2 — Amendment to WLAP. We sent you a draft of the Proposal Report and have not received comments back. If you have no comments, we'd like to provide a stamped draft Proposal Report and close that task. You can then use the draft information for the planning purposes for which it was intended. (JAM; Engineers Surveyors Planners It's not our intent to abandon the public's interest in any "institutional knowledge" that we can bring to the table. Therefore, we'll be available for questions concerning the J-Ditch System as they may come up from time to time. We will also do what we can to educate McCall's new City Engineer as to the intricacies or operation of the wastewater system, upon your instruction and under the Post Construction Task. This notification is also made to satisfy the requirements of our Code of Professional Responsibility. If you have any questions, please call me to discuss. Sincerely, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Timothy J. aener, P.E. Vice President / Area Manager Cc: 11622-F02 Jerry Vevig Chairperson Board of Directors Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District Re: Corr. Of May 20, 2005 Dear Mr. Vevig, I am in receipt of your letter dated May 20, 2005, and have reviewed the content with the McCall City Council. Be advised that the City of McCall is in the process of reviewing user fees, and following this review will be modifying the user fees for all users including your District. Given that the City is undertaking a comprehensive review of user fees, and although we appreciate the effort by the District to review its user fees, we reject the District's proposal regarding its user fees, and will determine the appropriate user fees following the completion of the City review. The City will certainly consider the information supplied by the District in your letter of May 20, 2005. Likewise, we will consider all historical expenditures, historical capital cost, as well as give due consideration to future capital cost in determining the appropriate user fees to be set by a revision to the user fees which is under consideration. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, Lindley Kirkpatrick City Manager City of McCall Cc: McCall City Council PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 201 Jacob Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 rE:7"! � :- I \/j [r ? [�. o'lice 208-634-4111 • fax 208-634-7613 email: plrwsd@citlink.net May 20, 2005 Lindley Kirkpatrick, Manager City of McCall 216 E. Park Street McCall, ID 83638 MAY 2 3 2005 ,, a1 re: Flow -based Proposal for Cost Sharing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Expenses for City Fiscal Year 2005-06 Because the current method of sharing costs at the wastewater treatment plant does not take into consideration the fact that the City is responsible for a much greater share of the influent treated at the wastewater treatment plant, and thus is responsible for a greater proportion of effluent requiring storage and pumping, the District Board of Directors seeks a method to more fairly distribute costs for treating each entity's influent flows. To this end, we have made several proposals for negotiating an agreement for cost -sharing of wastewater treatment expenses based on metered inflow figures rather than equivalent hook-ups. Previous proposals for new cost sharing calculations required a great deal of manipulation of the city's budget on a line by line basis. Upon further study, the approach presented here recognizes the city's cost of treatment plant operations and administrative oversight. It identifies costs of treatment (operational) versus infrastructure (capital) costs. Operational costs, those expenditures relating to the treatment of effluent including staffing, supplies, certifications, utilities, and administrative functions of overhead and professional services, lab fees, etc., can be annualized into a cost -per -gallon of treated influent using the most recent audited expenditures for the City's sewer treatment fund. Monthly or quarterly, this cost -per -gallon can be charged to the District's portion of inflow. This rate would be subject to adjustment at the close of each fiscal year once audited financial statements of fund accounts become available. Capital expenditures, including purchase and repair of equipment, building and grounds maintenance, regulatory permits and fees, facility insurance, and other non -operational elements of the facility will be shared based on the allocated share of capacity, currently 1/3 District, 2/3 City, or other basis which best matches the nature of the benefits to be provided. The attached outline and spreadsheet more fully explain this approach. We are proposing this as the approach utilized for cost sharing for the City's fiscal year beginning October 1, 2005, subject to negotiation of specifics. We would suggest the Joint Powers Board review it at their next meeting, and a final version be presented to both governing bodies. In the event that the Joint Powers Board is not convened, and no response is received from you, we will operate under the assumption that the proposal is acceptable to you, and will plan on remitting accordingly. Sincerely, Jerry Vevig Chairperson, Board of Directors Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District enclosures: two cc: Earl Ward, member Joint Powers Board A Proposal for Sharing Costs at the McCall Wastewater Treatment Plant with the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District I. Operational Costs : Those costs of treatment and associated maintenance of components of treatment A. Labor, in-house or contract B. Employee expense (benefits, payroll taxes, worker's comp, clothing/uniforms) C. Employee certifications, professional development, books and publications D. Materials and Supplies E. Chemicals and other consumables F. Fuels and lubes G. Utilities H. Automotive Repairs I. Administrative 1. General personnel support functions such as supervisory oversight, payroll functions, and administration of employee benefit programs 2. Professional services: monitoring, sampling and testing activities 3. Advertising: legal notices II. Capital Costs: Infrastructure related costs A. Equipment Purchase and Repair B. Engineering and Attorney Services C. Insurance D. Repairs to building and grounds E. Repairs to Facility: e.g. J-Ditch pond liner, aeration piping F. Regulatory driven expenses including permits, reporting requirements III. Operational Cost allocation: Operational costs shall be allocated between the parties based on actual flow data, namely, the readings obtained from the flow metering devices installed in the respective collection systems which permit the accurate determination of the flow volumes delivered to the treatment facility by each entity. A. Using audited expenditures from prior year, and total gallons treated for the same period (e.g. city fiscal year October 1 through Sept 30 following) calculate a per gallon cost B. The per -gallon cost as calculated in III -A will be charged monthly or quarterly on District gallons of influent as measured by calibrated and/or certified flow meters installed on District collection system. Invoice will be accompanied with the city sewer treatment general ledger detail for the period, as currently provided. C. Annual reconciliation will compensate for audited year-to-year expense variations. IV. Capital Cost Allocation: Capital costs will be allocated between the parties based on the capacity allocation, namely, one-third District and two -third City, subject to budgetary approval by both entities. V. Operating and Capital costs will be reviewed for comment by the Joint Powers Board prior to submission to both entities. Refer to Exhibit A (attached) for proposed allocation of current City budget line items for sewer treatment fund. Cost -Sharing Proposal May 20, 2005 Page 2 Pro rata flow -based cost sharing: calculating per gallon expenditures 100-110 100-140 100-147 100-148 100-149 100-15 100-151 100-152 100-153 100-156 150-210 150-220 150-222 150-240 Minor equipment 150-250 150-300 150-310 Attorney services 150-350 Engineer services 150-400 150-410 Insurance 150-420 150-435 150-440 150-460 150-465 , 150-490 150-560 150-570 150-580 150-590 600-910 600-920 600-972 Repairs, Repairs, Re CFarig;, h u III III i1%/li,ll ,�1il l;�lDi o ��l _ �lll W///�� 'lIIII � lJ��Nllll�lll�ll�ll,;; I1 $ _�y� ,%�IIiVI ` 4/ ' ' (lNdlwl�IVI����,,,fi ii higi, lldlD�G.r ' _ti.�' 71�1k1/!1/N,// , �l:,i r l ' l' , h'i,IIM 141/Ml ' /l l H „II 1 ml 1, rl i � n � lNl��aiji„nry lllllmanin���ll "If iN;lll,:n. llllle� j' l iu lrllhi ! -�, r' 71,1//i ilhrpYr, iie7/:7e it n /%i I/,, f rr / ,/!� z i i :, u7lflbr%/iHrv�i�ilml/ii / llll, 2% 1/lAi /H lNl,�li/r Nl 'll' 7 p� ,, , 1'/1lb, ryr�.YuYl7M%�IIIIIi;I r,l i f 1 II�I/II��� U!!, l�l �'�a�,4'�� lq'/I !la/h l/llll/Yillllllll(rll�'I / l lr l 9 / 11 l/ %w ...; r / ri'jii, 1IAA/ 7,9 rlu�/ei,,////% �/'; ?/n /i i % / / %eji lY// 0 /llly l/ 11 / 1 llr� l 11/4,41l l ��s i� it / n 11r 11 �i .: .... , as 9r:1 !%�7r rllfl/�rlu; �l'lr �:��ti�l�lr'�i1u 4/4 ��r I I ri! p' l I nib, Ir lr i�%! �h%l%� �lr �1,�1 lli%ilrl� l7/63„l,/,/m!a„,xf G�teylllll, l�il l��l %' //0//,/vsµ,,, AIM a :n � ���llN� l �ilro I bG/m�uduM1%ti�l"l/ ��111111.li NlMinh) ; �1ilAl�l�l�9a�/m%��{ .n/cT,,nn1/ / // Ft office equipment building and grounds •airs_ othere.ui• ° li 11 /11, r rllli r 1 11 i IlilGNuiol%ili$��rlillll rlr 200-704 Land Application Permit 200-702 Capital Purchases (Facility/Equip't) 200-709 Slud • e Removal/R • lc Cell 2 diffuser Capital Expense 5,000 5,000 3,780 300 3,500 19,500 37,080 40,000 7,000 47,000 $ 84,080 /lll, fg/l1lti 1,/luGll,Dl '//i" !l,/AaillNll ,///,lr ,,5,.tat l� Capital Expense 952.87 12,486.65 3,780.00 386.58 22,229.37 39,835.47 ($3780 to ins) $ 39,835 CITY OF MCCALL CITY MANAGER January 19, 2005 Jerry Vevig Chairperson, Payette Lakes Recreational Water & Sewer District 201 Jacob Street McCall, ID 83638 Dear Mr. Vevig and Board Members: The McCall City Council has spent a considerable amount of time reviewing the current sewer capacity issues and new developments in and around McCall. At the Council meeting on January 13, the Council discussed several petitions for inclusion that have already been received by or are anticipated to be submitted to the District. The Council asked me to send you this letter with their comments regarding requests for inclusion into the District. It is important to note that the City does not want to compete with the District for new customers. It is the City's desire that new development be able to receive all necessary services from whichever agency is most logical to provide those services. These comments are not intended to raise unnecessary roadblocks to development or stand in the way of orderly and appropriate growth. The City has grave concerns about the total capacity of the wastewater treatment system used by both the District and the City. Analysis by both JLTB Engineers and Holladay Engineering Company has identified immediate, or looming, capacity issues in virtually all parts of the wastewater treatment system. These include I&I flows into the collection system, the capacity of the storage pond, and the capacity and utilization of the land application system. The City Council urges the District to consider these capacity issues and use caution in your consideration of petitions for inclusion within the District. The City is working diligently to address the total capacity issues, and has stopped issuing 'will serve' letters, certifying that there is capacity to provide sewer service to new developments. Further, we are working with a number of developers to fund improvements to the system which will increase net capacity while still allowing new development to occur. We anticipate working closely with the District on a number of other potential solutions. The City is committed to working toward a long-term solution to provide effective wastewater treatment as our community grows. I look forward to continuing to work with the District Board and staff to strengthen our relationship and resolve our mutual problems in a way that benefits the community to the greatest extent. Li I ey Ki City Mana cc: McCall City Council Members 216 East Park Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 • (208) 634-1003 • FAX (208) 634-3038 -1 N --• wI►8t3tgPt4(N».p wP3N+ot2CO-4C on4swN+04DCO COCO[1�Aw1k)-� m 2.12 A!!!A52tg(Ori��(OVA� t►+O +A� T w (JN(fCn(lN+O -+C1iA ODNw+ (pwp� :4 me N '�T� -A(C �I'r''wA+++O W+(D++O(� �J49wG1ti?m Cy Da m N AIM -i vilsommonsiossistormassor NISI'® 3NRJO1NO A A A CD J 0 J J + ? g o g 3& ...ram -a O N w+ N N N N N N N+ O O Q O + p2.1 N54y+GD.�pp�Eg CDNNN <DAN N �►3 ^NI -a --..I CO 4a 4s*4 `C "1 0 R co - a N Oa 745�(A�wpAAAAA WCa O + 0 8 &-2ga."::�OD4t-NwT2g9 •0a Z (3 �(�,t1 ww 0 0 (7s N A�-4. 0 W WNAW-w, _ ..r (D >O O-+V N0+ O A �� N. o + <c-wzocom0-4(s� ( -AE(l4 ««««««« a UT OD CO ea V w 00 V (fl V N'co - " .-ln ++ (D O V (fl 00 (0 V 0D (0 w 0o C Q .+ V O4iA 2g000�1NA8 (rOl80 WNW 0 t0 00 -i a tsao o • 0 N S1A. GJ ? ce- m � � w 5 a 1 c Vn► v + O 0 L m pN A n a 0 Z 0 0 y T1V331N 40 A113 0 CO -dV Ah COCOt O !tppN V A O pf 5 �O Cn O �I Now r" co pi - K2co-w co r" hi co? A i CA cn N "• OJOO O OD c A V0cn4,03IQ C7mCO CO CM 03N NvvhV W IV GotyERCnoI A NcoACA8 cm m GNIO w A 8 ` ' j c,> ct+o/vc - 911,2 OWC Ga W44 A tWT d� W CD A �: 0 - cio cb w CS-aG- p cw-.i► i► <a (P TA tD P ca P• Ca --�1 CD -` 1 [Jt SD V (aI CO W 0 G:,A W G:-W Cw+4 W ra"—►'-.ac�wn: V cr-�►' S v+cr� ca+ - cs - rs+ w w -3 . ,�,:.► p�•�-� y,,,cr oc• iy-c,= be �,r• i,•bD ti;c�+- to, Cv c CHt (n i i i 1+V i i W i u G a !\.r ( .ti+..1�1`1 �11�:•_s Fig - =�11 J N .ltD 0)--0) A CT P► o"OD -*•fC �.l C ttc + wtgcg ••. a W W C11 . 1r% CN 4CA N 4 C1t, OC, Rr -+ W -.' gc A oc - C+1 hi42.. 0 + +.4' CO • w -4 O - '4 4 co Cri-b v, • Fs w is 03 c+ , c� c0 m N 0 a 2 0 co 0 32 fl1 to Ainf — :H1NOW CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY -1 D j O m CO (Nn A W N N+ O CO COJ 01 tr � W N� O �D co J O cn � W N� �'I lb SI m J NJOcnOAOcncnCo tn(raoNJC)C 4a. CD cncnJOC)cn<O4a.Cn4a CO 416.6 r` W OOc0c0NOJ 4a cn O4N03JON cn COOCA -aO 03 W NGONA) 0 J C)4aJ4acncn o7(nCK3 AD -a W 4a�n) K) 4a- 4a 4a 4aOco co co OJCD(O. Gi71 A) () �. s Z rn MEW o y .O.0a A N). nc0 C)NN03 NON Co Oo7A AO 88NO 1-1,'A W 7ANO�co W cocnOcn -aNJJNJCO 0)O)AD O W cnNNu+6O4aWN-►AN—K'3 o Z W N O ZN Co A A A A CD CD 00 0 v 3 O 3 13 O N CO :A Co CO W co N 4a co N W^U u+4) -.. n W cOtnONNODJtu cn Co in W cn J W c0 O) W 4a== G) m (JD.cn W J-aJ0) WJ46.%< 03 4a. m Cn 0 77 W CO W 4a (13 W W CO W W W CD W it it 4k 4t 4# 4t 4k 4k 4t 4k 4t 4k 4t 4k 4k 4t 4t 4tcn O O W A cn W Co J co O O �D� �DDDDDDDD �D��vN-aNCCI, 0�NCAcCO-a O co «<<«<<<<<<< <<C<co(A co A -a co cn4a Nco co 4a „^� � � � �ON000(l+J Wtnsq to co 000000000000000000.JN_OD�-d_OJOcal CQ)C) O .� ._ ._ . . . ._ ., ._ ._ ._ t0 0 CJT c-.4 0) c0 CO CO N W `44 , COO -y C.'" 41. h3 CA -4 W .4 cn it.. (3 c0 0) -1 cn 0) In J 71 cn O C) 0 a) -A 4a cn J CO O W c0 A to AODOONOcO W 4aNJN 0 TIT O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 h:•— W co K3 4a 4a. 4a ON— W OO— N. 0 O W —in(0N NC 4a CocnNcnC) WInNOOcO-Ac') 03C)C)4aNO-a Oocncn�')NIL 0,. CO 46. c0 0) J N 9) c0 MOIA }Veld 0/0 I1 rn CD c) N O l (D 0 0 I O 3 O IQ 0 3 m. O o 0 3 -I A 3 o0 z ca v O 3 -I to Go n NOI1d1S ONIXIW+ }snbny— :HINOW CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 11V03W AO uID a�av0AicSmvw c Co an to - a+. w ni 0 000000 O- C7cy00 C�GQOo-i �l 00-&-p) Sc.ire_ .�i�• in as Gsau)biDQ-0.t 4,. re.r" • r��+pp Q N 1V re.iV N W co ' ta1 W � a► # '� Cit 3 t .,1 V ti+ W _ � �, tit �i -► t7f A CA 1J W 4b ) -+ N t�l +► V N W trf W W W N N WI W w N W tO W f11co W W N W W ••• V a) pm c 4,.(1.-plica U u+ u 0) !GA , ' ui - cm IA to cm n - op to to - J CO Cb CO W � co INF SJA to N f�3 W rla v O .4 921 W 1. ma at. =C�-WCO # 0 VIZtAt AaWN--A -a. tJ+-W+t - OI CO 7 v m y +fi�b?}}-.g4 4 0.44 «+' Nit 71 trWttA0OJ0 1 agi iig 3 4ig O a - W►Occoa) 0) CA • WN�00000 J07N-►Occ) 00"NI CI) Ct+i� "" OGOG 000P0-AP 0 GOP oPPOp000-+-+PC00o0 0Dc�JtV0•▪ W▪ A ▪ A -�a, 471 W A0mAAN�►▪ t—D A WO-►OO W0Na, coc00a,=Gi 0 C)W Cn� cn O)Nc0 C) O)OuhNO)CO CI) Cr, CO0)CU1CO -+ r W is "►'r OONNJaN tV▪ CNN ��''-�O)N N W N74...a�NU+cJ)"�c��-0 0 " W NcO� A' 000ONN �' NAVJN.J+CntV A W co.— �IN" �4JOO�J Con 3 0) - v co J 0 'J V A A A A A W W W A N W W A 4s .A GO N A•n:•.:,42:C4+A. U G:•A .A.A Oo+C CO N W A N Um00• CD 0 N W N COT1 W 0) N �,00 -2 0! JJ +CIO 0 U• +c(J'+(AC-l�� +• �lCr C.) O'541.1CJticr;511..C•0) A U1 Ui V 0) V -•02•A O:•A A,Cr+U'.O,U�a:•`+-`1CPI Q 0•000 - C.2 C.- CO U0i V CoON A 00O A ON.`-QJ W OC+cc. CO ca..•—• •PP-- �3taC•V W CM W W W A W-W W W O V Cf W CO ODCO-►A000D00 • � .4.► P4 W 00)) 0 W CCO • -N+ C.11 A W -� O) W V N 00 -4. Cn W W 02 0AANNOO-.i'-+CnCh N c.n N' A V A A CO 0 W 0 (3n t(0(0( .is0) V_NOONNA `yam A 00O ton A CO 0) Co • h•0J 0) ^0.t a rn L'StrLL1761£ ZZZ9tr996'L£ S£Z££0£9'L£ 9 4 4 466 l 4' 9£ Z9ZStr£S'9£ 9L6LOS LOW n Aop IA 0l� �JtCCA A CA A -N A h.; 00 CO A W N 03 N A A Cn CO] N Cn -+ cD CC • Cn Cn. ppA co V V ' Ooo -► N Ch _. O 04 G A O O PI W m n 0 0 0 0 Pr.0 . Er v - g `g K a O N 0 3 P. Cti L... O w -•i 0) Z 0 WSW 3NR1O7HO AInr :H1NOW 0 W CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 7'IvzDW AO JLLID 1 1 1 1 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ita I 0 titislu[01#1uktuy6,6-41 tAN� WN-+O el: .4 CD tAli: ik3 .w6 OigEntiliSHAVANVMSgliggili E A It E A aalfaientS tr 74 g- N 0 A Sttti0-+TNmcA Iron, 22 csA b 00 t 4 74 A N • 92 re, 0VCbCO. 0, i i I I fo- CD 8 " j A w i /roe IR 2 4a1 ig 144 pg to • E1�j yy Nay N d Otg titgtN1+W WN�►OcflOD^•Jdit7� A►W N-4OmODdWtrAEaN"'' a st f cn�f t�,% pp ��,,p� N �j ��ii pp p ' ^ Wtf Cggg EOi5Eg!iOD-t�l112tiERS W ±vy0000eg W Om G)In N - t NW W Wc0 co ;► IVNN W-.N-.N1'NW WtL,ra tO V�_iAiDD��O� OD tn-+tTCOala)��NW aflV-�=d0N coGntA:1O- -+ COCD-+ABC 3 Jg N A A 0 J �► CO , N tD O p Q ..► ° o v il- O aDco "4 -4 coi ..� < «««««««Z «< aaaa0000a0oo0acouao ac-c rn_rn trWn)M*0 t!r-+siNa w 5 -CD Z. 0 0)- CO v .3 c--oyui*a alW1841sal 8 1 O O- O o o -+ -+ c7 o O O o t? 0 a OOO 0 O t) -.�=' $-EgEoigEg Eg2 $w 2Atgt)1NW 0000 en N 11 ts y a c i CD N 9 N S CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 0 0 -a- ct s r O • voN N N N N N V N N CO VCACn?W NV .+OCDCb'dCAto4AW N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'A -4 -4 in co QD coCn U CSC Cn '' Co ,A CJ', N co V O O J OtloNW �1 (4.4. - '' _ 0)C,3- (0-Y..a5) co h:-CjC)i0iDC) gip,.ACAC)C)wIot J O 000-46C 4.WN� 74 to co co co m ..s 6 m s L • it cho o _ C' N W -' r- -N N N N N-+ C'C+ Q 6 h N Ct�IC�'' V It -CD C�1,C0l,�LNnC7,WA� v 0 v y p Ps 5o 74 w-I�►,ar•:. a► a,,. �..A w- 0 z �t1 :xNNCAC)CDO ( '71 �. "1 * t '$.. 0 .,W .N;"�ti-•�!C�.A W Wr-'NW W -'(0 ae 0 i Dft.,x• t�••aa,a A+c+N a•wACmnC�.:�-8888=88t8-88888a o m o <1-:o�Cm a-o v:---- '0 -.I O •A Cr+ « « < « « <]< < « °: 3g R. :1 a,. -.5c,J opCA-4O-p--ON pp�► �► -� . *+.-. yC Cn O O 1►.A-AcnNCA-A W A. COOoW OOOOOOZ5aZ5 '.•O0OO., In i�. .- - i j ' - Cn tD CJ) -d GJ. COV 0 V _ N 0+ -d co aa.CG,N:•Y•OG•tCpp C12-C)C• R -+ C+ ... -. ! CA -4 4A Cr+ Co C7r N:. 4P CO CJ" Cr + 0 + 00 IL 0 W� 0 t31 CD m CA N 0 0 CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY I1V33W 1O AJ.ID W8NNN NNN N (OCI) V WCPI A N �►-+O�DO��V ��J��A W�-+��000^JQ CO AWN-+O ato CI CO NCO O f�O.t000O /a CO -+aOp-+COao 01 00 m A OA.r'N W (C1D'N CA-+ANfV W �'ODNQ"� V1-a��V71iatNOGO�•iVoo tntn ' -HIV°) ul gra ' W+W,w pp5"�,W N 54'1`•W.w L�+4:•W+W.tw+W,4:rQ�Wpp qp tT•N-isi v g•C`•w Ay•y► Q'A (J SOD 8 (0.0 6- V V V CC- V V A• W C,.+ MOE ' C e3 m ti a 01111. b WW Cl 1� N -►A� Vgc CO.A W CO co A W m ...aJ i080 v 3 A .R► CT + (�1--.G`' W CC. A C� - W pa. t.) te a x ft U f a;mil A•P-O-99 0 V P-a1Ql P-W P-c -co V ci!-CA V P CA -.4naP Pcrc,:m �►'�'.•ti;'Q,_V ice: 0 '[7 v CA! C+7+Civ ,Cw+4:+ +G:, t f .�,n 4'-,A, .W W W C4+4%, , •�'A, �C+CI'+ +;`PCT_a '�' C.1v+ + GLL N 7.1-V►,•..l (W COY -D :A J► ubeakiliTi . •-c.aa.''ir i,44X- +j ;s. is �1 �p i4!i� I'`� Cr p m Isi-i •i. + C� ww y 0 + CC a fv+ ti 1.a..a ft. � • a i • uii `� Kam' -i ►�' ` + .p, oe p a iac.� !_s O4ec+ + .1P►► •�..a.-a a C--► t� C+ ..r �iN ` �1�.1�+,.tio+-► .0 ....10 Clh'�,�y4 +•1►,u'.1�P. OC•IOea..t CO •..! C�c 0,8.. G:,+GW ,r` a + + .i h. A,,I`IV t -- 4COC C�-Ce-City T. ice, A , tC-G:i••.00 A,tC+w+1`+ C*ati� +v'OC+G�V•CiD^r7.•:1+� Ct+ o 6Ca 3 § O g 3 -CI4 g 'Cr 13 o 3 a co 3'a O v -0 Z 2 o ca ��� flint' :H1N0111 CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY TIV33W AO A1I3 0 W W NNNNNNNNNN-)- ... › -A 0 W W -J O C)1 A W N-hO W 00 •J 01 Cf A W N J O OD CO -! 0) 0 A CO N N-10)Cr04-0C) mwt mcooamrn-JAcomm-1000ntDAU1AwA0g tW cootOt0N A0)c71-I-.NtnO AA - wo-JOON cn-kOG) W N OON -.I O cri co u1 O N tD -.W .12. - � A rn m w w o ,i m CO z w G) v A A NAACmQD ON-00-) QDNN-A co N0)N-1"PNO)�trA W 66.00-1.) -IN-I WOD O)Q)tOtD COGmNNto4,CDA W N AN � v v ZI0 Ie}ol Mold weld 31VG NISVB 3N121O7H3 - 1 O C N A A A A CD 0 00 0 ti 3 O O N W 1+• w w w w N A W N W iCo 66--�tiltW666ivNOvm KD z A 0 W --J � -4 00) W v -A ? v Av ▪ G) QD f y n co �Dco-A000)O) Dog 0 pp , t �. A00ocohaCD• QDO W 4.N-OJN iv Ell' 'G)m Z O i 1 • coW W A co CO W Co co Co CO Coo N Wit 4t 4t 4k 41, 4t 8 4t 4t 4t 4t 0 W A CD CJ1 W co -J Co 0 J @ O 0000000000000 0000-AJN NC0 V O-A+NQO)(0—- Na o0 (O G,GG«GGG<«GGG«<Gaov+wA-)0)(0( 4..)(00)(7' '•a-=. •p '� OD N W O Cl1 s J W 01 -► O C71 -,'.G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a O b v N t7D -! 0 -4 0 th CD to O) CO ` T 0 _ ., ._ _ ._ c0 -J 0) — Co C •-L Cn -4 W f W O A N cn -4 -4 W,N•Ow) ? COt.0- �-. T , 00o000c•000000000 000000009•0o-000OD m k,-A W W N A A A O N -' W O CD. -A W 1.) A CD-' CD Co -A Cn CL:•N 4;•N O j =) O A.00t.mNtt-0)A-�0:10NODO)tC•-' tr00)O)AN00-)Cott:(' NN00.� n ' N - -1 i O _A A ma) Co (0 0 0 � 3 (1 3 — A o • 3 o co . com R 15 0 v m A o 3 • O 0) ? o 13 -4 o • 9 -1 ha� n O v C N o 3 -I O = c= co •G 1sn6ny — :HiNOW A21VWWf1S SiN3W3IIft 321 ONI O11NOW 213O O 1N3SNO3 11V33W AO A113 jfira+V N 14 Alt bil N A) Al N .O 0 tpOpViANtav WN-*O 0 0640 046 W1Vj ocyo-pov o Po 5CAcio,00-j oo-�c (Q� c�'i'1v- -�..►� in W ti'±ita it7�moti WA1tkSe `► P W 341 '�J as Ci-g ao- ac% N 'an" ul m �_ V1 Qv us CO # A to j-to DJ w= N1N_ co-cr. cr. �• .'�-tA 1�:=tJf_A Qp Of 4, Us ty-- Cf 4► CA � to-W ja tR_to)-4 t tr:t-i±J NSW 74 Coto .,a tp U' lT W tlti li± altitiosate » c P A t>7 ► P -d t.v. sW -� toU O P.) y CO (411 us co 4 tai m 12 W CO ODD +0! CO '"w op co cvid;i A iDoc+000006464 - tl± +fp y 0 1 46, W lri i CO 0 A EaG 214 Q Q. 0 mar 5 - o m o z ti- /Y a 3 - f 0 0 17 =ad 0 A f b rn ! g— I i i Ai m 9 11rF § zi o CO al 3 4 0 NNv�O CDOJO)tA Ca Ny OCOOOUl WNOCOCO-4 Ui40. W N m M c ooOO0000O-►o 000000PoP000•�-,00000p g A cOC 0 v A A _, A 0 -V+ W A Cn _, A A N 4-. 4 W O N• OOO W CNO N t N O .. O W W U) -+ Cn CO N CO CO 00 Co N 0) CO Cn Cr( Cn CO Q) CA Cr CO O v W T..a..► OONN AN''NNN"' A"' -A" N W NJ�'�NCJ1Cn', W�� C� a W N t0 A <O 000 N A IV CO v s cJi N A W aD IV .! N j W 00 v t N co N amo N -► mo 71.0. W W W ,A W A N W W? A W A W N? N N W W? W Ck •.4. . C O) N W Q) O CO N 0) G= - O) --► W t` • G1 N C 4 f cc + iC , 4) M _ coO O O O A O CO IV --� J O N Cn A O O W o CL i N A. Cl'•' ,0 'n NO.Cc-O NW Cr co co Iv haCn W or,N J J Cn co V+Cn CO N J CO N O) -, c.:+- O tO �.! O Cn - CJ' + �, C!t � O ? Cn CJi J C: - •� � J O � O 1�. � V � V � O U+ O �! v V + C� V + a: + p � O O s'tvbot�) mco jaao�ImOOOtoN•Go.-+CnNo ca C]6Copo,, E -•. J CA CA 3 (n W W OD Cn J CO N O) O W 00 W CO W O N t J CO -' ? OAS +n m �► v 6 NNW 0 p V O) Co) W O0 NON -`,NOOW CO 4 OD CD S6S44£E L'8E 494LZL9Z'8£ COOi4:1.CO OWo-4J 0)-4 0 W CO--0Cn OA A Cr) OiD Wo -4 N 0) " Co W W ^J CO O W N CO N Co J Cn Cr J A W O O 04 .p 40. CO O W O40. CO W N40. W JNCONN-0• CnNN J00) " O Cn CO N (O ? N W W N CO CO Co CO J O J J N U) C)+ N -0 -+ N O Ca) 03 03 4LZL LZ6'L£ 99LSZZZL'LE 91 L L661 l'9£ 8119101S"9£ 1.0EL4S6S"8£ Z8ZS4ES"8E 446E686S"8£ Cn 0 9E96LEZL"8E EE6Z884L"Z£ 9L6LOS 1.O"9£ VSLS844L"4E 9068S£Z6"t4 SL6ZtZ8Z"S£ LLSS4461-14 Wv r m O Lpsa J co W co -.► /\ O O O 7r0\�. 3 Cli g t °' K 13 t 0 V 7 CO = 5 _ o "0 w 03-a r co O 0 •G V NISVEI 3NI21O7H3 NOLLV1S ONIXIW AInf :H1NOW 0 W CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 17VO3W AO A1.I3 i !!888tiitAllMJNi►WItt-N+�8ali :1Z;0•AwN).•C3 C°"4Cfwa►W14"A 11 io ii 8 Z:1 ►E!!iiliVa$§VN88m; vtt;titgg5 811i8g-n�-+ cu oCO CO cn .i CS a• 4• CO -a a• ao CO COoewu+•� .A, "A;JNNc)N�.+-+• A Co AN-+h1 to cn 10natorA-A ...co..a,..►.i x Ito in3U ., N^4sii(4 n4.41'..1.D'h�+tjtgOD -► „iyN'CO ai VGDOD i C9 i I§2' —al A f / COOSA8it'46)tC`tOb 46.*i_W.ttsbtlQ��CpO�Ntj)le NW+itN7sfct.Q�ig41'§it1 c4-144:.W@22).15,44ri..:88 ttiftiltresa g A xi GO f0 co . 0O C� 8P $ O CO yn .400 Ai :: CA 40 47 P! 0- Z4 !! 8868N ri.< g .. co v a. u m A-1 W NN C?-6CCo VQf1NJ�VttN it3a)CD V01u+4wN..►pcD0 '4CD(."'WN-► rna�w�r N t+n;w jwwypplu► gv��iap►oVc» Noo-4c 0 r 0 -, PO hohowiW tOOO�+ coco4b.00CMW coc)4)04)Eg WOff. +0,i .a R fa Pa C ,03 Nwwt+o44w .. NNN-w-►N-�PaNw50 5U�"OD(0 -'-•c1+QD CAb�C��N W CEN-��.lGatV co co CA V GS�I� CDto-+� 3 A `y N co X. a CD�. N A- O , ~3 -o w 00„� 00© O ow -4w3 0 f ti b .rR I m 0 0 t0 ..a #� o N ,.► ae G, 88.88888888a8 !88 88888 G GODdie V 40,1IVB 3 P g<<;<<<<<««<,<<<Z<gZZ-r-r. .4f,1"�c a-n �, aaeaaaoOO0000c,aa-a000a — o0 w cb ad w 00P-0 T 00-pp>- c►ppO000ppc00c!QQc-O0O_c- 000ODis A IJDOOOmCf .�►SA WCOf1?AVOitQfliV W J► V40,,!U'<3 cD Lif►� 3 N N O 0 CO CONSENT ORDER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 0 't1 0 r IRIS I RIG I t P rrt /�ts��E�1 Ao100icj (2co.t&4 /1 4 3-3 45�'1 I t1 5/ 69 Sewer District F Date Month 1 /31 /2003 JAN 2/28/2003 FEB 3/31/2003 MAR 5/2/2003 APRIL 6/2/2003 May 6/30/2003 June 8/1/2003 July 9/2/2003 August 9/29/2003 Sept 10/31/2003 OCT 12/1/2003 Nov 1/2/2004 Dec 2/2/2004 JAN 3/1/2004 FEB 4/2/2004 MAR 4/30/2004 APRIL 6/1/2004 May 7/2/2004 June 8/2/2004 July 8/30/2004 August 10/1/2004 Sept 11 /1 /2004 OCT 12/2/2004 Nov 1/3/2005 Dec District Total Flow 2,843,000 2,491,000 3,000,000 4,192,000 4,120,000 3,717,000 6,182,000 5,317,000 2,604,000 2,595,000 2,495,000 2,957,000 2,659,000 2,043,000 2,437,000 2,987,000 3,711,000 4,821,000 6,844,000 5,174,000 3,965,000 2,782,000 1,954,000 2,552,000 % of J-Ditch Yrly Totals Capacity 42, 513, 000 4,702,000 7,139,000 10,126,000 13,837,000 18,658,000 25,502,000 30,676,000 34,641,000 37,423,000 39,377,000 41,929,000 47.24% 46.59% %of Monthly Yrly. %of Plant Indiv. % of Average T.P Capacity 'Capacity Influent % Infl. Ini 4.68% 4.10% 4.93% 6.89% 6.78% 6.11% 10.17% 8.75% 4.28% 4.27% 4.10% 4.86% 4.37% 3.36% 4.01% 4.91 % 6.10% 7.93% 11.26% 8.51% 6.52% 4.58% 3.21% 4.20% 14.03% 15.64% 18,' 12.29% 13.45% 18,! 14.80% 11.27% 26,E 20.68% 11.29% 37, 20.33% 11.70% 35,E 18.34% 15.43% 24,( 30.50% 23.68% 26,' 26.24% 23.12% 23,i 12.85% 13.61% 19,' 12.80% 17.48% 14,i 12.31% 18.20% 13,i 14.59% 19.99% 16.24% 14, i 13.12% 16.81% 16.34% 15,i 10.08% 11.13% 16.14% 18,. 12.02% 7.72% 15.85% 31,E 14.74% 9.60% 15.71% 31,i 18.31% 13.43% 15.85% 27,E 23.79% 18.45% 16.10% 26,i 33.77% 24.35% 16.16% 28, i 25.53% 20.62% 15.95% 25,( 19.56% 19.04% 16.40% 20,f 13.73% 16.17% 16.29% 17,E 9.64% 11.55% 15.74% 16,E 12.59% 15.08% 15.33% 1-64 TP Flows low Experience ICI I Y "Ox�f w f1c Total uent Yrly Totals 75,000 22,000 19,000 18,000 26,000 89,000 08,000 D1,000 32,000 46,000 08,000 95,000 271,339,000 18,000 30,000 59,000 06,000 36,000 35,000 07,000 94,000 22,000 )8,000 19,000 1-9,080 275,683,000 City Total Flow 15,332,000 16,031,000 23,619,000 32,926,000 31,106,000 20,372,000 19,926,000 17,684,000 16,528,000 12,251,000 11,213,000 11,838,000 13,159,000 16,317,000 29,122,000 28,119,000 23,925,000 21,314,000 21,263,000 19,920,000 16,857,000 14,426,000 14,965,000 14,367,000 Yrly Totals CITY FLOW 228,826,0001 233,754,0001 % of J-Ditch Capacity % of % of Plant Indiv. Capacity Capcity 25.22% 26.37% 38.85% 54.15% 51.16% 33.51 32.77% 29.09% 27.18% 20.15% 18.44% 127.13% 19.47% 21.64% 26.84% 47.90% 46.25% 39.35% 35.06% 34.97% 32.76% 27.73% 23.73% 24.61% 129.86% 23.63% 37.83% 39.55% 58.27% 81.23% 76.74% 50.26% 49.16% 43.63% 40.78% 30.22% 27.66% 29.21 32.46% 40.26% 71.85% 69.37% 59.03% 52.58% 52.46% 49.14%I 41.59%I 35.59% 36.92% 35.44% Monthly % of Influent 84.36% 86.55% 88.73% 88.71 88.30% 84.57% 76.32% 76.88% 86.39% 82.52% 81.80% 80.01% 83.19% 88.87% 92.28% 90.40% 86.57% 81.55% 75.65% 79.38% 80.96% 83.83% 88.45% 84.92% Yrly. Average % Infl. 83.76% 84.67% 1/20/2005 rr( _-��.: 1772 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Topics for Discussion 1) Re -cap of Analysis to Date a. Estimated capacity of Wastewater Treatment Lagoons b. Estimated capacity of Winter Storage Pond c. Estimated capacity of Land Application 2) Split Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Ownership of City/District a. Wastewater Lagoons (1/3-2/3) b. Winter Storage and Land Application System? 3) Responsibility for Debt and Judgment on J-Ditch System 4) Inclusion of New Development in Sewer District a. Impact on Land Use and City Autonomy b. Basis for Capacity by District? Sao 6e 5) Moving Forward a. Clarify/Improve Situation with Land Application System -Short Term b. Facility plan j G e c. Scope of Work Sewer Collection System Master Plan i. 50% Funded and Comparison to Facility Plan d. Sludge Removal Project and DEQ Joint Work e. Sewer and Water Rates f. I/I Reduction g. Joint Powers Board Meetings 6) Potential Long -Term Solutions a. Expand Land Application and Winter Storage with Lagoon System Upgrade (likely not an option) i. Land Costs ii. Difficulty with Expansion b. Upgrade Existing Facility along with Tertiary Treatment i. Additional Lagoon Cells with Covers ii. Phosphorus Removal 1. Regulatory Limits 2. Limits of New Technology 3. Regulator Challenges 4. Public Perception c. Mechanical Treatment Facility with Groundwater Recharge Project i. New Proposed DEQ Regulations ii. High Costs d. Mechanical Treatment Facility with Discharge to River e. Package Treatment Systems for Individual Developments N E HOLLADAY ENGINEERING COMPANY 32 North Main Street Payette, ID 83661 (208) 642-3304 N HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. E ENGINEERS • CONSULTANTS 32 N. Main P.O. Box 235 Payette, ID 83661 (208) 642-3304 • Fax # (208) 642-2159 October 28, 2004 Lindley Kirkpatrick, City Manager City of McCall 216 E. Park Street McCall, ID 83638 RE: Review of City Wastewater Treatment and Effluent Disposal System Capacity HECO Reference Number: ML062004 Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick: We have completed our review of the letter from J-U-B Engineers, Inc., dated September 16, 2004 regarding capacity of the winter storage and land application sites for storage and disposal of treated effluent from the wastewater treatment facility. Based on our review, we have the following comments: There are three major processes within the wastewater treatment and disposal system including the wastewater treatment facility (consisting of three treatment lagoons), the winter storage facility (used for storage of treated effluent during the non-agricultural season), and land application (used for effluent disposal on agricultural land and for agronomic uptake of nutrients in the effluent). Any one of the three major processes can act as a choke point for capacity of the entire system. According to the letter from J-U-B, the maximum volume of effluent that the J-Ditch Pipeline Association (JDPA) can currently apply on land application sites on an annual basis is approximately 230 million -gallons (MG), which is significantly less than the design value of 494 MG for land application (Addendum No. 1 to the Facility Plan Report Book One Chanters 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, 1996). Total annual influent to the wastewater treatment plant was 271.3 MG in 2003, 243.0 MG in 2002, 223.7 MG in 2001, and 248.3 MG in 2000. Leakage losses from the winter storage cell were estimated at approximately 50 MG annually according to supporting data in the submitted analysis Preliminary Water Balance J-Ditch Phase 2 Operating Year 2003-2004, by J-U-B. Leakage from winter storage occurred at a higher rate than allowed by regulations at the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). According to a separate letter from J-U-B, dated September 14, 2004, repairs have proceeded on the liner for the winter storage cell. A conservative assumption is that liner repairs will eliminate leakage from winter storage. If this occurs. the noted land application capacity of 230 MG will likely be exceeded in the 2005 irrigation season. The letter of September 16, 2004, notes that negotiations are in progress with the DEQ regarding an amended Consent Order to decrease the mixing ratio WATER • WASTEWATER • SOLID WASTE • PUBLIC UTILITIES • STRUCTURES • PLANNING • STUDIES Lindley Kirkpatrick, Page 2 of 4 of irrigation water to treated effluent, thus increasing the volume of effluent that can be applied on the land application sites. The amended consent order also involves negotiations with the JDPA. The capacity of land application will not be firmly known until negotiations with the DEQ and the JDPA have been completed. If an agreement can not be reached to increase capacity for the wastewater component at the land application sites, it appears that emergency discharge to the Payette River will likely be necessary within the next storage year as some treated effluent will remain in winter storage at the end of each irrigation season. Once the land application capacity is addressed, the next potential choke point in the system is winter storage. According to the information provided in the September 16, 2004 letter, the maximum stored volume in the winter storage cell in the 2003/2004 season was approximately 150 MG. The data provided in the submitted calculations, Preliminary Water Balance J-Ditch Phase 2 Operating Year 2003-2004 by J-U-B, supports this conclusion. The data also indicates that 30-40 MG of leakage from winter storage occurred during the 2003-2004 storage season (September 12-early June). Assuming leakage from winter storage has been eliminated, the amount of storage reserved for current use is 180 MG to 190 MG. According to the letter, winter storage capacity is approximately 280 MG. Therefore, 80-90 MG of additional storage is available for growth. We require further information regarding the amount of winter storage that is reserved by the PLWSD and the amount that is reserved by the City. Assuming no leakage, the total storage capacity used by the City during the 2003-2004 storage season was approximately 162 MG accounting for precipitation and evaporation, and the amount used by the PLWSD was approximately 26 MG. Assuming an average 2.5 people -per dwelling unit, which is slightly more conservative than the census statistic of 2.25 people - per -household (US Bureau of the Census, 2000) and multiplying by 100 gallons -per - capita -day (Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities, 1997), provides an average flow per dwelling unit of 250 gallons per day. Applying this value over a storage year assuming the same time interval as the previous storage year, 263 days, provides room for growth of approximately 1,380 dwelling units. Of the 1,380 dwelling units, our firm has written will -serve letters for 270 units over the past 1.5 years, the majority of which will use capacity in the future. This includes the Aspen Ridge Subdivision Phases i and II (130 lots), the Greystone on the Payette Condominiums (30 condos), Rio Vista STEP Sewer System (90 lots), Pine Meadows Condominiums (8 condos), and Wildwood Condominiums (12 condos). Furthermore, we are unaware of will -serve letters that may have been written in the recent past by the Public Works Department, which may have included the River's Crossing Subdivision (59 lots), Woodlands Development Phase 2 (? Lots), and potentially others. Please verify the number of dwelling units that have been approved by the Public Works Department since the beginning of 2003. Also. due to the rapid growth observed during the past year, City in -!ill has been substantial. We are aware of 3 cases of recent City in -till including Hayes Estates Subdivision (2 lots), Gun Hill Subdivision ±3 lots), and the Fir Street Utility Extension (5 lots) that will contribute flows in the future. The amount of City in -fill, not including lots from the developments listed above should be quantified, based on permits issued since July of 2003. The City Building Inspector must be consulted to determine this value as we do not have this information. Additionally. development applications are currently being reviewed or Lindley Kirkpatrick, Page 3 of 4 pending submittal for several developments including the River Ranch Subdivision (67 lots, requesting sewer service due to Central Health District Recommendation), Whitetail Development (15 lots, remainder of 200 lots proposed served by the Sewer District, application not yet submitted), Candlewood Condos (16 condos), Treasure Communities (30 condos, application not yet submitted), Hopkins and Fields Development (? Lots, application not yet submitted), Michael Goldman Development (? Lots, application not yet submitted), Greystone Village (? Lots, application not yet submitted), and the McCall Rental Relocation (1 commercial building, application not yet submitted), Bret Walker Development (1 commercial building and six residences). The winter storage pond appears to be the next bottleneck in the wastewater system. The City's portion of the winter storage pond must be identified to determine if capacity exists for further development within the City, assuming the issue of land application capacity is addressed. The final potential choke point for the wastewater system is the wastewater treatment facility (WWTF). Based on the capacity value of approximately 2.0 MGD currently used by the City and District for capacity allocation, the wastewater treatment facility has a slightly greater capacity than the winter storage component of the system. The combined peak flow of the City and PLWSD in April of 2003 was 1.24 MGD. Peak flow in spring months was used as a basis for remaining capacity due to high inflow and infiltration (I/1) to the sewer system, causing a substantial amount of the WWTF capacity to be used during Spring months. The flow from April of 2003 was used as a basis because this represents the highest recent flow since the year 2000. When the winter storage assumptions are applied to treatment capacity, approximately 2,900 dwellings could be added to the system. However, it is our understanding that the City owns 2/3 of this capacity and 1/3 is owned by the PLWSD. The City's influent volume during the month of April was 32,926,000 gallons, equating to an approximate average daily flow of 1.1 MGD. Two-thirds of the plant capacity is approximately 1.3 MGD. Therefore, the remaining capacity for growth in the City is approximately 836 dwelling units if the WWTF were the system bottleneck. Capacity of the WWTF may be reduced based on a year with high precipitation due to increased flows from I/I, which also affects the remaining capacity in winter storage. More information and analysis is needed to justify capacity values as affected by I/I flows. In a memo from Dale Caza of the PLWSD to Paul Levinn in the year 2000, a priority listing of manholes that need repair was provided. It was noted, "from 38 M.H.'s listed at a #1 severity, a possibilty of I&I at 250,000 gallons per day exists.", which applies only to periods of high I/I. A "# 1 severity" refers to the ranking system adopted at the time of the study on a scale of 1-5, where 1 indicates major infiltration (>5 gpm). Furthermore, a report by J-U-B, dated June 1993, and revised in June 1996, Facility Plan Report Book Four Inflow and Infiltration. Citv of McCall. noted that I/I flow varies greatly. Over a period of four years (1990-1993), I&1 contnbuted 1 7.7-63.6 MG annually of flow to the WWTF. It is clear that UI has a significant impact on the capacity of the wastewater treatment and disposal system. Capacity of land application, at the current combined flow rate from the City and PLWSD, will likely be inadequate in the immediate short-term future, according to values and data Lindley Kirkpatrick, Page 4 of 4 provided in the letter by J-U-B and flow data from the WWTF. The available capacity of land application and winter storage is significantly less than the design values noted in the City of McCall Revised Facility Plan Report. dated June 1996. A meeting was held on October 22, 2004 between the City, PLWSD, JDPA, and DEQ to discuss decreasing the amount of dilution of treated effluent in order to apply a larger amount of effluent to participating farmland. Although we were not involved with that meeting, it is our understanding that the result verified inadequate capacity for land application effluent disposal based on several issues identified at that meeting. The opinion was voiced that farmers associated with land application of effluent would not be able to take more effluent than is currently estimated (approximately 230 MG). This must be verified. Based upon your email concerning the meeting between the City, JDPA, PLWSD, J-U-B, NRCS, and the DEQ on October 22, 2004, we recommend considering a moratorium on new building permits until this issue is better defined. We recommend quantifying the exact number of dwelling units that have been approved with "will -serve" letters and the exact number of City in -fill lots since January of 2003. As City Engineer working on the City's behalf, we cannot obligate the City with future will -serve letters until the above issues have been addressed. Assuming the land application issue is addressed, the City will be able to allow new sewer connections up to its portion of capacity of the winter storage or wastewater treatment facility depending on which component is limiting. This may limit growth to development that has already received a commitment from the City, depending on the amount of capacity reserved for the City at the winter storage facility. More detailed data and significant time and resources are required to verify precise values for the capacity of each component. However, based on the noted capacity of land application and meeting on October 22, it is clear this component of the system is the current bottleneck and must be addressed as the highest priority to allow use of remaining capacity of the winter storage pond. In the short-term, I/I reduction projects in the sewer collection system can be used to create additional capacity. A manhole rehabilitation program could potentially be implemented through the winter to reduce flows into the sewer collection system. However, long-term planning efforts for a new wastewater treatment and effluent disposal system are recommended. Respectfully Submitted, HOLLADAY GINEERING COMPANY By. / ,e.66�-LYE and By: / / 1 , ►.� ; Shawn A. Kohtzs-E'rT., M.S' Vernon E. Brewer, Project Manager And 3v: V c�_- Kenneth R. Rice. P.E. CC. , Bill Keating, City of McCall Bill Burke. Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Lindley Kirkpatrick, Page 4 of 4 provided in the letter by J-U-B and flow data from the WWTF. The available capacity of land application and winter storage is significantly less than the design values noted in the Citv of McCall Revised Facility Plan Retort. dated June 1996. A meeting was held on October 22, 2004 between the City, PLWSD, JDPA, and DEQ to discuss decreasing the amount of dilution of treated effluent in order to apply a larger amount of effluent to participating farmland. Although we were not involved with that meeting, it is our understanding that the result verified inadequate capacity for land application effluent disposal based on several issues identified at that meeting. The opinion was voiced that farmers associated with land application of effluent would not be able to take more effluent than is currently estimated (approximately 230 MG). This must be verified. Based upon your email concerning the meeting between the City, JDPA, PLWSD, J-U-B, NRCS, and the DEQ on October 22, 2004, we recommend considering a moratorium on new building permits until this issue is better defined. We recommend quantifying the exact number of dwelling units that have been approved with "will -serve" letters and the exact number of City in -fill lots since January of 2003. As City Engineer working on the City's behalf, we cannot obligate the City with future will -serve letters until the above issues have been addressed. Assuming the land application issue is addressed, the City will be able to allow new sewer connections up to its portion of capacity of the winter storage or wastewater treatment facility depending on which component is limiting. This may limit growth to development that has already received a commitment from the City, depending on the amount of capacity reserved for the City at the winter storage facility. More detailed data and significant time and resources are required to verify precise values for the capacity of each component. However, based on the noted capacity of land application and meeting on October 22, it is clear this component of the system is the current bottleneck and must be addressed as the highest priority to allow use of remaining capacity of the winter storage pond. In the short-term, I/I reduction projects in the sewer collection system can be used to create additional capacity. A manhole rehabilitation program could potentially be implemented through the winter to reduce flows into the sewer collection system. However, long-term planning efforts for a new wastewater treatment and effluent disposal system are recommended. Respectfully Submitted, HOLLADAY GINEERING COMPANY By: 6y% Vernon E. Brewer, Project Manager And By: Kenneth R. Rice, P.E. and B Sliawn A. Koht ., M.S/f CC. Bill Keating, City of McCall Bill Burke. Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Lindley Kirkpatrick, Page 2 of 4 of irrigation water to treated effluent, thus increasing the volume of effluent that can be applied on the land application sites. The amended consent order also involves negotiations with the JDPA. The capacity of land application will not be firmly known until negotiations with the DEQ and the JDPA have been completed. If an agreement can not be reached to increase capacity for the wastewater component at the land application sites, it appears that emergency discharge to the Payette River will likely be necessary within the next storage year as some treated effluent will remain in winter storage at the end of each irrigation season. Once the land application capacity is addressed, the next potential choke point in the system is winter storage. According to the information provided in the September 16, 2004 letter, the maximum stored volume in the winter storage cell in the 2003/2004 season was approximately 150 MG. The data provided in the submitted calculations, Preliminary Water Balance J-Ditch Phase 2 Operating Year 2003-2004 by J-U-B, supports this conclusion. The data also indicates that 30-40 MG of leakage from winter storage occurred during the 2003-2004 storage season (September 12-early June). Assuming leakage from winter storage has been eliminated, the amount of storage reserved for current use is 180 MG to 190 MG. According to the letter, winter storage capacity is approximately 280 MG. Therefore, 80-90 MG of additional storage is available for growth. We require further information regarding the amount of winter storage that is reserved by the PLWSD and the amount that is reserved by the City. Assuming no leakage, the total storage capacity used by the City during the 2003-2004 storage season was approximately 162 MG accounting for precipitation and evaporation, and the amount used by the PLWSD was approximately 26 MG. Assuming an average 2.5 people -per dwelling unit, which is slightly more conservative than the census statistic of 2.25 people - per -household (US Bureau of the Census, 2000) and multiplying by 100 gallons -per - capita -day (Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities, 1997), provides an average flow per dwelling unit of 250 gallons per day. Applying this value over a storage year assuming the same time interval as the previous storage year, 263 days, provides room for growth of approximately 1,380 dwelling units. Of the 1,380 dwelling units, our firm has written will -serve letters for 270 units over the past 1.5 years, the majority of which will use capacity in the future. This includes the Aspen Ridge Subdivision Phases i and ZI (130 lots), the Greystone on the Payette Condominiums (30 condos), Rio Vista STEP Sewer System (90 lots), Pine Meadows Condominiums (8 condos), and Wildwood Condominiums (12 condos). Furthermore, we are unaware of will -serve letters that may have been written in the recent past by the Public Works Department. which may have included the River's Crossing Subdivision (59 lots), Woodlands Development Phase 2 (? Lots), and potentially others. Please verify the number of dwelling units that have been approved by the Public Works Department since the beginning of 2003. Also, due to the rapid growth observed during the past year, City in -fill has been substantial. We are aware of 3 cases of recent City in -till including Hayes Estates Subdivision (2 lots), Gun Hill Subdivision (3 lots), and the Fir Street Utility Extension (5 lots) that will contribute flows in the future. The amount of City in -fill, not including lots from the developments listed above should be quantified. based on permits issued since July of 2003. The City Building Inspector must be consulted to determine this value as we do not have this information. Additionally, development applications are currently being reviewed or ty of McCall Wastewater System: Effect of Community Growth and Sewer Collection System Repairs Sewer Collection System Repair Dedicated Growth and Recent City In -Fill 12/2/2004 Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status 1 rea Flow (gallons/day) Area: I 100,000 Area 2 :22,0,000 Area 3 140,000 Total Other Areas . 210,000 Total ` 670,000 Reference: Facility Plan Report, BookFour, Infiltration and Inflow; Page 5. City of McCall, June r1996-Revised, J,-U-B. 12/2/2004 ,"'; "After" ] l e store :enis of -If No measurements available to gage effectiveness of III removal since 1996 I/I measurements in Spring '05 Estimate of effectiveness of I/I removal after measurements are completed. Consider follow-up measurement after Lake Street Sewer Rehabilitation. 12/2/2004 Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status 3 Dedicated and.Ikecent Sewer Hookups ,f 'Number of Hookups Dedicated Recent City In -Fill ; r161 (Verification in Progress) D'edicated'to New 522 Development ,ITotal Future City In -Fill Outside New Development 12/2/2004- 683° Estimate of Effect on . Wastewater Treatment and. Digposat ,stems . vstem Recent Dedicated 'Total Remaining 'omponent Capacity by the Capacity in City of McCall Component Wastewater Treatment Facility 683 D.U.'s 2,900 D.U.'s Winter 683 D.U.'s 836 D.U.'s/? Storage Land 683 D.U.'s 0 D.U.'s/? Application . kovt Basis for Capacity Evaluations: Letter from Holladay Engineering Company to Lindley Kirkpatrick, dated October 28, 2004. D.U.'s = Dwelling Units 12/2/2004 044,5t 1 [ tvtitl l ter Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status c) It v.)t(rtco 5 aA, stithate Estimated Growth and Remaining Component Capacity 4000 3500 3000 2500 m 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2003 r — Estnetedc;rtyGrowm r'% 2013 2018 Addinonal Cistrici Growth? Corrbned w lm City Growth Wastew aler Treatrrent Faciiy Additonal Capacity Wnter Storage Addaonal Capacity I" — Additional Land AppticatIon Capacity? "Neill -Serve" letters no longer written; by City since'capaeity; issue surfaced (10/28/04) I/I Removal proceeding with Lake Street and systematic manhole repair Emergency Discharge Permit 60:1 Dilution Public Perception J-Ditch System Capacity Debt -Life Expectancy 12/2/2004 Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status 6 Dedicated Growth and Recent ita tin=Fi. Dedicated and recent sewer hookups Effect on land application, winterstorage,; and wastewater treatment facility Residences receiving a building permit issued after September 2003 not constructed until Summer of 2004 and must be included in recent City in -fill category. Dedication for new development is based on development that has, received final plat or a "will -serve" letter, but has not received building permits for individual lots. Handout describing details 12/2/2004 Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status 4 Map of completed repairs and identified' repair needs Legend: Blue Yellow = Red Repaired Manhole Replaced/Repaired Sewer Main .Identified Repair Need Refer to 1996 Facility Plan Report Map Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Estimates in 1996' Facility Plan Report by Area Repair Map w "Before and After" Measurements of I/I to Assess Effectiveness Measurements during peak I/I period in spring months. 12/2/2004 Wastewater System Growth and Sewer Repair Status 2 r� 0 September 16, 2004 Mr. Bill Burke Payette La Water and Sewer District 201 Jac McC. , ID 83638 ear Mr. Burke: RECEIVED SEP 2 0 2004 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS Regional Office 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 208-376-7330 Fax: 208-323-9336 www.jub.com I apologize for not getting this letter to you sooner, but, as usual, we thought we would have enough data to provide a preliminary analysis sooner. With the assistance of the City of McCall, we have all of the data available for flows into and out of storage. Based on our analysis of this data, it appears that the storage lagoon is leaking approximately 50 million gallons per year. Allowable leakage under DEQ guidelines would be approximately 23 million gallons per year. The maximum stored volume in June 2004 was approximately 150 million gallons. During the storage year, September 12, 2003, to June 2004, approximately 30 million gallons leaked out of the lagoon. For this storage period of approximately 263 days, if the lagoon did notleak, approximately 180 million gallons of storage would have been required. There is approximately 280 million gallons of total storage volume in the existing lagoon. Based on these numbers, the existing excess storage capacity is approximately 100 million gallons. Based on just existing available storage capacity of 100 million gallons, a daily flow of 300 gallons per equivalent dwelling unit and a storage period of 270 days, approximately 1,200 additional units could be added. The limiting criterion for capacity appears to be water usage on the J-Ditch Pipeline Association lands. The actual water usage is substantially less than anticipated. The actual water usage for 2003/04 was approximately 180 million gallons. The pumping to the land application site was curtailed early because of road construction and might have been continued for another 15 to 20 days. Expected pumping during this period is estimated to be 40 to 50 million gallons. Therefore, the required capacity based on the 2003/04 data, without leakage losses, is approximately 230 million gallons. This is approximately the total flow into the McCall treatment plant for the 2003/04 storage and pumping season. This would indicate that, if leakage out of the lagoon is prevented, the capacity of the treatment facility is approximately 230 million gallons of flow per year and the land application site is at capacity. The City of McCall has been pursuing a modification of their consent order to allow for application of undiluted effluent during certain times of the year. A preliminary amended Consent Order has been developed between the City and DEQ and a meeting is being set up with the J-Ditch Pipeline Association to determine if the provisions are acceptable to them and to determine how much treated effluent can be applied. At this point, without the amended Consent Order and the utilization of considerably more treated effluent by the J-Ditch Pipeline Association, it is reasonable to conclude that very little excess plant capacity exists. It is my opinion that some moderate growth, 10 to 20 connections per year, is acceptable. However, long term, it will be necessary to apply more treated effluent to the land application site in order to have capacity that is compatible with the reserve storage capacity. The tasks remaining to determine plant capacity other than the Consent Order issues is to examine the City and District flows and to determine a definition for each of an "equivalent user", examine the original flow projections on a year-to-year basis and to determine if the existing wastewater treatment system capacity is adequate based on the model we used to predict performance. 12u01/2004 17:50 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:24 FAX 2083236386 002L4 City of McCall J-Bitch, Operational/Storage/Irrigation Issues 2002-2004 BACKGROUND Since the effluent storage pond was first filled, beginning in the fall of 2001, there has been sufficient capacity to allow treated wastewater to be stored and discharges to the North Fork of the Payette River have not been necessary. The total storage volume of the reservoir is approximately 270 million gallons. The historical quantity of treated effluent in the lagoon at the beginning ofthe irrigation season over the past three seasons is presented in the table below. It has previously been estimated that the pond leaked a total of 50 million gallons in 2004 (30 million gallons during the storage season and 20 million gallons during the irrigation season). It is believed that 2004 was the year of greatest leakage from the pond and these estimated leakage values have been applied to all three years of operation to provide a conservative evaluation of available storage. YEAR MAX. EFFLUENT IN STORAGE 2002 I 2003 2004 170 million gallons 163 million gallons 151 million gallons MAX. EFFLUENT IN STORAGE w/out LEAKAGE 200 million gallons 193 million gallons 181 million gallons % of max 74% 71% 67% As can be seen, the lagoon has historically had approximately 70-89 million gallons of additional storage available at the end of the storage season, without leakage through the liner. While efforts have been made to repair the liner, it is unlikely that all of the leaks will be identified and repaired. DEQ allows the pond to leak 1/8" per day, or approximately 23 million gallons per year. If the pond were to leak at the maximum rate allowable by DEQ, the available storage capacity at the end ofthe storage season would have ranged between 93-112 million gallons. In each of these years, the pond has been successfiilly emptied during the irrigation season through blending with irrigation water at a ratio of 3:1 (total flow: of luent flow). Records were reviewed to examine both the rate and duration of flows from the lagoon to the mixing station. Presented in the following graphs are the daily flow rates and cumulative totals for each of the previous irrigation seasons. From this data, it can be seen that the Facility Plan peak design flow rate of the pump station of 4,600 gpm (494 MG applied to 2300 acres over a 75 day period) has not been achieved during the previous three irrigation seasons and the average flow rate is approximately 1,900 gpm, less than half of the design flow rate. The total quantity of effluent delivered to the mixing station and subsequently delivered to the agricultural land and used for irrigation has been measured and recorded by flow meters both at the pump station and the mixing station. These totals are presented in the figure below. 1 12/01/2004 17:51 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:24 FAX 2083238336 .,/ LL Presented in the table below, are the total number of days between the first and last day that water was pumped from the storage reservoir and delivered to the mixing station and the resulting average flow rate based on the number of days presented and the total effluent delivered to the mixing station shown in the previous figure. YEAR 2002 2003 2004 DAYS OF DELIVERY SEASON AVERAGE FLOW RATE (gpm) --- - 65 — - --... 19?6 93 1635 58 2151 During the 2002 season, the duration of the delivery season was limited by the late starting date that resulted from work being completed on the J-Ditch project. In 2002, the delivery season did not begin until Airy 3, while th-e- irrigation season -began earlier. In -- 2004, the delivery season was cut short by approximately 20 days to facilitate construction of the new bridge and bypass roadway. The previously presented numbers show that the total quantity of treated effluent being applied to those lands designated for application of blended effluent is much less than the value used in the Facility Plan. The NRCS stated the land owners would use approximately 23.76" of water per year, which would allow the City to discharge over 494 milli -on gallons o treated e __._.e._. effluent at the 3:1 dilution rate on 2300 acres. Howevor, it .... can be seen that the maximum amount of treated effluent that has been delivered to date was in 2003 and was approximately 219 million gallons. This volume was delivered over a 93 day delivery season. Since the construction of the lagoon, it has been found that the lagoon leaks. Testing has been conducted in 2003 and 2004 that show the lagoon to leak in excess of DEQ requirements. Actions have been taken in the fail of 2003 and 2004 to attempt to repair the known leaks in the liner. A water balance study has been conducted in an effort to estimate the annual leakage from the lagoon. Based on numbers for the 2004 season, the leakage from the lagoon has been estimated to be approximately 50 million gallons per year and 30 million gallons between September and June (storage season).. At the current time, it is uncertain if the pond continues to leak. DEQ required testing will be performed in June of 2005 to evaluate leakage. In order to provide some perspective on these flows and what was anticipated prior to construction of the storage reservoir, earlier predictions and estimates can be examined. Included in the following graph are predictions that were made regarding the necessary storage volume that would have been necessary in past years based on historic flow records. This information was developed during the planning and design phase of the J- Ditch project. As can be seen in the figure, the pond would have been nearly completely_ full during the `941'95 and `96/'97 seasons, and if the irrigation season had been shorter than 100 days, the storage capacity would have likely been exceeded and a river discharge may have been necessary. 3 12/01/2004 17:52 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:25 FAX 2083238336 L( 00 )b6Ucc actually being used Initial investigations_ nto_this issue appear to indicate -that_, significantly- less irrigation water is being_applied to the JDPAI lands than_a .ticipat-ed._ It appears that the NRCS value of 23.76" per year of irrigation water that the City relied upon May have failed to consider CrEier tactors. __trst, tt is not cleifif the actual water rights held by the land -owners were considered and if the water rights were adequate to pmvide the stated 15.84" of water per year for blending purposes (15.84" irrigation =� 7.92" treated effluent = 23.76" total irrigation). Through recent discussions with property owners, we have found that some irrigators are liiriited by water rights while others have adequate water rights, but -do not have a need to utilize their full water right. Another factor is that some irrigators do not appear to need23.76" of irrigation water even when the water rights allow this quantity of application.For example, based on discussions _ with one of the irrigators, he typically uses 6-8" of irrigation water on his low-lying ground and 18" on the higher ground. In order to clearly identify the capacity of the existing system, the actual water usage for each of the JDPAI irrigators must be established. This information will require a more detailed examination of each irrigation system and the water rights associated with the land. Additionally, this investigation should include an evaluation of tlne two-way and three-way agreements and the responsibilities of each of the parties should be considered. (Attached for reference) Additionally, it does not appear that a total of 2,300 acres has been provided for irrigation with blended effluent. Based on NRCS evaluation in 2002, it appears that the actual nti b of irrigated acres is closer to 2,000 acres instead of 2,300 acres, a reduction of 13%. The actual number of acres being irrigated should be clearly identified and the resulting impacts on disposal capacity and compliance with prior agreements should be evaluated The Facility Plan identifies options that should be considered to increase the system capacity. The Facility Plan did consider the possibility that the JDPAI irrigators would use less water. These options warrant further evaluation because of the situation you are now facing. The alternatives identified in the Facility Plan included: Pre/Post-irrigation season application, ▪ Reduce plant flows (I&I), • Secure more land for irrigation disposal (through purchase or agreement), • Acquisition and permitting of a site for slow -rate land application to supplement JDPAI lands, • Acquisition and permitting of a site for high -rate land application or a snow fluent system, and Discharge to the J-Ditch at dilution ratios lower than 3:1. In addition to these actions identified in the Facility Plan, there are other actions that the City can take to increase the capacity of the existing system and to mitigate for a potential river discharge_ These include operational measures to reduce or eliminate pump down- 5 12/01/2004 17:53 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 7FOM„ L 12/01/2004 1526 FAX 2083238336 A copy of both the two-way and three-way agreements has been attached for your reference and specific language in the agreements has been highlighted. We believe that these agreements establish the responsibilities of the various parties and may provide insight into the current capacity issues being considered. Operational modifications. It has been previously noted that operational modifications could increase the total quantity of effluent that could be delivered to the irrigated lands while still providing the dilution ratio of 3:1. In each of the three previous years of operation, there were operational measures that could have been taken to increase the quantity of effluent disposed of. However, in each year, there was not a need to realize these opportuirities as the pond was completely emptied. In 2002, the pump station could have been brought on-line at least two weeks earlier, but the contractor was still working on the pump station and this delayed placing the pump station into operation. In 2003, the pump station was started shortly afler the irrigation season started. Delays were necessary to allow leakage testing to be conducted on the pond. Additionally, during 2003, there were at least ten days during the irrigation season when effluent was not provided for nixing. These days resulted primarily from a lack of water in the reservoir and to a lesser extent by equipment malfunctions. In total, it is expected that 15 days of pumping were not utilized during the 2003 season because they were not needed or other factors interfered with pumping. In 2004, the delivery season was again delayed and impacted by leakage testing and the delivery season was cut -short by approximately 20 days because of road construction. In total, it is estimated that approximately 30 days during the irrigation season were not utilized during the 2004 season because they were not needed or other factors interfered with pumping. Given the recorded delivery quantity of 219 million gallons of effluent in 2003, and 20 days not utilized for pumping. an estimate of the amount of effluent that could have been disposed of can be made. If we assume that the average pumping rate during the unused 20 days would be 1,900 gpna, the additional quantity of effluent that could have been disposed of would have been 54.7 million gallons. This brings the maximum total of treated effluent that could have been disposed of in 2003 to 273.7 million gallons Taking the same approach for 2004, an additional 82. l million gallons of -effluent could have been disposed of, bringing the total to 261.Tmillion gallons for the year 2004. Based just on the years 2003 and 2004, the total disposal capacity averaged 267.7 million gallons if all of the available days had been utilized for pumping. Given the current issues with capacity, we believe it would be prudent to look closely at those pieces of equipment in the system that could impact dilution ratios to ensure that the system is operating as it should. Key pieces of equipment that should be looked at include the system flow meters. The various meters associated with the system are susceptible to damage. Flow meter readings should be checked against other flow records, pump curves, and irrigation district measurements to ensure that the flow meters are recording flow rates accurately and the irrigation water sent to the farmers is mixed at the prescribed ratio. 7 12/01/2004 17:54 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:26 FAX 2063238336 0v0 / v _` dime 'Simplot Cnrzan 142 Ranch (Bettis) Falrbrother179 Missals 172 Maki 120.5 (Jake) Mold (Ni9) 2129 sttl$ 456 Pwdom 599.6 467.4 (5725) (210_4 132.2 Area with � dPeed w ElRuent- A_ j rs by Chow, 26 if 126 by Approved (01126), Choice. 0 if Ptin 42 t1 14 42)[142] ?proved 170 (179) (1791 192 (10z)1U1 94.5 (40.9)110 160.5 [711 (711 R,agram�n permed vie emA (Disapproved vie email Verbally approval of Draft proposal, signed off on mn cept Aceeot Grating ing Management ablesidiel 'Disapproved t 'Disapproved via email 'Verbally approved of Verbally approved of Draft Proposal. Nand off Draft Proposat signed off on concept ,'Nl concept 0 Approved. Signed oft on inapt and Drag Proposal concept and Draft _o�po�pf,� 10 Verbally approved of Draft vcrvnq approved of Proposal Draft Proposal 34 Approved, signed off on Approved. signed off on =meet end Doak Proposal concept and Dreg Proposal 52.4 Verbally approved of Draft Proposal, signed ot\7ref1 Proposal, signed off TOTALS 447 (447) t1131 Accoof P9atrofi 1310101211102 Approved. signed Off On Verbally appraise of Oran proposal, signed ort on WOOM 9 Verbally approved of Draft Proposal, signed off on �ra! Rep�rseantallvea verbally approved of Draft Prnpoaal 1.6524 (1,414.41 2,016 727.71 553.t" on wno6Pt Verbally approved of Approved. signed off on oncept and Draft Jarbdly approved or Draft Proposal approved. signed off on ]rah Proposal Verfelly approved of "I moot • ✓erbeoy approve of Draft Proposat signed ot0.Dren Proposal, signed off on concept aCr Representatives verbally R ilves verbal approval of Oran approved of Draft Proposal °r000sal Recent contacts with the property owners have indicated a reluctance to embrace the concept of unblended applications of treated effluent. We would recommend that the following actions be taken to determine if this option is viable at this time. • Schedule a meeting with JDPAJ, NRCS and the Irrigation District. The agenda should include a discussion of the following issues: o Timing of potential applications (pre/post irrigation season, times of drought, soil moisture conditions) o Interest of landowners for unblended application o Identify issues or perceptions against the application of unblended effluent. Based on the results of these discussions, the City will need to determine if this is an option that is worth pursuing further. If the landowners are reluctant to accept this alternative, we do not believe the odds of successfully implementing the approach are good. The landowners must support this approach for it to be implemented. Discharge to the J-Ditch at dilution ratios lower than 3:1. This approach would require an amendment to the Consent Order and the approval of the landowners. The prior efforts with DEQ for the 1:1 application would be valuable in these regards and the current proposed amended consent order would allow applications at dilution rates less than 3:1. However, one of the greatest problems with this approach is that it would limit what lands could be irrigated (the same as with 1:1 applications). As such, this approach 9 12/01/2004 17:55 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15'2/ FAY 2083239336 tJQ012 IIL?VLL may take the most time to implement, but could be structured to provide the necessary disposal capacity. Key steps that the City should take if this option is to be pursued include: • Identification ofDEQ's position on slow -rate, high -rate and snow fluent systems, • Evaluation of potential sites, • Contact potential landowners, and • Evaluation of necessary capital improvements. Discharge to the North Fork of the Payette River when capacity is exceeded. While it may not be the preferred option, the City does have the right, as granted under the current NPDES permit, to discharge to the river as long as certain conditions are met. Given the volumes that have been recorded in the past few years of operation, it appears that approximately 268 million gallons can be disposed of annually through the application of blended effluent if operational procedures are modified to take advantage of every opportunity to deliver water to the irrigated lands. Based on the actual volumes of water delivered in 2003 and 2004 of 219 and 180 million gallons, respectively, and assuming a leakage rate of 50 million gallons per year, the necessary capacity without leakage from the pond is 269 MG for 2003 and 230 MG for 2004. The City could take the approach to maximize on the opportunity to dispose of treated effluent and dispose of as much of the effluent as possible. If at the end of the irrigation season, water still remained in the pond, it would be held as carry-over. During the subsequent filling season, the City would closely monitor levels in the reservoir and make a determination ifdischarge to the river is necessary. Because of the additional storage capacity in the reservoir, the possibility exists that the City could carry-over water from one season to the next, but could then use it to blend with irrigation water during the next season. Carry-over does not mandate that discharge to the river will be necessary, but it does make this occurrence more Iikely. Key steps that the City should take if this option is to be followed include: • Review NPDES permit for discharge requirements, • Implement operational improvements previously identified, ▪ Establish criteria for determining when discharge to the river will occur, and • Establish allowable growth rate of connections. 11 12/01/2004 17:56 FAX 2086343038 12/01/2004 15:28 FAX 2063239336 C , District apsesgad essitethe Ptojar t o i fora 20 year period 'g fromthe time period of time which maj' be 'ttatgc 1��0[ any longer - D. District agrees to provide its War to maaagi- !r igarion flows, to - . coordinate with the CIW.Pao ' 4i?tin$sr das, d5':' ai thedcl Herr..: `- • pipeline and its ..�..,t.,.,.,,ents in optimum operating co�'noa. ". 9. Cily t1bligmc_;, A. , The conditions p first being mat. and District and Association having acknowledged it gation to proceed with their part of Project and approval dim Facilities Plan bavmg been received by the City itom die DivisiCto of Environmental Quality. City agrees to pmvide us pan of Project Consm cnot. to provide heated effluent water at the mixing station upon completion of Project Construction, and to operate rbe mixing station. 8. The Project C..+w...4lr,...ao3n in fact having been completed, such triaged will be . . ' , . in the : amount of the tv's tgaggigon of =w ac. • lr be ., _. , , water . as to cr thed i on w .,.:1 ..gnat torxcrei 3 in .� , _, g • d4 rosin ., . , �„ irrieapoa warer� ant naQired • 1}� net view of . ,.+ 1 . ► , 1 og 3 . ,, en h` mental, tactors. exact mixture shall be - " �� • + • 1 time t0 time CITY OF MCCALL of acreage already comrnittad justifies proceeding with expenditures of the scope contemplated for Project Construcdon.t� H. Under no « I will qty. An roon or District be oblin to proceed w • -�� •;} � tioa Ta A_� st Dy owners o acres, prior to the Associatioat's , the City's g secured Naas g (including a provision for addressing cost overruns) to do all Project Construction, or prim to requisite rights -of -way and auction sites having been obtained. - C. Under no circumstances will City, Association; or District be obliged to proceed with Project Construction unless all water users desiring to construct as on-tlem stock watering system ming the.unmixed canal water pipeline (to �• which water such user is entitled) is raasonmb1y assured that a construction grant. on a ratio of 75% grant to 25% owner contribution, is cotnmitted and available to such water user. _ - , • . 8. District Oblkigism A. The conditions first being met. and City and Association having acknowledged d r obli tgstion to proceed with their part of Project Construction, District thatt these will be sine p availaolj with ,our water. B. tunes* 441c1 to me eaten is to severe Project Construction. i'nlfltct hniving, been completed. District canal water at the mixing station in = Of treated eginent at for prvoocuo! ha accord �,. .1 1.. BCCOII i witb o to orovide wl dr %%ti the atermaster. C. airs Plant and tiv District's W c in the t this of • It • w'- - 1/1',�' p tb - aroma of Caty's -}.' . -1 ism fact used iQ thc .. + . r of • creates =canon water: or ra pee -season or post -season application of . • .1 .1 .1 ., • AGREEMENT RESPECTOTO PROVTSION•AND D.ISTRiBU rxON • �_r... —V t ' 12/01/2004 17:57 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:29 FAX 2083239336 I II � �osvcc Agreement for such period of further years as they may then determine. This process may be initiated by City's sending a letter to Association, and if City chooses. to one or more individuei•lafd owners, inviting • negotiations. The process being iaitiated,.theonly obligation of the;pauties is: to explore openly in good faith whether an agreement can reached. with .: whom, and in what foam_ This Agreement th'4 meyhe.renewbd form many subsequent [Cant as may be each time $greed, or the patties, or some of them, or some or all (Ate members of one of them. inay negotiate some other arrangement, or Cry may make some entirety different lawful use of its treated effluent. E. The parties all acknow theist least five year's advance notice by each to the others of any desired change in tease arrangements is necessary in order that City can have the time to work our other arrangements and get any necessary 1P3A/DEQ pezmiis.- add soother patties can make replacement arrangements Oftheir own... . • • F . If at any time during the period of this Agreement.a member of the Association desires to ikteasitbe acreage receiving enriched irrigation water. such mbar may do so, that the deliver increaseWatemaster d volumes of water ermines diet the delivery pipeline has caPacft7 to such member without impairing its ability to deliver previously committed tt edto others. provided char no damage to the delivery facilities is' tt by such increased and'ptovided that water rights to support the use exist.. • - • G . Irrigators not receiving enriched iiiigadon water through the pipeline system may request to join the Association to receive such enriched imgation water upon approval of tbs DiMa%t•snd provided`thsslrthe Water piaster determines • • Mat the delivery '1ii su�nciertt#ipacity to�deliver increased volurnes of waster to such nn WithOut impacting its ability w _deftver pfeviouslp committed quantitiet oo ot%ci; iirriddelfiliaftio &image to:tl'ie deb -very' • facilities is tiyyscsch'u 'delivei> . and• rbtirderithat vaster- • • rights to smart the usecxi .a c' i s.. :: ai �:: i , .._ , :..s; .. : r a' • _... , .) , 11. Citv-Asaiataa to District. Valley anc� Water conservation"Dishnct and • • Association, The Conditions Precedent having been met, and approval of its Facilities Platy having been received by the City front the Division of Environmental Quality. CitY willfinpiEVAIniipt or to the Valley Soil and Water . ' . 4 District. for Association as . --. to meat actual obligations -' , -. . iree t�t Lotrsttttction, not to ---. , •' WU toward the cost of constmcnon .' acuities noof the mixing - .ti. brig limitation snau DC increased by any mteiest ear., on the state grant rece -. under DEQ Contract No. QCO2OSOO, and decreased by of S 1.00 per aaaum for of the twenty years contemplated life of this ., thus an of S20, as additional consideradon for the treated effluent, and decreased by any sum which City in fact returns to the State under such Contract upon demand having been made for such return. 12. Indemnities. A. City agrees to indemnify, hold harries and defend the Association. the District, and all signatories to User Agreemetus ("Inrimmair'*K") from any and all harm, liability, damage, expense or claim of injury ("Damages"}, together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, that result or arise (1) from the use and application of the-Qty's treated effluent (diluted and , •_ undiluted) forirrigation in. accordance with accepted agronomic -practices _ .. and (2) from the co . „Ip:+'on of the City's treated effluent (diluted and undiluted) by livestock. . addition, the City will also indemnify, hold AGREEMENT RESPECTING PROV[SION AND DISTRIBUTION page 4of6 ►.�-.-J !N....-. ring. 12/01/2004 17:58 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12,01/2004 15:29 FAX 2083239336 01 Lb8k)44 right At the end of such 20 year period continuation of use or cessation of use shall be as. provided in paragraph 10 D. above. `' 14. In the event of any dispute in the carrying out of this Agreement, the matter shall be submitted to alternative dispute resolution before it is taken to Court 15. This Agreement is governed by the law of Idaho. and Valley County, Idaho is the proper venue. 16. As a variety of permits are involved in this matter. at least some of which impose deadlines on the ccrmittee, all arties shall cooperate to provide as timely a performance as can be obtained, and shall in no event breach the obligation of the contact -i, - :,, - _... -, . . . .. - ..__ , _. ,. 17. Any rights and remedies stated' in ails A i eI1t att;'L�1]Yulat ve. ' _ - 18 , , The ect of any party to enfocc'Ttr frights at any' particular times or upon any parr occurrences shall norrecle'resort to those rights at any other time or with respect to any other occurs s, 'Any waiver of ally light must be done Ina ` : westing executed by the party to be'charged, with such waiver. mead interned .with no : . . fewer of different formalities and approvals than were attendant upon execution of this Agreement. 19. This Agent shall bind andinure to the benefit of the parties and their respective. - heirs, successors and assigns. Data: /921ElANIZ/fr.:1..- = = - 4,.. - - QTYofM„CALL-.•!-., by 1 Herald Noires, Chairman Director % ir■ er-r J- Ditch Pipeline Association,l: .. —" Guy R. Fairbrotber, Secretary AGREEMENT RESPECTING PROVISION AND DISTRIBUTION OF !ENRICHED IRRIGATYON WATER page 6 of 6 Printed Dscamber 19, 1996 - 0 12/01/2004 17:59 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15.30 FAX 2083239336 bzi ULU/ GL 3. In order to complete construction of the enriched irrigation water distribution system, User agrees to cooperate in the construction and completion of User's individual on -faun ex system with construction by the I -Lateral Ditch Pipeline 'Association, inc. as • ed and described in the Three-way Agreement. User hereby agrees to contribute ten percent (10%) of the cost. in cash or in -kind contributions, tor on -farm sprinkler system improvements to permit the Project Construction to be complete and operational prior to the availability of enriched irrigation water. 4. No less than five years prior to the expiration of the 20-year term hereof (and five years prior to each expiration of each of any extended periods), the City, the User, the Association and the several iaigators making use of enriched irrigation waxer or desiring to do so, stall sit down and discuss renewal of this Agreement for such period of a further years �ybe initlated by receiving g lettcrtoAs in and to or mac indivand owners wcr from the Project di on system inviting negotiations. The process being initiated. the only obligation of the patties is to explore opraiy in good faith whether an agreement can be reached, with whom. and in what form. This Agreement dins may be renewed for as many subsequent terms as may be each time agreed, or the parties. or some of them. or some or all of the members of one of them may negotiate some other arrangement. or City may make soil entirely different lawful use of its treated effluent. 3. User shall be permitted to withdraw the acreage committed on Exhibit A prior to the end of the 20-year term hereof if and only if (I) subsnnite acreage is made available for application of enriched irrigation water and the owner of that substitute 12+w11S executes a Water User and Supply Agreement of the same form and substance as dais Agreement. (ii) there is no cost to the City resulting from obtaining substitute acreage, and (iii) any subsdrute landowner a net have adequate irrigation water rights to peezmit use of eancfted irtigai on water containing nor to exceed thirty-three and one-third percour (33 1/3%) treated effluent as required by tbee Three-way Asument. 6. Cishall simply Oulapg the =ration sego adequate auantaupt of orooerly i' io !t 'i User's acres at •. • . •. L "conraininailot tit nett.�d 33- 3 pea . i i t treated to w,. i _ w1 16 6.e teaubeiganguplau applicable federal. stare anit • Iocal laws, rules and regnlstines. The . - : �:n t the 33-1r3�6 tepee is term m�atr� Ct�r' ...'�; , n �f �tty the tteatCd ,� eTfluenr Edward e and the amount o ' - _ • + . eel the tai�ctnrr may sole ^^c �ieSS t112n "ni .�]{` ati oe ieutag " Ttae term • t. L: s2r. in! K.7V� MiYi � 7 to . " .� ; f • , 7 thou= all �?ucante of • i •� •� H e ohs add tf�C 1 anon akt to treatednlr•nt to USk(S Ja exent autumn �o permit, or outside of me ire Oron 7. City agrees to indemnify. hold harmless and defend User from any and an harm, liability. damage, expense or claim of injury ('Damages")., together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, that result or arise (1) from the use and application of the City's treated effluent (diluad and undfllute l) for irrigation in accordance with accepted agronomic practices and (2) from the co oisumptiou of the Cny's treated effluent (dilated and undiluted) by livestock. la addition, the City will also indemnify, bold harmless mless and defend User from any and all Damages, together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, involving wafer quality damage or land and soil that result or arise from spills of the City's treated effluent (diluted and undiluted). For the avoidance of doubt. the parties intend that City's indemnifications shall include only Damages caused directly or indirecdy by the presence of City's treated effluent in the irrigation and stock water distributed in Project Operation, such as water quality problems, soil or crop contamination. crop or Iivestock rtiaPase or similar Damages caused by the preseaoe of viral, bacterial, and fungal organisms, process chemicals ar similar substances in the WATER USER ANO SUPPLY AGREEMENT - page 2 of 4 printed January 22. 1997 12/01/2004 18:01 FAX 2086343038 12/01/2004 15'31 FAX 2083239338 CITY OF MCCALL tg..4G�22 GG Qcanncnr system, contemplated by the Three-way Agreement must be operational by y Ire" , 19 9 , and al! necessary permits for the acuvities contemplated hereundershall have been obtained by the City. with the cooperation of User_ If the City has duly performed and completed its portion of the Project Construction the User shall be obligated to apply enriched iragauon water maunder as soon as the mixing and errfrbt-d irrigation water distribution portion of the Project Constructicm has been completed. 12. Other than the promises. conditions mad covenants contained herein. no additional. consideration. monetary or otherwise. shall be required of the City or the User under this ......� ..t. L3. In the event of any dispute in the saying out of this Agreement. the mama shall be submitted to alternative dispute resolution before it is taken to Court. 14. This Agreement is governed by the law of Idaho, and Valley County. Idaho is the proper vertex., 15, Any rights and remedies srazed in this Agreement are cumulative. 16. The neglect of any parry to enforce its rights at any particular times or upon any particular occurrences shaU notpreclnde resort to those rights at any other time or with respect to any other occurrences. Any waiver of any right mast be done in a wrmng executed by the party to be charged with such waiver, and executed with, ao fewer or different formgirlhs and approvals than were attendant upon execution of this Agreement. .,r,k TN WITNESS WHEREOF. the City and User have set their hands as of the 199%7 CMt OF l icCAL1_ /"7 USER By: w Mayor _ .. WATER USER AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT . printed January 22. 1997 page 4 of 4 1 1 1 12/01/2004 18:00 FAX 2086343038 12f01/20O4 1b',30 FAX 2063208336 CITY OF MCCALL elto Vice City's treated effluent. These indemnifications shai1 not extend to or include (I) Damages to persons and real and personal property caused solely by the hydraulic action of escaped water from the discs button system, =eh us ditch, crop or road washouts. field erosion or structural. Damages to improvements, nor (2) Damages arising from problems User may ercaused directly or ind recdy by matter in the carts] water ce In marketing corps or livestock having contact with treated effluent leer {3) ase supplied to the mixing station. User agrees to provide notice to City. as psuulitly as reasonably possible, of unusual or uncontrolled releases of war containing City's treated effluent that a User knows or suspects could give rise to a claim- A User shall also give prompt nodes to City of say third party claims asserted against User, which claims are reasonably believed to be subject to the teams of this provision. /ler.._,.., ag Cityd U each agrees toe . hold harmlessazu mast and fro , and all harm, 17 . damage, expense or ("amages") it. - ..-, wlth !''iTSintDor in . • e of Pro,} rs chip ass or agents. S. User acba that at C;er de .• �.. the Use - + 0r nind. he— hanunder for spolieetk'on of a cm of us at ouantmes Re uSer woe'' • ► !..,; v a.. r ' .. c . to User tt urige,pas season- Lieu 1 Ave Me =Mix treated . ., ..... _ . � .. menu in�ca 1. .,1 ,_ � r+sl_uses to such peat' red -1: �` ,, to se ;- wiain accepted �:� !. . ► .I: I , ' �ry (j chains f, �stnota season ncumally ���atrca .,.. :.. USei t be .. ,� -• ter pup Y di ' tamed efih cgu 'Users kenos commons su h as wet►. �lan ao= cropping and harvesting ., . 6, unsa ona.1 fteezas�cxcesst've • Sipoil w_C y�,r conceit ens, w as truces melcure events. not sue application, 9- City shall rat DEQ to provide to User. ar Usees desigaee . regular summaries of test results for 1) City's treated a inem as delivered at the ma" lag station and 2) concentration levels of treated effluent in the treated e:ffluenticrral water mixture to be disted through the iorigation system. In the event that User notifies City that DEQ has faded to do so, City shall Amish to User copies of test results available to City. Upon notification to City of anv.vielacion of the treated diluent quality standards with aspect to viral, bacmri4 and fongai eTganisms process rh.nwa s or similar snbsnces or of any violation of approved dilunoa radon, Caty shall use beast efforts to correct such non-confo=ance within 48 hours- Should City fad to make such corrections within 48 hours. City shall cease raising treated effluent with I Ditch canal water and shall activate the bypass system to supply Liu -mixed canal water to the irrigation system until such time as such corrections are made. If at any time during the rant adds Agreement such violations persist over a continuous period of 60 days. User may termitiate this � A`greemctu 10. This Agreement shall be binding upon the hens. successors, and assigns of the User and Cittyy and then covenants erettauue d Kenya shall nun with the fated of User during the tttmberra£ . up to and Meloding �./'%; 2O /at which time this Agreement and the trams hereof shall tenet absolutely and shall cease to encumber or other ni a affect the user's lands mains a written extension hereof is duly executed and recorded by the then owtaer of the subject lands and City. try- and User agree to execute for recording by either party a written memorandwa of this Agreement ar the request of either User or City. 11. As a condition precedent to User's obligarion to apply enriched irrigation water hereunder. the Project Construction. including but not limited to the City's nce ocher of injury e attorneys' fees/ Bch as to Damages that by reason of neg ii nce or willful acts of WATER USER AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT - printeed January 22. 1997 pager 3 of 4 12/01/2004 17:59 FAX 2086343038 12/01/2004 15:20 FAX 2083239336 CITY OF MCCALL I�01 t 9u L c WATER USER AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT The City of McCall Idaho ("Cary") whose address is P. O. Box 986. McCall. 83638-0986 and Harry Bettis ("User") whose address is 10775 Sucker Creek Road, Payette. Idaho. 8366I hereby enter into this Water User and Supply A,grcement (the "Agreement") 3s of January _. 1997. RECITALS. A. The City, the J-Ditch Pipeline Association, Inc. an Idaho non -prof t corporation and the Lake Irrigation District, an !dab° statutory irrigation district have enured into an " ent Respecting Prevision of 'Treated Effluent and Canal Water to Nfixiiig Station. M� and Distribution of Enriched Ittigarioa Water for Irrigation Purposes" (the "Three-way Agreement") to construct, operate and a sovaie a mixing and distribution system for dilution and application of the Caty's created effluent water to a=iculmral lands in Valley County. Idab.o B. The purpose of the Thu .gray Agreement is to permit the City to dispose of its created effluent in a manner that fully complies with regulations and requirements of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality ("DEQ") and any other regulatary agouties having Jui sdicnorn over said disposal, while at the same time providing enriched water for irrigation and fertilization of agricultural lands located in Valley County, Idaho such as those of User. C. City will benefit from Users appiicatitoa to User's lands of the dilute treated effluent because land application at the intended rates has been determined co be a safe means of disposing of the treated effluent in cam] imam with DEQ's de fay prohibitions of Cuy's phosphorus discharge into the North Fork of the Payette River. D. l ser has determined that 'User will benefit from the application of treated effluent to User's lands ibr the 20-year term described bcrcinbelow because the improved distribution and application system constructed in part with a 51.85 million grant obtained by the City will increase irrigation efficiency. provide crop nutrients and proraete water conservation. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the muni l promises herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration, City and User agree as follows: 1, The above recitals are incorporated herein and made a pact of this Agreement 2. User mere comics tslY treated e<�su tcto t of 1(6.d acres owned or contra e_r, Wluc and is r dcscrl an art A attaetyi hereto and iacorporat rem. User hereby warrants and represents that User has full right and authonty to commit and hereby does commit said ]cads to viliczion of treated effluent at agronomic rates and in accnrdanee with the terms and couadons of this Agreement and the Three-way Agreement for a period of 20 years. The 20-year application period shall commence on the date the first intutioa.sasso gets in which the construction obligations of die Associanon, as provided in the Three-way Agreement. and of the User. as provided berein, have been completed and rye 1-Ditch dismbution system is operational. A copy of the Theft -way A _-.......c is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. and capitalized terms herein shall have the same definitions as those in the Three-way ant ruler defined otherwise in the Agreement. The eprnmencement date shall not be deferred if the City has not completed its obligations to construct irs t atment system and mixing station unless all Lturs and the Associatica cvnsenE in writing to such deferral or ❑t11csx the Association has also not completed its com-uvccion obligations. ORIGINAL WATER USER AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT - page 1 of 4- printed January 22. 1997 12/01/2004 17:58 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:29 FAX 2083239338 1gP017VCG harmless and defend Indemnitees from any and all Dania g'. together, with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. involving water quality damage or land and soil contamination that result or arise from spills of the City's treated effluent (diluted and undiluted). Far the avoidance. of. doubt, the porters intend that City's indemnifications shall include only damages caused direedy or indirectly by the presence of City's treated effluent in the." irrigation and sto&water distributed in Project Operation, such as water %lality probletm. soil or crop contereinarion, aw or livestock disease and similar damages caused by the presence of viralbacterial. and fungal prosy dr.-meals or similar substances 1n the CI ty s treated 'ors shall not extend to or include (1)� to persons and real and personal property caused y • the hY action of escaped water from tie distribution system, ; i .4' as ditch, crop or road washouts, field erosion or structural -damages to timpcavements, nor (2) arising from problems users may experience nit maricedng crops or having contact with treated effluent, nor (3) damages caused dirncdy or indirectly by matter in the canaLwater supplied to the milting station. _ _ H . The Indemnitees hereunder agree to provide notice to City, as promptly as reasonably possible, of unusual or uncontrolled releases of water containing City's treated effluent that an Indemnitee-]mows or suspects could give rise to a claim. An Itidernaitee shall also give prompt notice to City of any third party claims asserted against Indemnitees or any of them, which claims are reasonably believed tc be subject to the terms of this parovis on.. C. City and District each agree to indemnify, hold hornless and defend the other against and from any and all hum, liability, damage, expense or claim of injury ("Damages"), together with costs and reasonable- attorneys' fees, each as to Damaacthattleaultor ache moue course of Project Operation by reason of ecgII ece, • ' �xTof i6 rmployoa or agents. District agrees to i���+r+fy, , t �� r•�� �� and defend the City against and from any and all harm, liability'. damage, expense or claim of injuty ("Damages"), together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, that result or arise from hydraiili.c action of escaped water fioin the distribution system, such as ditch, crop or road washouts, field erosion or structural damages to impovements, or Damages caused directly or indirectly bar matter In the canal water supplied to the mixing station City and District shall each maintain in force and effect general liability insurance with combined single limits of not less than 31.000,000 under which the other Is n amed as an additional named instated. 13. Definition of "User Aereementa" &used above. User Agreement means an agreement between City and a landowner, in which a landowner agrees: to commit a stated amount of acreage to the use of enriched irrigation water, and to do so far 20 years; and which a, , ,.. t does permit withdrawal of acreage prior to the end of such 20 years if substitute acreage is made available under a User A,,..... �.t and at no cost to the City. Associatitoti will assist in funding substitine acreage. If the Association is unable to obtain User Agreements respecting the serge set out in paragraph 7 above oat or before January 10, 1997. the City shall have the right to declare this Agreement of no further forte and effect, which deadlhue may be extended from time to rime at the election of the pry until Ads respecting such number of acres are secured, or City elects to go no further, whichever first occurs. Nothing in this Agreement is an assignment, abandonment, change in place of use, or wasting by City of any water or water AGREEMENT RESPECTING PROVSION AND DISTRIBUTION pie S of 6 OF Q4R1CHE3 IItRIGA?ION WATER Printed December 19. 1996 A 015 utt tr plc et wig atiitine and in accord with law for fergiuntio o users t!u su>aw .du,caree to khv r effiii i to D. DuringsMiProject rb ti e,sta&fa ai:cwd with Statearid Federal mpg o� iFistf later to be-' �faj"aloai=raue' land' appl cation E. :If y ar D 'that the other's repro ent ve is not cooperaiiag appropriately in the management of this relawwaship, and the matter cannot be resolved by contacts between the District President and the City Manager. the part feeling aggrieved shall provide notice to the other's governing body. and a joint meeting of the two gavernning bodies shall be held to discuss the matter fully. ands„ „ • - 'orthe ' ,.. • reach � t tit ere ct eti�u�eat st~aii 1.1 � ! natoe at Ciry strait undue to °a �.��°'i° ___ftsfor angel t8 r. cnndiiops of Staub a �h�as $e[t-�ba(t . i' . - • that such • . i 11 shall join in the „re to pm ' . - — is ,_ ,i,„ - ' 1,.,.,•. i. . of • - i• '•• �� •�-I •- • „.f .� -. ... lit 12/01/2004 17:56 FAX 2086343038 12/01/2044 15128 FAX 2083239336 CITY OF MCCALL be • • K1 1 11 1 vt• • an Diu 1 - and F . xn the ewer that 11 a 1••a 1 / 1 f.. 11•l _�1�. 11.1 .• .I.' ClailVar 'I1 1 •,.1 .� .. ., . • / 11 10. A. . �� p fix& being met, and City end District having ti obligetion, A. d with MOP , Coasaucdon, Association apnea, vide its. Part j • ._ • . Construction. The Project , in fan baying been coioplated. ._... . to - - 'mod . . SMOG ttpd(n • 1 :c;�.x�;.' •. �11 .' ..•,1 .:4., , . 8t ��{� 1� - t .. .,1 %.,. ��y1 Y. UMW 1 -• • 1 11 � 1 -. � ] .. ✓' , �l I i i►i`����^•�'�'• � ' ��� -- 4.1 then w111 bill downs ea 1 which to deliver this b�aaa tt° faadowners cierthe team of this Ag/�n�a ent and any extension thereof. and to rise a that there will be {�g-]L1 enough�Wwhchto��the -.1, . , , .11 ���w7. 50 tell, to accept au _4' t Mad -1 r 1 I - • 1 ., . _ . 1 lit{ Cut;ent vrwfllpw#ltll' UUas rran. 111 Irl !1'•1r 111•' 1•• 1� .a . """ 1 l el - a l az ctbCr `' ' 1 11 -I 1 • • I/A pipeline Urination water. to ftessp4 con tons. B.Association to./ the 1 1 •.... nor use fctCyv 11 .„1 utt�;er ein �!i! + owe, ows under some pressure. and i ► subject to valves and shut -oil. and thus to water hammer effects: plans and specifications for such construction shalt be submitted to elty for review and comment by the City Engineer and such consultants as such ginger may d,,,�.•...LL. C. Association will obtain execution of in r-duai User • 1 -*Ilk ono waft cut n / 11 ... oo1f�. acresq,as o ttraeQ c • r • 411 the s tP f • , dje Pr�oiect for :team ZO Y D�°d ggimur"iVromaac: time the enric�trr nation water nip g is acixvate . D. No less than Ave years prior to the expiration of that period (and five years . prior to eachexpiztttion of each of any,extended periods). City and: -... Association and the: several irrigators making use of enriched irrigation - water or desiring to do so, shall sit down and discuss renewal of this . •1111■ AGREEMENT RESPECTING PROVISION AND DIs'TRIBUTION nF TIMUV% .nil,,...,.-- 0d3vt4 12/01/2004 17 : 55 FAX 2086343038 36 12/41/2004 15:27 FAX 2 CITY OF MCCALL AGREEMENT RESPECTING PROVISION OP TREATED EFFLUENT AND CANAL WATER TO MIXING STATION, MIXING. AND DISTRIBUTION OF ENRICHED IRRIGATION WATER FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES This Agreement is made December 19, 1996 by and•betweeo the City of McCall, Idaho, called "City" in the rest of this Agreement, the J- Ditch Pipelioa-Association. Inc. an Idaho non-profit corporation acting on behalfof its -present and futuremembers, called oc "Assiation" in the rest of this As. and the Lake irrigation District, an Idaho statutory irrigation district, called "District" in the rest of this Agreement. Background City and the Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District together own and operate and m�aiutaut a Wastewater collection systen and efflucut meanoent facility which gives rise to a volume of treated effluent which is suitable for mixing with irrigation canal water to created enriched irrigation water for irrigation and fertilization of lands. Such treated effluent has value. 4'. - mommil 2. District is an Idaho irrigation district which owns various stored water rights in elfl:1::drainages flowing to Long Valley, Valley County, Idaho, and furnishes irrigation water currently through the J-Lateral Ditch, among others. 3. City proposes to build a pipeline to, and a mixing station at, the confluence of the cpipet= and the J Literal Duch. At this site canal water and treated effluent will be �! mixed to aeatc enz khed itrigaaon water. 4. District proposes to make canal water (whether delivered by canal or by pipe) ��a.+• available for the mixing station; District has no obligadon to provide associated 4"`"1 Project Construction. • -,�'./ 5. Association proposes to build lrnigadoti w ter'hies, tine far 3Ji ►•� ioti of canal water to the vicinity of certain users' tands, and anode' r froeni ilte canal to the muting station, and fora the mixing station to the viciaity_ofitsnaeiizher iuigaxo ' lands, in order that those member inio ''?us apply YIv: ail hed'ir gatioe water to member inigataes' lands. JCssociaoan proposes as welt to •itpiabe: the-J-i.ateral Ditch with a pipeline, and to increase the amount of stored water available to Lake Irrigation District for other puirposea. by cdnsecviag watanchrougftnf best management practices. Association areanbess shall install pt'inkler irrigation systems, and certain of them shall install stock watering systems, and anticipate doing so with matching grants of 90% and 75% respectively. 6. The 'construction of a treated effluent pipeline to the mixing station, the construction of worts to dirnet canal water to the mixing station, the connection of the mixing station, and the constnxrion of downstream pipelines to users' properties, are jointly called "Project Consun ctioa " in the rest of this Agreement; and the supply of geed effluent tad canal water to the mixing station, the mixing of canal water and treated effluent into enriched irrigation water, and the distribution by the Association and by the Lake Irrigation District of the enriched irrigation water and the canal water, are jointly called "Project Operation" in the rest of this Agreement. Such Project Construction and Project Operation are together called the 'Project" in the rest of this Agreement The parties understand that unless all parts of the Project Construction are in place and functioning, the Project Operation will fail. 7. Conditions Precedent. A. The ultimate Agnminenta for the Proiect Oocratic)n tanngja Marc vears.ar'eri„Gty and District will t nee to detetmrne when the amount AGREEMa1TRESPECttNG.PROVISION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ENRICHED IRRIGA'nrnrr d,. • 12/01/2004 17:54 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:27 FAX 2083235335 would limit the acreage that could be irrigated. The following initial steps should be taken to evaluate this option. • Evaluate DEQ position on amending the consent order to allow lower dilution rates, but rates higher than 1:1 and the regulatory restrictions on such an approach. • Determine landowner position on lowering dilution rates. Conduct meeting with JDPAI to discuss. Based on the responses of these entities, the City can determine if this option is worth pursuing. Reduce plant flows (1&1 and coiservation). These have been ongoing programs for the City and the results of such programs have the potential to decrease flows at the treatment plant. Continued efforts in these regards will decrease the total quantity of effluent that has to be disposed of. It is difficult to quantify the impact of these efforts on wastewater quantities. The City should continue to pursue these programs to reduce the flows received at the plant which in turn will decrease the required volumes of effluent that must be disposed of. Secure more land for irrigation disposal (through purchase or agreement). Increasing the total acreage of land that is being irrigated with blended effluent would also provide additional disposal capacity for the City's treated effluent. This process would involve identifying potential landowners whose property could be added to the system without requiring major changes to the delivery and distribution systems. We recommend that the City take the following actions if this alternative is to be further pursued. • Schedule a meeting with i'DPAI and the Irrigation District and evaluate potential properties to add to the system. • Evaluate potential capital improvements that would be needed for the identified properties. • Review three --way and two-way agreements and identify parties responsibilities for providing irrigated acreage. • Contact potential landowners about being added to the system_ After these initial evaluations, the City can determine if this option should be pursued. Acquisition and permitting of a site for slow -rate land application to supplement JDPAI lands/Acquisition and permitting of a site for high -rate land application or a snow fluent system to supplement JDPAI Bands. Both of these options are centered on providing a supplemental disposal site that could be used to dispose of the treated effluent. Either of these options would require that additional lands be identified, agreements reached, permits received, and improvements constructed. This alternative 10 12/01/2004 17:53 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:26 FAX 2083239336 C 009 1Q 09/022 To maximize the amount of effluent pumped to the mixing station for irrigation at a blended rate of 3:1, we recommend the following actions: • Close coordination between the City staff and the water master. In the past, it has been typical that the irrigation season starts before the pump station is brought on-line. City staff should coordinate with water master so that the pump station can be brought on-line as soon as possible. Reschedule future pond leakage testing so that it is finished before the start of the irrigation season. Public Works department should be aware of importance of keeping the pump station operational. Problems or alarm conditions at the pump station or mixing station should be a priority. • Perform checks on flow meters using pressure gauges, pump curves, and Irrigation District data to verify accuracy and dilution rate. Through these actions, the total quantity of treated effluent that can be disposed of can be significantly increased compared to the historic values. Increases of 50+ million gallons per year can be identified from the brief operating history of the facility. Pre/Post-irrigation season 1:1 application. This concept was first considered by the City over 24 months ago and was contemplated even earlier at the time the two-way and three-way agreements were executed. Nearly two years ago, a process was begun to amend the Consent Order to allow for the application of unblended effluent before or after the irrigation season as allowed by the two-way and three-way agreements. One of the first steps in this process was to determine the TDPAI members initial position and feelings on the topic. At that time, a positive response was received from the landowners to the concept. From that point, a process was begun with DEQ to amend the Consent Order. Included in the table below, is a summary of the landowner contacts that were made by NRCS in the first stages for considering this option to amend the Consent Order. The table also identifies the number of acres that are irrigated with blended effluent and the available acres for unblended effluent application. Finally, the table identifies the landowner position on the concept. As can be seen from the table, only one landowner objected to the concept at the time these investigations were conducted. Recently, it has become evident that some of the irrigators may have changed their mind or their position. Regardless, the current position of the irrigators in regards to the use of unblended treated effluent must be obtained before this option can be considered further. 8 12/01/2004 17:52 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:25 FAX 2083239336 L0007V« time in order to maximize the quantity of blended effluent delivered to the agricultural lands. If it is found that irrigation rights are a limiting factor on the land that is currently being _ irrigated, it may be wise to see if additional water rights can be obtained, or transfers or leases executed that would allow for additional application of blended effluent. While it may be considered undesirable, the City has the ability to discharge effluent flows to the North Fork of the Payette River. This option provides the City with a great deal of flexibility regarding capacity, but it is understood that this is not a desired alternative. However, given the current circumstance of lower than anticipated water usage on the 3DPAI lands, discharge to the river becomes more likely, regardless of changes in effluent quantities. RECOMMENDATIONS/ACTION ITEMS Discussed in the following paragraphs are recommendations and actions for each of the various items previously presented regarding treatment and disposal capacity. This discussion is intended to provide you with a number of alternatives to the problem you now face and to provide a better understanding of why the system is at or near capacity at the current time as well as options that the City has to mitigate against the potential of a river discharge. Evaluate existing irrigated lands. It is clear that the existing irrigated lands are not using adequate irrigation water to allow for the anticipated 494 million gallons of effluent disposal. Key issues or questions that the City should have answered include: • What is the total acreage being irrigated? • How much water is being used for irrigation? To what lands and at what rates is the water being applied? • Why aren't the irrigators using the NRCS numbers (23.76") for crop utilization? • What are the contractual obligations of the parties to the two-way and three-way agreements? In order to receive answers to these questions, we would recommend that the City take the following actions: • Review the existing two-way and three-way agreements with counsel. Determine the contractual obligations of the parties to the agreements and the City's obligations. Arrange for a meeting with the NRCS to review their input on crop use requirements. • Arrange for a meeting with JDPAI to identify actual acreage under irrigation and actual irrigation rates and patterns. Consider additional monitoring of use or installation of flow meters at individual farms in order to collect data on actual use. Evaluate potential to provide additional water rights, transfers, or leases to increase the total quantity of water (and effluent) applied to the existing acreage. 6 12/01/2004 17:51 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:25 FAX 2083239336 E i 005wAvurv« aoo 275 229 Requfrsd etorag. Volume 100-Day ration season •N 11em d.O OReduoed V! 'B0 / 91 161 /'92 '921'93 bs / 9l '64 / 96 130 /97 The potential for the reservoir storage capacity to be exceeded has always been a reality _ and this fact has been recognized by all of the involved parties. It has always been understood that land application in Valley County could potentially be limited by environmental conditions such as late spring rains or other factors that could limit the amount of blended effluent that could be applied to agricultural lands. Recognizing this reality, an NPDES permit was obtained that would allow river discharge to occur under certain circumstances and conditions. During the entire permitting and planning process for the project, it has never been a question of "if a river discharge will occur", but rather a question of "when will a river discharge occur" An attempt to now define a system_ -- capacity that does not include the option of river discharge is simply not possible because of the environmental factors that can control the quantity of irrigation water applied to the land. Since the reservoir has been placed into operation, it has been shown that the needed 1 storage has been less than what would have been expected based on the historical data provided in the previous graph. However, while all of the effluent has been applied to agricultural land each season, the rate at which effluent has been delivered to the irrigators has raised some concern regarding systenn capacity. CAPACITY ISSUES The last three years of operation have shown that the limiting factor for increased capacity of the treatment system is the differential between the quantity of treated effluent that was planned to be applied to the JDPAI Iands and the quantity that is 4 12/01/2004 17:50 FAX 2086343038 CITY OF MCCALL 12/01/2004 15:24 FAX 2083239338 a0031 . 4500 4000 3500 - 3000 lit 2500 a 2000 ur 1500 --.._ --. 1000 - 500 0 5113 6/2 250,000,000 EFFLUENT FLOWS TO MIXING STATION • + Li ititeir2S614,6 ° • • • A e + 1in z c aa- 200,000,000 • 2 /50,000,000 r = 0 u, ▪ 100,000, 000 W 0 z 50,000,000 - ii 0. 8/22 7/12 8/1 DAWN ONTH 1 RO, UUU, UUU 218,948,000 YEAR _ A 8/21 9/10 9/30 179, 839, 000 a 2002 • 2003 mi 2004 ❑ 2002 ■ 2003 ■ 2004 For each year presented, the total effluent delivered is a combination of the treated effluent stored in the pond during the winter season plus additional flows that are generated during the summer. 2 PROPOSED SEWERAGE MASTER PLAN STUDY -CITY OF MCCALL, HOLLADAY ENGINEERING COMPANY, HECO PROJECT NO. ML042003, April 21, 2004 SUMMARY 1. Subject: Sewerage Facilities — Collection, mains, trunk lines, pumping stations, force mains 2. Scope of Study: City's collection facilities, existing and needed, per comprehensive plan 3. Functions: 3A. Inventory and capacity of existing facilities 3B. Projected development agenda including locations, sizes, quantities, priorities 3C. Projected repair and reconstruction agenda; with priorities 4. Scope of Work: 4A. Display graphic information on base map prepared from data supplied by City 4B. Project future additions based on present and build -out condition per comprehensive plan 4C. Determine general condition, remaining life, and capacities of existing principal facilities 4D. Determine capacity needs and probable locations of needed new facilities (lines & lift stations) 4E. Determine upgrade or expansion needs of existing facilities 4F. Prepare list of needed repairs and upgrades with item probable cost and item priority 4G. Prepare list of future expansion needs with item probable cost and item priority 4H. Key lists to map 4 I. Prepare capital improvements plan for repairs, replacements and expansions, based on demographic projections supplied by City 4J. Address CMOM requirements for City 5. Probable Cost of Study: $90,000 CITY OF McCALL MONTHLY CONSOLIDATED DEPARTMENT REPORT Items noted in red indicate that item will be removed from the next Department Report unless otherwise requested. 9-29-03 1-30-04 Pre 6-30-03 6-02-04 11-05-04 Pre 6-30-03 Pre 6-30-03 MONTH: AS of DATE: Janua 7, 2005 031100 - Pine- Wooley Connector 061600 Airport Sewer — Lift Station Krahn Lane 062800 Holiday Express Review utilities 081600 Bertram (Pancake House) Development 122000 0, W River Ranch Development Review and Water Modelling 042301 Assist SAIC With Comp Plan Amend 101401 McCall R.V. (Glenveigh) Resort Review Developing as funds allow Discussed options with BK. Awaiting further authorization. Construction underway by developer, drainage plans discussed with Kim Allen. Drainage review to be complete upon final construction using as -built information. Meeting held with developer's engineer regarding drainage. Alternatives regarding drainage improvements were presented to developer's Engineer. Awaiting developer's decision/action regarding drainage improvements to be installed. Met with developer's engineer to discuss water modeling of the proposed distribution network. Received preliminary plat application. Preliminary plat reviewed and recommendations forwarded to City Manager. Copy of review letter to City Manager regarding comments to be addressed by developer's engineer. Prepared revised subdivision and development ordinances. Submitted to staff for review and action Reviewed plans for utilities. Completed drainage review. Awaiting response from developer, engineer. Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering 1-07-05 1-07-05 11-05-04 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 10-01-04 12-08-04 2-27-04 12-08-04 3-31-04 1-07-05 Stephen Group Vacation Homes- Greystone Development 111403 II1 Reduction Project — Mission to Mather 111603 Subdivision Review, Prior Owen Property, Bob Hunt 121303 0, D STEP Sewer Cost Analysis and Design 122103 Aspen Ridge LID Segregation, 0 & P2 011104 Council Meetings 015404 Sludge Removal 122303-JC Storage Tank Funding, Judicial Confirmation 020804 Lift Station No. 7 Upgrade 020904 Brundage Drive Sewer Upgrade 122303-FD, FDCA Water Tank Drain/Fill Line Design 031604 Payette Grand Hotel Infrastructure Review 031704 Aspen reviewed and signed. Awaiting phase II submittals and fmal plat. Cost estimate for proposed sewer Engineering improvements in progress. Estimate to be finalized upon completed agreement with Chad Olsen for remaining project. Awaited submittal from developer's Engineering engineer to finalize review of lift station design. Submittal never received or sent by developer's engineer. Comments to be forwarded to City. DEQ review returned and project rejected Engineering due to maintenance responsibility issue. DEQ requiring Public Works to maintain system. Public Works asserts that a private contractor is to maintain the system. Negotiations to start with the DEQ. Segregation analysis complete for phase Engineering II Aspen Ridge. Attended Council Meetings. Engineering Issue of funding discussed with City. Engineering Meeting scheduled to discuss proceeding with project. Reviewed new cost submittal from Payette Lake Water and Sewer District engineer for the proposed project. Awaiting further authorization to proceed. _ Complete Engineering Prepared moratorium recommendation and map. Prepared initial budgets for lift station rehabilitation for Public Works. Awaiting further authorization to proceed with upgrade design. Prepared initial budgets for Public Works. Postponement of project construction until Spring due to additional DEQ, State Revolving Loan Fund contractual requirements. Plans and specification adjustments in progress to meet additional DEQ requirements. Met with Developers to discuss preliminary concept of Hotel proposed at current Yacht Club site. Awaiting submittal for review. Design in progress. Design issues to be Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering 9-9-04 10-01-04 11-05-04 12-08-04 11-05-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 12-08-04 11-05-04 11-05-04 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 080304 Treasure Communities Development 082004 Lick Creek Connector: Engineering Support 082304 Aspen Ridge PRV #2 Design 090404 Fir Street Utility Extension Review 060504 Lift Station #7 Moratorium 091204 Hopkins and Fields Development Review 091804 Timberlost IV Easement Acquisition 101004 Michael Goldman Development Review 101404 Benad Development (Greystone Village) Review 101804 Bret Walker Development Review 111604 Marina Development Review 111704 Scott Finley Development Review 111804 Rob Collins Commercial Site Director, and Developer's Engineer addressing water pressure and fire flow available at the site. Reviewed preliminary construction plans and forwarded review letter to City. Met with Developer and Developer's Engineering engineer prior to pre -application meeting to discuss engineering issues and attended pre -application meeting in McCall on 8/20/04. Discussed timing and impacts to road Engineering construction of proposed development with the Public Works Director, City Manager, and Aspen Ridge Development Group. Received purchase order to proceed with Engineering design from Public Works. Received calls from Developer requesting Engineering. will -serve letter. Can not provide due to wastewater treatment/disposal system capacity in question. Drafted recommendation to City Engineering regarding lift station #7 moratorium. Outlined and defined service area of the lift station. Copies of moratorium map prepared. Preliminary plat application reviewed and Engineering to be forwarded to City 1-7-05. Pre - application meeting held with development group. Will await response to review from developer and the City. Assisted in draft of easement agreement. Prepared exhibits to easement agreement including legal description and plot of proposed easement. Pre -application meeting completed. Awaiting application submittal for review. Pre -application meeting held at City Hall. Awaiting submittal for review. Pre -application meeting held at City Hall. Awaiting submittal for review. Pre -application meeting held at City Hall. Awaiting submittal for review. Reviewed annexation proposal and drafted review letter to be forwarded to City 1-7-15. Prepared preliminary investigation of off - site stormwater detention at developer's Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 Development Review 111904 Rob Collins Auto Body Site Review 120904 Mountain Meadows Development Review 121004 Wastewater System Total Flow Measurements engineer's request. Review to be forwarded to City 1-7-05. Pre -application meeting held at City Hall. Awaiting submittal for review. Completed review of preliminary plat submittal. Review letter to be forwarded to the City 1-7-05. Tracking down information/costs for installation of flow meters to measure wastewater flows contributed by the City to the wastewater treatment facility. Meeting scheduled for week of 1-13-05 with Public Works. Engineering Engineering Engineering 6-02-04 1-07-05 1-07-04 12-08-04 11-05-04 12-08-04 8-4-04 1-07-05 Ridge Water Booster Station Design 051304 C Lake Street Regional Stormwater Treatment Probable Costs 062004 Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Analysis 070104 Wastewater Effluent Discharge Diffuser 070204 Candlewood Condominiums Development Review 071004 Pine Meadows Condominiums 071804 Wildwood Condominium Development Review 072004 Engineering Support, Sale of LID Parcels 072804 Timbercrest Subdivision discussed with Public Works Director. Preliminary analysis and probable costs Engineering associated with an East Lake Street regional stormwater treatment unit prepared and summary forwarded to LK. Ongoing discussion regarding capacity issues with City Manager and calls received from Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District. Meeting scheduled for 1/13/05 with City Council and City Manager. Reviewed recent and committed City Growth regarding impact on wastewater treatment and J-Ditch system. Completed review of City improvements and repair needs to sewer system. Presentation to Council completed 12/2/04. Verification of growth analysis in progress in coordination with City Grant Writer/P&Z. Easement checks completed for effluent diffuser discharge location and information forwarded to Public Works Director. Private deck constructed over the existing diffuser pipe, limiting access to the pipe. Title company contacted and information obtained. Exact location verification of diffuser in progress. If emergency discharge to River is needed, this will be critical. Meeting held at project site and at Legion Hall to discuss outstanding items for final plat signature. Items have been addressed and agreement drafted for several remaining items. Final plat signed. Awaiting submittal of easements and solution to drainage issues on site prior to allowance of building permits for units to be constructed next summer. Completed review of private lift station design. Engineering comments addressed for the proposed development. Site visit with Public Works Director. Requested water line testing results from Contractor. Awaiting final inspection results from Public Works prior to signature of final plat. Received copy of proposed agreement with Silvertip, L.L.C. Reviewed proposed agreement and forwarded recommendations to the City Manager. Additional water modeling completed and forwarded to City Manager, Public Works Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering 11-05-04 1-07-05 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 12-08-04 6-30-03 6-30-03 1-07-05 1-07-05 101501 Aspen Ridge Development Review 051802 Whitetail Development 060202 Four Corners Project 050402 Mapping 042003 Sewer Collection System Master Planning 050103 (0, A) Pressure Reducing Valve Design 061103 Water System Vulnerability Assessment 061703A City Park Grading Plan 081103 Broken Ridge Subdivision (Ray Alford) Review 111303 Review Submitted LID segregation analysis as exhibits to ordinance. Signed final plat of phase II. Meeting with Developer, Developer's Attorney and Engineer, Public Works, and City Manager held on December 16. Review of preliminary plat application in progress. Completed water model of phase IA of proposed Development. Water modeling of additional phases in progress. Developer meeting scheduled for January 14 to discuss water system requirements. ITD has represented they will be ready to bid the project in late winter/early spring. Meetings and detail information discussed with Public Works. Meeting scheduled in February with Public Works to outline tasks leading to completion of utility mapping. Data collection in progress for mapping by Public Works, but postponed due to winter conditions until spring. Ongoing discussions with City Manager regarding 1 base mapping. Summarized recent City projects for • Engineering sewer rehabilitation and needed improvements. Rough map generated for identified repairs and needs. Project planning in progress to be implemented in the Spring. Internal piping to be painted in Spring Engineering (only remaining punch list item). As - built drawings to be finalized and sent to DEQ and Public Works. Started review of vulnerability of the City's water distribution system regarding the EPA Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act. Discussed several criteria with City Manager and will prepare self -assessment to discuss with Public Works. Discussed with Public Works Director and City Planner. Awaiting direction from City Manager or Rec. Director Final plat filed with the County without engineering signature and approval by developer. Awaiting direction from City Manager regarding identified issue. Bond submitted to City and final plat Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 Development Review 111904 Rob Collins Auto Body Site Review 120904 Mountain Meadows Development Review 121004 Wastewater System Total Flow Measurements engineer's request. Review to be forwarded to City 1-7-05. Pre -application meeting held at City Hall. Awaiting submittal for review. Completed review of preliminary plat submittal. Review letter to be forwarded to the City 1-7-05. Tracking down information/costs for installation of flow meters to measure wastewater flows contributed by the City to the wastewater treatment facility. Meeting scheduled for week of 1-13-05 with Public Works. Engineering Engineering Engineering 6-02-04 1-07-05 1-07-04 12-08-04 11-05-04 12-08-04 8-4-04 1-07-05 Ridge Water Booster Station Design 051304 C Lake Street Regional Stormwater Treatment Probable Costs 062004 Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Analysis 070104 Wastewater Effluent Discharge Diffuser 070204 Candlewood Condominiums Development Review 071004 Pine Meadows Condominiums 071804 Wildwood Condominium Development Review 072004 Engineering Support, Sale of LID Parcels 072804 Timbercrest Subdivision discussed with Public Works Director. Preliminary analysis and probable costs Engineering associated with an East Lake Street regional stormwater treatment unit prepared and summary forwarded to LK. Ongoing discussion regarding capacity issues with City Manager and calls received from Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District. Meeting scheduled for 1/13/05 with City Council and City Manager. Reviewed recent and committed City Growth regarding impact on wastewater treatment and J-Ditch system. Completed review of City improvements and repair needs to sewer system. Presentation to Council completed 12/2/04. Verification of growth analysis in progress in coordination with City Grant Writer/P&Z. Easement checks completed for effluent diffuser discharge location and information forwarded to Public Works Director. Private deck constructed over the existing diffuser pipe, limiting access to the pipe. Title company contacted and information obtained. Exact location verification of diffuser in progress. If emergency discharge to River is needed, this will be critical. Meeting held at project site and at Legion Hall to discuss outstanding items for final plat signature. Items have been addressed and agreement drafted for several remaining items. Final plat signed. Awaiting submittal of easements and solution to drainage issues on site prior to allowance of building permits for units to be constructed next summer. Completed review of private lift station design. Engineering comments addressed for the proposed development. Site visit with Public Works Director. Requested water line testing results from Contractor. Awaiting final inspection results from Public Works prior to signature of final plat. Received copy of proposed agreement with Silvertip, L.L.C. Reviewed proposed agreement and forwarded recommendations to the City Manager. Additional water modeling completed and forwarded to City Manager, Public Works Engineering Engineering Engineering • Engineering I Engineering Engineering Engineering 11-05-04 1-07-05 12-08-04 1-07-05 1-07-05 12-08-04 6-30-03 6-30-03 1-07-05 1-07-05 101501 Aspen Ridge Development Review 051802 Whitetail Development 060202 Four Corners Project 050402 Mapping 042003 Sewer Collection System Master Planning 050103 (0, A) Pressure Reducing Valve Design 061103 Water System Vulnerability Assessment 061703A City Park Grading Plan 081103 Broken Ridge Subdivision (Ray Alford) Review 111303 Review Submitted LID segregation analysis as exhibits to ordinance. Signed final plat of phase II. Meeting with Developer, Developer's Attorney and Engineer, Public Works, and City Manager held on December 16. Review of preliminary plat application in progress. Completed water model of phase IA of proposed Development. Water modeling of additional phases in progress. Developer meeting scheduled for January 14 to discuss water system requirements. ITD has represented they will be ready to bid the project in late winter/early spring. Meetings and detail information discussed with Public Works. Meeting scheduled in February with Public Works to outline tasks leading to completion of utility mapping. Data collection in progress for mapping by Public Works, but postponed due to winter conditions until spring. Ongoing discussions with City Manager regarding base mapping. Summarized recent City projects for sewer rehabilitation and needed improvements. Rough map generated for identified repairs and needs. Project planning in progress to be implemented in the Spring. Internal piping to be painted in Spring (only remaining punch list item). As - built drawings to be finalized and sent to DEQ and Public Works. Started review of vulnerability of the City's water distribution system regarding the EPA Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act. Discussed several criteria with City Manager and will prepare self -assessment to discuss with Public Works. Discussed with Public Works Director and City Planner. Awaiting direction from City Manager or Rec. Director Final plat filed with the County without engineering signature and approval by developer. Awaiting direction from City Manager regarding identified issue. Bond submitted to City and final plat Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineers Surveyors Planners c00 Mr. Bill Burke September 16, 2004 Page 2 A reasonable target is to determine a means of applying enough effluent at the land application site to be compatible with the 100 million gallons of available storage. Then we can determine the projected life of the system. The analysis we are performing should allow us to determine design capacity and incorporate these values into the connection fee analysis. Until we have our meeting with the J-Ditch Pipeline Association and get their input, we will be inhibited to coming to a conclusion. At this time, if the lagoon leaks are successfully eliminated, it appears that the treatment system capacity is limited by the amount of water that can be applied to the land application site and is approximately 230 million gallons. We expect to attend your next meeting to update the Board on progress. • Sincerely, J- -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Kirby D. Vickers, P.E. KDV:Ihc cc: Lindley S. Kirkpatrick,• AICP; City Manager Timothy J. Haener, P.E. J. Matt Uranga, P.E. yF:\users\jmu\mccall capacity letter.doc N N N N Al Al N 0 O) CO A p. W N N N A O CA !D A l!1 C71 W -+ V -+ -+ 0 A -CO C. A 0 C71 CO CO 0 -+ 00 -+ N CD 0 CO A V W CD V CA CA A V N V O N O -+ W -+ "co O O C! O O co O O co O O O O -co O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O A W O O) e e O N CO O O v v N W e A N W• 0 A• A A A Co 0) N 0 0 -1 CO CT e e e e e e W A N N.) N ON) CT j 0 Co N N CD 0 CT A O O O D O O 0) Co CO - W w 00 (o N A Co O co - N o e e e e Cli rn 0) COT A A A e e o e O 01 CT CO O O 0 N T (0 Q O CO G7 CA O -co 0 C_ 0) O CT 0 0 O O O C07 O W V Co (31 O 0 N V -CO CO O 0 0 Z O O CO W v O CO O O O 0 C) W 0 O O O (A co .D O W CO CO NJ O O 0 D CO O W N W O 0 O O O O v W co C71 O N W 0) 0 c O W N 0) O 0 O 0 O CD C) CO ry j -1 C0O CO O O O O 0 0 0 0 O C 0 0 N N 0) 00 0 O 00 O 00 O O O CA CT CA A A A W 00 (0 0) CD CO CD W 0 CO 0 e e e e e e e J CO 0 0 A W W 0) 0 A CO CO 0 O O O O CJ N co -1 -+ N N cm co A W CO Al N N N 0 GI A W 0 N O N N W 1ot cm O) Et y A W CO N 0 0 N N -+ N 01 ID .+ CD C>1 C>1 CO W V A O V N N V1 m O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0. o O O O O O O O O O O O f O O O O O O O O O O O O NJ A W CD 0 CO CT CT W W I A 0 O iv N Co 0 CO 0 0- C0J1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O CT W 0 CO -1 e e e c W N O 0 CD O 0 0 N -1 CD 0 0 0 N A O) N O O O O O O CD O W W co, N N O O 0 D O CO CO v CO O O O 0) CD O CO N 0) O) CO 0 O Ca N W ON°' 0 0 Co O O O o O O CT O CT (T A 0) N CA W N CA A W W - W e e e e e e T CD Q W CO -CA N O O O O O 0 0 0) O W CO V CT O O O U1 -co CJ N 0 O O (n Co O Q CO C) O N N W 0) Co O 0 O N A W -co N v O O 0 N O v CD CO O O O N O CT O O CD 0 0 O Z O O N CO CO O O O 0 C) O N CT CD O N O O O (n CD O N U1 0) 0) O O 0 N Q) 0 D (0 O NJ N O U1 v CT) O 0 O W O CA N 9) N Co c- c O N N W CT O O O CO CT CT -4 CD 0 A O O O O CD CD c O N N O U1 0) W -co O O 0 CO N O 0 0 A N N -.•-. N) N N W W.CT CT CO N N W N N N N N - Cr) CO CO 0 V CO N CO A CO CD CA A CD N_. A 0 �l O 0 0 A ,A -.-. O -1 CT Co W N N CT Co -1 0 N O A A -4 A. CT CO CD -40 CT 01 ^.1 N A CJ1 A 0) -� CA) 0 0 o Ib o ito 0 0 0 ..89, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o b o -1 A CO N N CW A A A CT -4 CO CT W W LT N W W W A A O N CD-•V O O W CD O 0) CO CD -1 _, CD CO N -4 N O 0 N A N N ',Ca) - N �l N IV 0) 'co 'co 'co IV v - CO 00 CT 0) CA - 0) N CO W 0) 0) A W -4 CT CaN CT A CA0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N CO0CO CO CO N.) CT)) CA 0) A CO0CO CO CO 0CO CO CO Co CO CO0A Co N 0 0 0 01 W 0 W CT W -1 -I 0 W A 0) �1 CO -4 CD O N CD CO N -4 0 CO CT 0) -1 -1 CD v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO W v 0) 0 A O e co CD N CD -4A e e O N U1 0) CA O O 0 0 D O NJ W 0 0 W O O 0 N W O N 0) N v CO 0 0 O CO 0) N O T CD CS O N CT A O O 0 N C7) O A O CD O N v v CD O O 0 Q (0 0 O 0 A Co 0 O O N co v O O O O n e 0 O Ca CA N j N '8 -I`0 N N CT co n 0 O Co (0 O 0 CO , W 0) co(J•1 0) „C 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .► CT -4 Ca1W CO N y Q CT 0 A N -1 1 CD . O W O A Co (J1 A 05 '" W A A CO - CO CD e� e e e e e o co g o F 0 co0 0 0 0 Al 0 CT CT CT C „O* 3 A c1 �1 j 0 O CD - co O) �1 O O :3 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 � i_\ < N � L.> 7CQ (D McCall Sewer and Water Flows Date Influent Water 1 703100O 505 2 515 505 3 597 491 4 529 496 5 527 497. 2q 6 514 541 7 548 514 8 550 506 9 624 518 10 763 495 11 853 503 12 837 548 13 974 581 14 1039 542 15 1040 514 16 1001 483 17 1074 492 18 1176 469 19 1253 505 20 1340 522 21 1461 538 22 1540 518 23 1632 509 24 1738 508 25 1675 519 26 1658 522 27 1239 520 28 1009 489 29 987 456 30 982 451 31 1181 436 March, 2004 March, 2003 March, 2002 March, 2001 March, 2000 March, 1999 March, 1998 March, 1997 March, 1996 March, 1995 March, 2004 Hi Lo Precip. 37 5 38 4 .06 35 -1 trace 36 22 .21 36 11 .07 34 16 .05 34 16 43 21 55 16 48 13 49 13 43 19 45 17 44 23 40 23 46 25 44 21 49 21 49 23 42 14 51 21 58 29 62 26 62 23 48 31 trace 49 30 .13 40 30 .10 44 22 52 21 60 22 62 34 Influent 31,559,000 26,619,000 16,278,000 20,332,000 23,556,000 24,739,000 26,543,000 35,500,000 32,174,000 Out of Order Water 15,697,000 15,080,000 14,692,000 14,561,000 14,600,000 16,537,000 16,537,000 23,067,000 20,471,000 21,545,000 538 462 480 466 454 467 453 436 437 499 499 490 573 598 598 577 600 585 675 843 712 883 897 897 407 1015 1153 1021 892 927 1038 Effluent 18,935,000 22,994,000 14,171,000 22,099,000 23,876,000 Joint Powers Board Meeting YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED, Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2341 (5) (a), that The Representatives of the Joint Powers Board of the City of McCall, and The Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District will hold a meeting at the offices of Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District located at 201 Jacob St. McCall, Idaho on Tuesday June 8th, 2004 at 9:30 A.M. The meeting will be held for the following purposes: 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Minutes of October '03' meeting 3. Current Issues: a .Draft Agreement b. Status of Sludge Removal and Step Screens c. Report: Treatment Plant and Storage Pond d. Capacity: Present and Future 4. Other Business q4 5. Next Meeting Date u j — a CJ — 9; 3U Adjourn " GO CD CD 0 CD - 0. 2U W2E3k aM S OP:,r*v*v*vna' c��znt7 A�� O tUfl O ADo ��. qj y lD 0. c3'' 69696969-696969 b9696969 be be696969 N D1 N �%-' �%-' v::+ rn O oo - a\ N -4. cm W �%-' rn N ��..-' W O N lam: " IN 00 --' O N 00 IA 00 N W ��] O VD LA 00 W v W .P LA .D c1i .P c1i W �%-+ 41. J 01 \O v LA 01 41. �%-' 01 N W 00 O 69 69 69 b9.69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 ��D ��l 1--I" 00 ��] W �%-, N �%-' �%-' �%- N co co O 0o -P �%-' 41. O1 N "-' ��O . A to VD -1 ��] 00 W N 01 In 41, r VD r W C- VD LA O O �%-' 01 41, N Cr, co N I cA �%-' 0o 00 N 69 65.69 69 b9 69 69-69-6:.q-69-69-69-69 �%- N LA VA I N 00 . - W 01 01 N 00 [J N N [` ' N N �% ' N N 00 00 01 01 69 69 69 6=.69 69 69 b9 69-be.be.b9.69-69-69-69 -4 - O O �% �% �% r �%- N 00 N 01 D\ Co cD IA \O -] W IA - -P. v0 O co W O 0 0 O �%- 00 �% co W �%-` O LA l0 v0 01 00 01 W W O �%-` 41. O 01 O69 69 69 69-69 69 69 69 69 69-69-69 69-69-69 69 yyy cri ��D a1 tJ �% [J JO LA 41, LA .P VD cD VD \O 0 VD CO  .D VD \O -I \O 01 \O ' \O N W 01 VD LA 41. VD O VD 69 b9 69 69 69 69 69 69 aaUEU13 IE301 unupv W 401 iaJSIIE.I1 ulalpV 31-1ai3 IE4OJ. xioetjaM JE;oJ_ 5 y O Ozy z���� �%O 01 N W N �%. ry W C!i 01 W 01 GA 00 O " �%N- 01 N O 00 -4 N 000 N VD W N 01 -,] ��] Clerk portion of City Manager Budget: $ 40,976 Clerk % Council 2% Network Admin 1% City Manager 20% (Finance 18% I Attorney 1% Community Development 25% Police 7% 'Parks 2% /Streets/Public Works 4% Library 2% Recreation 4% Airport 4% Golf Operations 4% Water Fund 3% Sewer Treatment 1% Sewer Collection 1% TOTALS 100% City Manager Budget Line Item: Dept Supplies Printing/Binding Minor Equip Motor Fuels Professional Srvcs Advertising/Legal Travel/Meetings Books/Publications Professional Devel Telephone Repairs - Auto Elections Record Destruction Clerk Salary/Ben 'Total Clerk Clerk Amount: $ 906 410 8,134 7,531 410 $ 10,383 $ 2,713 $ 906 1,508 906 1,807 1,639 1,639 1,205 410 410 40,914 HR% 7% 1% 6% 6% 0% 16% 7% 4% Percent for Amount City Manager HR/Clerk Subject to Budget Amount: Functions: Transfer: 250 2,500 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 3,000 750 5,000 750 250 2,000 500 37,051 IHR Salary/Ben I $ 45,479 50% 100% 50% 25% 50% 75% 50% 50% 50% 50% 25% 100% 100% 125 2,500 500 250 1,000 1,500 1,500 3751 2,500 ' 375 631 2,000 500 75% $ 27,788 $ 40,976 100%I $ 45,479 1 HR Amount: $ 3,249 $ 650 $ 2,599 $ 2,599 $ - 1,949 7,796 1,949 7,147 3,249 1,949 1,299 5,198 3,249 650 1,949 45,479 uoi1OeIIo0 JOMe 1uaw;eaul JaMOS pund Je eM esunoo;Ioo R CD g 0 Cr k 7-1/ 0 s;aaJTS/s){aoM oiignd � ƒ \ k ƒ ƒ 0 . + a ] \ o / § ° 3 5 ) E ° = go & / CO 2 o % ° ] co / % ƒ CD 9 + 2/ a u ER o 0 N\# F/= g= c# c k "0 e e e e e e 0 0 - 0&' b E n Actr b o-# A- A\« -it \ o o G N$ N Q 0 10 .7 / / / / / $ / / / / / / ƒ / \ / # E EA m fzi3 EA 7 . _ . . . 7 al N .#### A c A u o, o NJ c N) CD 0 0 0 0 0- t 0\/ q 6- 6 :;unowv JejsueJ j uiwpy )IJonn;aN Ie;oJ llffl g?r� a . 0 0 0 2 Er Ft rai B g E 4c g 2 g. r r ao. �� CT u C N e e e e N A W N W e e e e e e .- 0, W N .- e e e e e 69 69 69 69 69 4n 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 W t7 ut u ▪ # A A 0•4" K CDo0 T O U.,N ►. N �0 ? -4 A ,--• J A N Q , 00 J 4 0 T., Ol J A U N W 00 J 00 CT N �. 0 toOOi VD w U CDb CA U4 A A A CA CD VI CN A N 00 b run 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 y U C) LJ o N [J 0AD # IA ... ► .+ 01 't3 53 o e O --1 A N A -.4 N O O 0, CAi Vt r O -4 I 0. r0i. N N W '0 W O O co sO .4 �l v .+ W 0 0 61 00 ▪ 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 .. 69 '-' ...4 N W N N ut J Ch N rn o O O O O O O O O O 6n 8 69 69 O O O O O CDO O O O CD CD CDO O O CO • 69 69 69 69 69 .." 69 69 69 6n W En v �+ N 01 N W W 69 00 .1 00 j 0 0 0 0 0 N u ut A Vr LA0 69 CD O O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0, 0 0 69 69 en 69 69 69 fn 0 C 5 0 IV ▪ 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 to 69 Ck.'. N N W N CA leut fn .N-. .N-. A EA fn 0 o 0 A '0 0. 0 A 0 0 0 O� N O A O A i fjy Cn i/ 69 N ▪ 69 69 ~ 69 L9 69 d\ 69 6 O 9+ W O W — '0 00 0, 69 A Is) p. A N N O O 00 U U O 69 r 69 Ot = rt N W �O W- O O O '0 J J J O O W •• G 6 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 CyJ 9 Ti re izrzl �• 0 r g 00 ' - • r r r O A VAr r 0J b i 69 69 69 69 69 69 07 � O O .1 W 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 T+ J u0 a 4, A N W W O A 00 A *+ A 01 N '+ C N C A O F+ z0 A 111 In A A '0 �1 �7 DD W N C� A 07 11' IL Obi d W A A N a W N U 0000 0000 N T O c co O N N un „CD CDD f) O� Pund ia1EM CD CD tiO f0 00 65 69 69 69 69 69 VD N N '-+ G\ .P to O to 4D N in w --+ w 00 00 C 00 0 Y r Gbc -t co Er' G Z. P' ccoo 0En w w s;soJ pail(' w O a p .1'W C� CCD .On C 0 N CD• CD 'ly rr E. 0 CD CT to N0 0 ~ N �-' N • 4' w ' ~' W - CT CON .r CD CDo o �0 0 0 o N o 0 0 0 0 0 \ 0 \ CD 0 CD 0 P� 69 69 69 69 69 69I69169169 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 169 J O p-- �1 N O i N -O .0 O_ 00 to N N to O CD w._ r-+ � W 00 t0Ji CO Oth bi N tO N N tO CN �P •--• po to O e o o \\ o o 0 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 -6A. 69 69 69 69 69 69 0 '� ul ,-. o •�-1 ,D W N ',l to --' 00 ,-. 1 .-. W N p -. P W _l 00 IJ �1 10 CT -' IQ ..O N oo ,A N O 0--' to '-. ' 01 N --1 N ---1 0 00 --.1�-' N oo -P. CT -1 U. N A N ---' N O to .O O to 4O 4O 4a ,--' 00 O 00 .- W 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 P.l N N .--' N •-' .p O� vl to G 00 .A N .-' w w (� CA 00 00 �O \p 4O \D 00 CT ' -' -1 --Iv�i 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 EA 69 EA 69 big 1 ' la 0 H �D O� O 0000�1 CA N -Al . fA W ) c . N r+ C co) p O� �D JW O N N N 00 1I. 1� O N 00 f11 00 N W i-+ 0 M eo W+ 00 �1 O \D (Il 00 W A r.l W 4a. f/1 \O f)1 . fn W •. U Po A J 01 �D --.1 f)1 0\ . r+ 01 N W . 00 0 :03png aauuum3 EA 4D 00 VP City of McCall 216 E. Park Street �' McCall, Idaho 83638 �� 208-634-2103 fax 208-634-3038 ; t 1--.- Payette Lakes Recreational Water/Sewer District Jamie Melbo 201 Jacob Street •irk 9 o? INVOICE 8/15/2003 200307 McCall ID 83638 DUE: UPON RECEIPT Qty Description Unit Price Cost Sharing Expenditures S 13,609.28 July 2003 I I $0.311 July 2003 Capital Expenditures $0.333 1, 3 N9,17) NW x /c-Y l J 7, t1) per"56-Aca eve ( ph, r��,.t S 2Gr `2,,g'.2.O2,)• rw r fk1NinSf' J 8.311X17k1 Please return this bottom portion with your remittance. TOTAL $4,232.49 $0.00 d,5 N1o,46 z 5gq•y TOTAL .$4,232.49 Office Use Only NAME Payette Lakes Recreational Water/Sewer District Expenditure Sharing INVOICE # 200307 Retum to: 70-13150 CITY OF MCCALL 216E PARK McCALL, ID 83638 AMOUNT $ 4,232.49 PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 201 Jacob Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 office 208-634-41 1 1 • fax 208-634-7613 email:'pIrwsd©citlink.net August 27, 2003 Mayor & Council City of McCall 216 E. Park Street McCa11, ID 83638 re: 2003-2004 Sewer Treatment Budget Dear Mayor and Council: The Board of Directors of the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District have reviewed budget materials as presented by Robert Strope to the Joint Powers Board. Although the Joint Powers Board approved this budget after a cursory examination of the material, this Board is not in agreement with their action. Specifically, the methodology used by Mr. Strope to derive management fees is not based on actual time spent by the finance and public works departments, but by an allocation depending on the budget size. While this Board has acknowledged some expense involved for payroll and finance support, as well as support from the public works department for maintenance, basing these costs on allocations of interdepartmental transfers is not accurate. The agreements in place between our two entities clearly state that the District is to be invoiced on actual costs of operating the treatment plant. The District is a co-owner of the treatment plant, not a department of the City. Be advised, therefore, that the Board of Directors of the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District does not recognize the fiscal year 2003-2004 budget for the wastewater treatment plant, and that the amounts budgeted as revenue from the District in the sewer fund will not be realized in their entirety by the City. This Board is striving to come to an agreement that is fair and equitable to all entities involved. Sincerely, Carolyn )hnson Chairperson, Board of Directors Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District cc: Robert Strope Earl Ward N HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. E ENGINEERS • CONSULTANTS 32 N. Main P.O. Box 235 Payette, ID 83661 (208) 642-3304 • Fax # (208) 642-2159 April 24, 2003 Robert Strope, City Manager City of McCall 216 Park Street McCall, ID 83638 Re: Joint Powers Board — Septage Handling and Fees Ref. No. 041803 Dear Robert: RECEIYEp APR28 On April 17, we met with the Joint Powers Board along with Bill Keating and John Lewinski to discuss a number of issues relating to waste handling and administrative procedures. In preparation for that meeting, we investigated some representative costs for septage handling as well as administrative procedures to track loads to better safeguard the City's treatment system. Based on discussions that took place and from our experience in permitting septage disposal under Section 503 rules, the following recommendations are forwarded for your consideration. 1. Initiate a permit process to limit dumping of industrial waste including septage to only permit holders who have, in turn, signed an agreement with terms and conditions acceptable to McCall's Treatment Facility. Usually a nominal annual fee accompanies the permit application. Raise rates for dumping waste to a minimum of $40 per thousand gallons with a minimum fee of $25 for any size load. Rates will be charged based on tank volume, not on the operator's estimate of gallons. This policy is standard in the industry unless a means of weighing or on -site metering equipment is installed. 3. Construct a dumping headwork with splash or spill containment and washdown water ahead of any screening or grit removal equipment. Again, this is standard in the industry. The cost of construction and maintenance of this feature should be allocated in the rate structure for the treatment service provided. 4. Test each load for pH at a minimum and require it be accompanied by a dated manifest identifying the generator with the generator's signature, type of waste, place of origin, and should also contain the hauler's signature. There are a number of manifests that may be used as a model. WATER • WASTEWATER • SOLID WASTE • PUBLIC UTILITIES • STRUCTURES • PLANNING • STUDIES Joint Powers Board — Septage and Handling Fees ML041803 Page 2 5. If unsupervised waste dumping is permitted, a surveillance system should be installed to record the action. Usually a card -reader gate control and camera can accomplish this. It is acknowledged that all this represents additional control and possibly additional man-hours at the facility. However, the negative experiences of other liquid waste facility operators indicate that fugitive dumping has been a problem. As other plants increase monitoring or are closing their facilities to certain wastes or haulers in the Boise valley area, McCall may wish to protect itself against those waste streams. At some point in the ongoing operation of facilities, a cost evaluation should be performed that includes the costs of specific septage handling facilities and management in addition to wastewater treatment. This could better inform the Council and citizens of the cost of treatment provided by the City. Typically where these have been evaluated using similar controls and oversight as those recommended above, the cost of treatment was found to range from $40 to $200 per thousand gallons of septage or other industrial liquid waste. It is our recommendation that, at some point, the rate for dumping be based on the actual cost. Typically, we support the policy that one group of ratepayers should not subsidize another. Respectfully, HOLLADAY ENGINEERING COMPANY By: G.L.-e...-- Vernon E. Brewer, Project Manager Cc: Bill Burke, PLRWSD Earl Ward, Nampa Treatment Plant Bill Keating, Director of Public Works John Lewinski, Plant Operator By: Shawn Kohtz, S off E . neer POND* 1, Sludge Measurements August 4, 2003 NW SW 1 0.5 0.7 0.66 0.86 0 1.33 1 0 0.68 0.68 0.25 1.85 0 1.5 1 1 3 0.66 2 325 Ave Depth. 1.333 feet 1.5 2.66 1.5 1.5 0 0.15 0 1.5 1.25 0.5 1.85 1.5 2 1.85 2_0(ii- liAs2-ez-oAr 1.1542,--t .tcqp4- NE 2.66 1.25 1.5 2.25 D.85 2.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 2 2.25 2 1.85 1.25 SE 44-3 , C7 / `(1a 715 C Pond *2 Sludge Measurement July 29, 2003 NW SW NE 0.9 1 0.85 0.85 0.75 0.88 1.2 0.75 2.5 1.5 0.75 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.25 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.1 1 1.2 1.4 1.8 1.1 0.75 1 1.33 1 1 1.2 12 1 0.85 1.1 0.85 1 1.5 2 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.85 1.2 1 0.5 1.1 1.5 1.1 0.85 1 1.25 1 1.6 1.5 1.25 1 1.25 1.33 1.5 1.66 SE Average Sludge Depth 1.21 feet Pond *3 Sludge Measurements August 1, 2003 NW SW NE 0.86 0.66 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 .0.5 0.1 0.5 0.66 0.66 0.33 0.5 0.66 0.5 0.66 0.66 0.33 0.33 1 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.33 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.5 0.66 SE Average Depth .53 feet Original Billings: Month October November December January February March April May June Revised Billings: Month October November December January February March April May June Total Paid: Amount Owed: Billing Comparison Salaries Public Works Transfer Other Expenses Total Amount Paid $ 1,502.38 $ 1,506.73 $ 1,507.91 $ 2,151.78 $ 1,475.82 $ 1,481.83 $ 1,652.18 $ 998.78 $ 1,343.54 $ 13,620.93 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 3,776.33 $ 4,039.96 $ 3,122.88 $ 1,460.43 $ 1,844.54 $ 1,038.75 $ 1,481.92 $ 1,704.64 $ 3,353.19 $ 2,782.84 $ 20,829.15 $ 5,961.93 $ 5,049.20 $ 3,387.93 $ 4,415.91 $ 2,934.15 $ 3,383.34 $ 3,776.41 $ 4,771.56 $ 4,545.98 $ 38,226.41 Salaries Public Works Transfer Other Expenses Total $ 1,113.98 $ $ 934.34 $ $ 595.89 $ $ 1,163.14 $ $ 733.15 $ $ 813.92 $ $ 917.73 $ $ 998.78 $ $ 1,343.54 $ $ 8,614.46 $ $ 32,107.66 $ 2,152.33 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 4,816.38 $ 4,039.96 3,122.88 1,460.43 1,844.54 1,038.75 1,481.92 1,704.64 3,353.19 2,782.84 20,829.15 $ 5,689.10 $ 4,592.38 $ 2,591.47 $ 3,542.83 $ 2,307.04 $ 2,830.99 $ 3,157.52 $ 4,887.12 $ 4,661.54 $ 34,259.99 $ 5,170.61 $ 4,257.89 $ 2,596.61 $ 3,624.60 $ 4,001.44 $ 2,935.67 $ 3,384.90 $ 3,353.10 $ 2,782.84 $ 32,107.66 0 e IIePu!i ZO/ZZ ssnH ZO/ZZ ozuoe ZO/ZZ ? O Z 01 3 co EA 69 EA EA 69 0 0 o) N U1 co U1 F io 0 ' J M 0 14 0D W o) (D Water & Sewer Dept. We 11/22/02 0 0 d d m 0000000($ N N N N N N IV D OOD OD OD OD 0D OD go (n Cn (n cr.(n co, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 N N N N N N N CO cr, Is.) N Is.) N No No IV o T. T. 2 m co oo z * c _v co co uZi *. co y 3 -, *. co a o 7 m N 3 7< K n -1 COel -1 0) CD-1. -I 1 1 W -+ 0 0 (0 N EA EA 69 69 E9 69 .en EA 69 EA EA 69 EA 69 co SD 4P Q) N (T co al ,'0 c — o) N cn 00 Cn c Co i0 H O O4 CO W a) CD O O y0 CO W o) (D ZO/SZ/06 3M ';daa Jamas Ja;eM v 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D O O O 0 0 0 o No to No Ni Ni NoN 1— T. 2 'n co co Z (D = 5 c 21 �. O 0) �. co a N 3 _ O 7 ..G R 69 69 .69 .E9 E9 69 E9 -a A °) N (T 0o U1 ODN(Oocorn,1„ o) ' O 'mil 00 co o) (D O 3 EA EA 69 69 {A I 69 69 EA 409 69 EA 0, C 0, 69 69 69 EA 69404 c 6969 EA EA 69 69 401 ti --.1 c o) c —1 o) (T * E -I o) 00) C N (J1 N 0) 0 co O O1 O ? CO 01 �l CO CO rt 0) o) (O rF Co (0 .* W o) (0 - o ' N (D p) 'co 0) ' 1 •4 (0 W (D 19 Ot N 1 1 1 1 O (D Ol 0 O y CO 0 y N- ? N y CO - W :1 m v " °) 1 1 10VXI 001 , 0 0� - ccoo-N.1 (D tD M ern m �Ty1 N\ jw 0 1 1 1 1 \ jw 1 1 o Y 0) J 0 0 wiD w CO 0 y 4. CO 1 1 1 CO 0 y (0 , 1 (0 N \ co (0 A \ i m — a, — m w A 0. A _0; A _t: W ? 0 01 O y coO o 0f coEy o 01 �C mC aCC C C C 1 sN LA Ll41) C) N -1A C) J J A C) 1 1 \ O•N.)o O 03 lI "'1 W O 0 rya 01 1 1 1 in o (0 r —Lw 'cro 1 1 J y fN O N (D CO 0M1 01 1 W A V01 J J 0 0 1 I I S D O o -► 0 y.Ct 0 0o N W 1 1 A (n 0 ((11 CY) CO W 1 1 I I 1 I v o W 01 C co co 3 0. C) of C O a ? IV so 01 N 1 I 1r • ? S (T 03 cn (11 1 c00o0� 0)) 00� - �0_1 N1 1 1 1 I j D 1 1 1 D 0 1—Oo 01 r 0) N go 0 (D (D G n 0 0 N 3 N � ao 3 1 I 1 1 O 0) (o °) (0 �1 ' 3 N w O (31 V O 3 /epiU!JUI £0/L I.I. ozuo81E0/L L/L v d z D) 3 m DM •Idea Jamag 1g Ja;eM N a i An co U7 W EA b) -10_ -A _K 0 CO CD C CZ CI) (D C7 fD v 0) CO CO CO CO CO CO CO O O O O O O O W W W W W W W c(DD 5. 5.• c m o CO o oZ) *.0Q. N3 cp o CD 0) 0) b9 b9 EA EA Efi EA EA - O N cn co 6 E, 0oNOOC10—CA .,G• CA 0 'd CO CO 0) CD `< O En EA b9 b9 EP) En V) Go co o OD 1 fp fl) CA O91 3M •Idea JeMeg +g JaleM CI co d co N N N N N N N S. 0N N N N N N Na - N N N N N N Ni n N N O O O O O O O go CO CO CO co co co d) go N `V O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O N Ni N N Ni Ni N 0 N Ni N Ni N Ni Ni 0fD N N r X T. 171 co co Z i c m CO CO aZi 5. co a y 7 7- N <. (0 O. y 7 N 1 3 �. 'CO y m m o m y °' m o o v ai -a � -tea r n n -I fn _ -I cn N C. i N P. `) cD N -1O -1 O U1 co co V N -P. N co N be) EnEflEAEnEA69" b9if) b9EAE9 Er) 71 N `O N O Co k <o O CO AL b' pi,. O 00 CO 3. ,c CD O -.1 Co CO CD 1D CA A O V CO CO 0') fD b9 EA EA EA Ea En Ea *—I v ? CO v 0IC O .r o oN N al CO 17 O MI CAD m mI s•Jm O v Z1 ? N V Z I N CO r( 0)) / Z e'^ V 1 1 1 1 0)) - 01 1 O e VI 69 69 EA - b9 EA EA EA O 1 • 1 1 1 • CO a) •A 0 0 to co ma �Tm/ 1 1 N V ' CO ( �I Q) O) O) Q) N IV V) N AL N O I N AL N V) - - IV Cn CT O Cn• 1 , 1 , •? O (- I v CT1 N N 9 O (/) CO N• ? O (/) a Q) CT e , N N <c) 1 Cn e (p 1• 1 1 1 • co CO CA A. ). U1 CT v C 1 co CD a n N ro 3 �C �CD CD 1 0 0 I co CD p ? C I I 1 1 W Cn co N01CA 6eN .A - e N A CO CO CO CA 0 � O- _A -D i CO i< W 7C • W 71/4COA' I W p O3 O 1 1 I V p O co 1 N _- - i i.n 0ioo e 03 5) 1 -. 1 1 1 V o O OW 00 00 _ coCT O CA OC'.I coa a a -a I I W crr O v co d An V 1 CO 2 COCD m OD N 1 CO o D*.0 W CO 1 Y J en 1 1 -.1 O 1 1 N 1 (71 1 -P. 1 1 1 1 O, CO 1 CT Al CT co m:44\I Cr) 1 (71 1 I 1 O D .44 cn Cp J • 1 1 O EA EA N A J M CO iNa b9 b9 co 1 CA • O _N co1 CA J c') 1 CT 6 W 1 v CA 1 OD CD n Q O N N D W 1 0 r 1 O - 1 1 1 1 1 N V) 0 4 1 0 -P. V O -" O r N O 1- CO -4'co CO71 W CD CO cn c1 CD 0) 1 - A O co G) V N 0 1D 1D DM 'idea camas 'g Ja;eM -a A O v N N N N N `V N 1�D N.) N N N.) N.) N.) N.) co co co co 03 co co O O O O 0 O O W W W G) W G) W CD • 2 �1 0, Z 9 3 3 c _1) 30 . d 3 eaco to • 3 a:.N O 1D 7 N O = EA Eft EA EA EAEflEA w O N 't O N CTI co CT 73 C 0) 0 01 CO GO00) CD Efl Eft EA CA VD En VD s ~ 1D G1 — 0 - 71 CD rn W y m 73 N CD"al 73 CI) V Vein J CO �M •;daa Jamas 1g ia;eM N N N N N N N 1�p IIePuOI £0/b ozuo8 £0/b Z to 3 tD DM idea JAMOS'9 Je;eM mN J A A N N O 0) O W VD EnE!4EnV)fAEA 1p '< O 0) N C71 co 01 73 C isa Co • tat CT) 0 Ca CO O) O) c 403 E09 Ef) Efl Efi Efl E03 01 W 0) (n N N 1.1 (n co (/) -4 . . . , 01 O (/) CTI -a 4 \ 4+ Idwoa s)pMloleaipaw I 1v1o1 I no ido G) W G) G) G) G) G) v CD1. O O O O O O O W W W W W W • 7 7 5.co a y o ▪ CD DM idea JamaS 'g JO;eM V V V V V 0 O O C. 0 W W W W-11 W CD 5. c LU < . ▪ co Q rn 5. 3 N cn = 7C' "I (1) p• c -a i J 1 -a N) N. O NJ ✓ 0 C)) V -Da CT W 0 VB V) VD Ef VD VD VD - _ V) En el V) VD `< O ? 0 r.) cn FO cn ,'a C � � 0 N cn00 IV CD O 00 „�. 0o N in O 03 rn�oV0oWO1D`< rn�OVOO Eft EAEA EA VD Eft Eft V)Ef) (z19 V) in 0)G CT ANG-i A O. O , O� _ CT CI1 CD OD CO 0 y N 0 CAD CO N y 0 CD MI O V m rn � O V AJ V CO CO N CONV Xi N O e V% 0' CD N Cn 01 W e co �, 0 0) 0, CJ1 0 CO • N CO 0) CA O 0) V O CO 0) NN.CO CDCDe co CD 4+ CO CO 0 3 3 3 • aa▪ a 0 CI1 CI1n co 1 1 4'0I5 00 --O0.AC71� co CDe N e 6 Nn)GI No C11 A O 0 V CO W O G G _ _ �N _ L,N _ _ LICA 0) i i i N O ~ i i CD O OD W N O CO CD • O W 0~3 3 CTI co W co CTI 0 0) O CO 0) CO v CD 0) g. CO 0) 00 U! N 1 i i i i Q 00 3 CD -. ,w CD O Cn 0)CTI J N (I1 CT TI cri CO 0 • DO Co 0) co • W .... V W N▪ ) O 0 0 � W 0_ N 0 COr) COO 0 N �n Cl)y U) V , O 'i r N N —1 r- 01 N OD 6 IV -i r O 0 V N O V CI1 0) � CO -J CD IIePu!>i EO/9Z/17 ssnH £019Z/t wed EO/9Z/b )aplu»8 EO/9Z/17 ozuo8 EO/9Z/b z 0 3 CD N CD W N ()I CO .co• o N 'co J *co — 0) . Q 0) — O Cn CO CO CA CD DM •;dea Jamas '8 aa;eM v d A A A A A A A Cep oo 0• O O 0 0 O O O W W W W W W W aft co co Z fl (en ' 7 N 3 fD O CD 77. K DM •;daa James 'g Ja;eM ozuo8 EO/9Z/E v d Z 3 CD DM •;dea James +8 JoleM v 0 W W W W W W W -1 N -1 N A.eo a, Aal w " N -I- A � t)D co O ▪ " N V co in W W C) N U1 W CO 0 EA EA EAEflfAEAG91 _ EA EA CA EA E0369EA - = fAfl Eb9EAEAEAfA - N < O N < O N K O N CT co V7 " ? O N C11 C)D 6 x1 , -, A O N cn 0o CT X1 6o N CD -.l CO ." CA CO N CD `,1 OD " CA a y OD N CD �1 CO s CA to CA " CD6 co co CA CD CA O 6 co co CA CD CA -, O CT Cb W CA a ozuo8 EOM? Z m 3 CD -CA EA CA 6/3 69 69 d3 EA EA H9 EA Efl Efl b9 EA CA EA EA *A ffi {4 b9 b9 EA b9 -CA ffl EA �J c v N-I N co 6-I W e a) () sV 0 N ? 0 O co co W cn -0.a) 0 -.- 1 • -4 01 to d. W W 1 t y Al co." .A CO 1 W �1 60 .0W O A CO W y CO CA O 01 y co CT 01 W CO '0 m cn v co 1 1 1 1 co CO O ,(n ? e v, 1 1 1 1 Cr) W O CA 1 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 CA CT O 1 1 1 vCO 0 CO 1 0 0 CA CA cn "N Ai)(R (xi O(f �1NN 1 , CAO(/) cn N " O 3 3 AO; _1A- Q; W CA 0 A CA O 1 0 015N e �CCOCCOOa a CD NO O C C LI M LI N A n -L N A n ✓ e O CO .-16 1 1 Ca:jt0 N .a N O CD QW)3 91 ✓ to 41 U! W 1 1 1 1 1 Q N co CJ1 1 co 1 1 1 T n O1 1 1 1 1 > O Co.) O 1 1 1 acn N � CO W .1 -.- 1 • CO , ? V .0cD A e CD AI.) O - • A CO -a ? W O O co'co in Q) 1 1 1 1 1 1 co N "0 e 1 1 1 d! O • a I1 1 1 I 1 N N CJ1 O cD N N 0 AOw• � r. cocn ) 44C(00 v" Ccc,0 1 1 4 N> "4 1 1 1 I 1 W N N O 1 1 1 C� N D CT V 1 1 1 (b N w — N v1 co rn -4 0 Entered in payroll with hours starting with pay period ending 05/09/03. a D o O� N C d 0 a; 3 W y n oo y c•°' a-o 0. 2 a 3 0 a W co N Q 9, O -k m e o) O O -4 to Q O IV N N N 0o W U1 (D 0 V O a)13 V O a) co N Co .A V IV O— o. Qf co W U1� N W V CO O O) U1 O) A 01 7 A is) a) J-. in V W U1 U1 U1 V -+ -I W A-1 CO Co V W N Co Co -P Percentage for hours in each department for Management Transfer Liz Hours Ea. Percentage Bill Hours Ea. Percentage * Airport PW/Streets 0 1204 0% 58% * Airport PW/Streets 0 940 0% 45% Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment 438 328 109 21% 16% 5% Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment 689 237 213 33% 11% 10% Streets!PW Crew Airport PW/Streets Water Hours Ea. 437 12958 728 Percentage 3% 89% 5% Totals 437 15102 1855 2.33% 80.67% 9.91% Liz # Emps cyo * Airport 0 0% PW/Streets 11 58% Water 4 21% Sewer Collection 3 16% Sewer Treatment 1 5% 19 100% Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment 291 146 2% 1% 857 4.58% Bill * Airport PW/Streets Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment * Bill and Liz report less than 1 % of their time is spent on the Airport. 468 2.50% Budget 774,069 567,916 195,624 175,796 1,713,405 Total hours 2080 100% Total hours 2080 100% Total hours 14,560 100% 18,720 100.00% % 0% 45% 33% 11% 10% 100% Fund PW/Streets Airport Water Sewer - Collection Sewer - Treatment Total Budget Expenditures to Allocate % to Allocate Amount Allocated Account Number' 825,118 80.67% 665,661 2.33% 19,253 29-56-905 9.91% 81,777 60-64-920 4.58% 37,778 70-74-920 2.50% 20,649 70-75-920 100.00% 825,118 Total Transfer to PW/Streets 159,457 24-39-999 8/13/2003C:\Documents and Settings\Liz Tash\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK12\Used - PW Transfers 2.xls Entered in payroll with hours (rather than percentages) starting with pay period ending 05/09/03. pep ;mob' Cn 0 3 SaneWaoJad uo pasee mime omc coo a CO_ * a) s. tch 5 m N noy- � o 3 0 N i C) 0 O -,l N N CO co —1 U) co -I O o) () N co A ti N o) N W 74 co O (Jl CD Q Cn j i o) .1 6) . O1 in C7) IP ,p. i o) CO �I CO N CO 00P s-noH uo pase9 nutttt9 IIBPuDi ZO/ZZ/ u!ed ZO/ZZ/ J 8I)IUu8 ZO/ZZ/ N O N 0 N 0 Ja O 69 69 69 69 ffl 0) N 01 CO 01 Co O OD O CO W CA 6969494949. WM 0) O 1 1 0 w N CD 1 1 1 C7 0 0 P 1 I 1 93 0 41. ti Co N =, O bp 1 1 1 cn 1 I 1 0 N.) w w CO NI 1 1 1 • cn o co t7 °* 000000 co \ \ \ \ ..) N N N N N I\:) Co- \ Cb CB C\ b C>, OD \Cb ¢p cn a CT Ul CJl auCJl N 00 0 0 O 0 0 N N N N N N N 0 N N N N N N N CD * r Tj T. 2 -1 CO W Z r T� 2 �1 co CD 5 c m �. o Al:-(1)co3 9' c m � �o 3 0 S v v=, m m y N N W � m N.. 6969696969E6> 69 *0 - 07 N cn OD 01 7.1 00)�Ofu �co 00)t�D"< 6969696A696969 N C.J.N d p W w 1 1 1 1 & CO 0 .� O CA CO v 41, 41, Co OD COO -a O N v N 0) Co cri w O v 0 tri N O O O 1 1 )2i 0 0 -� 0r O ozuo8 ZO/5Z/0 ,0 � N co N N 114ffi6969696969 -la CANcncocn: Oo N co O Oo CA -d= 0)- 0-10)w0 D {fi696969696969 W O11.4 W 1 - 1 1 Co � 0) • 1 1co I 1 1 41, 0) o) m 51 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ar O O O O O O O go N N N N N N N N CD c m 0� 0 *. cc 0.Ch o 7 = -1 N 7C o Cr) 0) 7 o0 . -4 N — R f o N -u its N N fA6969ffltn. ffl69i =. a C �ACANcnaocn7El OD IV co O Oo -� C7 ft4 0) -� 0 -J co W 0) 0 69 6969696969614 W 0) O 1 1 I 1 N CO co N 1 1 I 1 1" • Co N o) w wcan o �.A (D 1 I 1 1 1"�` CD 1 1 I v, ca 0 ,b•.' 0 o) 0 CO w -a :la C. cm ii. 1 1 1 1 1 N -!� w \] a) O oo Co v • a' ;D G W N - <�' N: • CN a 0 1 1 1 Q'4. I 1 I \ O 1 1 Co CJ1 -' 3 -a I 1 1 1 w 1 0 I w 1 a' N N 1 1 I N CJ1 CO CJ1 71 n moo° 1 1 1 1 CO 01 a Op N r Aapiuue EO/LL/L ozuo8 EO/LL/L 49 4/4 .—p Ay a CD !n(ft�.l N W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W W co coW W ` r_T -nco03 0 y O d co= p Ip .a 7r K .0 uie1 ZO/OZ/Z Aeplups ZO/OZ/Z N CD N g CA 01 r W CD cn W W ^4 ii' DJ.A N 01 ffl •cni-i i b9 .0) EA 49 'Q 703N) �9 69 ffl 69 Ef3 EA &9 Q N K '. NOCPONCI1OCJl"��t �CANCJIOCnpp Ei O O � Crt V CO O O co cn Er Ef *co N CO O O Lt CA IO W ON coCOLIO co cn Er O-0"IOwCACD -En s9 in • EA 69 = ff9 ff3 K3 0) 0) 0) EA 49 -EA 9 49 43 b9 • b9 0) N W N . 1 •P N lE 03 0 W CO W 0) A) 0 0 W 03 Al '0 CEO U2 ; rt V CA �I W fti O) W !Q '* v i i IV ' Cn I) CA ' IV �,.,. s CO fD N— 0) O CD y 0 0- . r) .P O o y ozuo8 ZO/9/Z Z 3 ID .P C' a V CO CO CO W COO V Ca 0 r cn cn W i N:I N 0 N a cn N N iv Co cncn01 a C) N CO N 0 CO 'cn ""I O CA 0 co 0) s �p #:• a; CO o o w- , a, , o, 'Ca) IV Cn 0) O a 'dal . . 41. e Q► � Ca) Ca) CO 0) A • CO C~D W i N i COp CO a i ~ p 0 ''"10)cn W C3) O w w cn 4+ 0 0) — rn co 1, v O W v O COO 1 CO cn Cam►) ' cn C7 p a) o '"I 0 a C7)) coo cn Cn W 74 0')i Cn N ' 0 O CO 0 -n -o 0) i i CA � v 2 n -1 co cn GO0�O i i 0 D CO 03 DM Idea JeMag 19 aa;eN 0) 0 N 6949 N_ CO CA 0 W � Q) Cr, CJ1 N CA W .<6 im QQQQQg a comcommcom 90 0000000—, co wwwwww ,li • r- i m CO CO * MR5c0)=0 (D ..05-m= -, 5 ID VI 'a,I8 'es Iv * n -11 CO *".... W" ," CO N N) ' a o 0 W EA EA IA 69 EA CA <A ;IT z m '40 -• A cn N.) cri co cri ,m, 0 bo k) (o --si bo -t .a) cn -, o cr, co co m S' ,e4, ...... .. co . i., . . , .7, i.s, e . ....„, ,...... a) --.1 CO 1 1 1 1 1 CO 0 li 74, 1 1 i...) .---- ."0 AC1: o o - a) .p..05 w co0 1%.: d cyi e-Li -'(1, m r%) * cn o co-wtoto,00-eotom ' bom .)4''5Dcbr\:4crlco'co9c:—Lmcn.cn.<: r okr'!7' -401 ".4 ▪ 0 0) "...I (.4 'en en el3 eft .15 .."6" cn n) al 5o cn 74ji b) iv 'co 'o 'co 0n-fl0--.4cow0) ko-cd4.eno)-ento tato-el-en al co -i. (n --. 0) _. 0 0,- OD CD CO P) 1 1 1 1 1 Wt041,, 0I -"A 0) 0 N.) OW (Du cn cn o -4 1, 71 6.... 1 •b.)..„0 w op-- .4 L.... 0 ... .... 4,.. _. coWe..0 CO • co a co m co ..._ , cr , 0 o co on 0 'cn . , , an at cc • cc. m co 1 1 1 CO K.) CJ1 '5 rn 0 -T1 0 1 Co— , 1, (.71 co cn 1 1 1 - co co cn 5.n co (0,00, bo-L,1-• a) n) 0 EA EA Eft --LACANO 'co iv 4) O 'co • 0 00 EA EA EA EA if) . cn P.m7.4111 •••4 co po ry co 1..t.71) 0)• '1") Co ry .-;r:•••!;40' cn o 0) CY) 0) -,•• m , 0 co m mcnom-silpv, 'cri i.) iv i0 is) W WA0)0)0 - _,:•.- co o cn tkitri,!: m wmowco!,,e0 in in 'cn w comomo • 1 1 1 1 N N N N N N N C111 0111 CJ11 ( C\11 1( 11 .11 ((1 O O O O O O O W W W W W W W s -5c� .0 . (Q ou co C. (') O N 1.3 01 d fA V/ 69 69 69 if) iY) s43, 0) N cT1 CO C71 - O co co0co C0) 69 69 61 10) 10) 68 6) COT 41. 1 .t 0 43, -P I 1 1 1 1• d W 01 y 1 I 1 as JaMag +g aa;em n 11) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W co co co W co W ,. 7 _a 2 TI t . OW f ce 7 7 c0. w ea �I N41) TI =.i1j • O 1 1 1 1 p 1+ CO- o • 1 1 1 I co co co 46 CO .°. • 43, 1 1 1 N ew W N ry • 1 1 1 tl co N' 0• Ca/ 0) v D co O co co C) TIwI O 1 1 1 1 N q_ 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO ozuo8 £0/17 " to 4 f N CD.. -.4 (() CO00)) N 01 , CO CO C11 ill 69 iti 69 69 63 69 69 a?V 69 11) 69 6) 69 En 69 1 11) N3 4‹.,,.0: N ,c ? co N co CO co :O'er,' -aV ( co C) 71 CO CJ1 XI 00 N CO N 00 — C)I ems' Co iv 'co JI Co s C) w C) — O co co co co r co — O co 00 co C) 1D ID 1D z 3 0 61 69 69 69 69 69 69 N CO V .� 4 CO W W 00 0) C. cn N3 Ca) W 1 0)00 -1 69 69 69 63 69 6) 1� s N (0 O 1 1 1 CO CO U1 01 co CO A 0) -. N 4 , _. N N N(0 1 1 1 N �,. `..: � 0 1 1 1 1 0 O 43, CJ1 O , Na)Co co N 0 00) 1 1 N CO W C) +0 cJ1 N COW 1 1 v (1) re- C) 1 1 1 0 0 b0 c)1 CO CO N 1 0 TI N 1 1 1 1 . 0) W T N CJ1 O co C.71 N O -a Add 4?� CC) '{/) N CJt O Cr) 1 1 1 . r N 1 1 1 1 C) CO O CO fft 1 1 1 0 Original Billings: Month October November December January February March April May June Revised Billings: Month October November December January February March April May June Total Paid: Billing Comparison Salaries Public Works Transfer Other Expenses Total Amount Paid $ 1,502.38 $ 1,506.73 $ 1,507.91 $ 2,151.78 $ 1,475.82 $ 1,481.83 $ 1,652.18 $ 998.78 $ 1,343.54 $ 13,620.93 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 419.59 3,776.33 $ 4,039.96 $ 3,122.88 $ 1,460.43 $ 1,844.54 $ 1,038.75 $ 1,481.92 $ 1,704.64 $ 3,353.19 $ 2,782.84 $ 20,829.15 $ 5,961.93 $ 5,049.20 $ 3,387.93 $ 4,415.91 $ 2,934.15 $ 3,383.34 $ 3,776.41 $ 4,771.56 $ 4,545.98 $ 38,226.41 Salaries Public Works Transfer Other Expenses Total $ 1,113.98 $ 934.34 $ 595.89 $ 1,163.14 $ 733.15 $ 813.92 $ 917.73 $ 998.78 $ 1,343.54 $ 8,614.46 $ 32,107.66 Amount Owed: ( $ 2,152.33 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 535.15 $ 4,816.38 $ 4,039.96 3,122.88 1,460.43 1,844.54 1,038.75 1,481.92 1,704.64 3,353.19 2,782.84 20,829.15 $ 5,689.10 $ 4,592.38 $ 2,591.47 $ 3,542.83 $ 2,307.04 $ 2,830.99 $ 3,157.52 $ 4,887.12 $ 4,661.54 $ 34,259.99 $ 5,170.61 $ 4,257.89 $ 2,596.61 $ 3,624.60 $ 4,001.44 $ 2,935.67 $ 3,384.90 $ 3,353.10 $ 2,782.84 $ 32,107.66 Fund Expenditures to Allocate % to Allocate Amount Allocated Account Number) PW/Streets 825,118 80.67% 665,661 (Airport 2.33% 19,253 29-56-905 Water 9.91% 81,777 60-64-920 (Sewer - Collection 4.58% 37,778 70-74-920 Sewer - Treatment 2.50% 20,649 70-75-920 Total Budget I 100.00% 825,118 Total Transfer to PN/Streets 1 159,457 24-39-999 8/12/200311FinanceO\STAFF\Public\Users\All Users\FINANCE DEPARTMENT\BUDGET12002-2003 Budget\Transfers\Used - PW Transfers 2.xls Percentage for hours in each department for Management Transfer Liz * Airport PW/Streets Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment Total hours Hours Ea. 0 1204 438 328 109 2080 Percentage 0% 58% 21% 16% 5% 100% Bill * Airport PW/Streets Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment Total hours Hours Ea. 0 940 689 237 213 2080 Percentage 0% 45% 33% 11 % 10% 100% Streets/PW Crew Airport PW/Streets Water Sewer Collection Sewer Treatment Total hours Hours Ea. 437 12958 728 291 146 14,560 Percentage 3% 89% 5% 2% 1% 100% Totals 437 15102 1855 857 468 18,720 2.33% 80.67% 9.91% 4.58% 2.50% 100.00% Liz # Emps %° Bill Budget %° * Airport 0 0% * Airport - 0% PW/Streets 11 58% PW/Streets 774,069 45% Water 4 21% Water 567,916 33% Sewer Collection 3 16% Sewer Collection 195,624 11% Sewer Treatment 1 5% Sewer Treatment 175,796 10% 19 100% 1,713,405 100% * Bill and Liz report less than 1 % of their time is spent on the Airport. CITY OF MCCALL Report Criteria:. Account.Termination Date = {Is NULL} Account Detail Budget Worksheet - FY 03/04 Requested Page: 1 July 31, 2003 (7/03) Aug 12, 2003 04:07pm 2000-01 2001-02 07/03 2002-03 Pri Year 2 Pri Year Cur YTD Cur Year Acct No Account Description Actual Actual Actual Budget PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS FUND PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS 24-55-110 SALARIES AND WAGES 283,550 326,106 268,363 348,484 24-55-140 OVERTIME PAY 161 751 63 11,696 24-55-147 FICA 19,902 20,574 16,251 22,331 24-55-148 MEDICARE 4,654 4,812 3,801 5,223 24-55-149 RETIREMENT - PERSI 30,478 30,857 25,243 32,288 24-55-150 WORKER'S COMPENSATION 12,882 13,520 11,711 15,496 24-55-151 HEALTH INSURANCE 43,068 46,975 44,362 56,784 Budget Notes -2004 Includes estimated 41% increase. 24-55-152 DENTAL INSURANCE 2,654 3,660 3,263 2,646 24-55-153 PHYSICAL EXAMS 1,169 1,389 973 1,560 Budget Notes -2004 DOT Physicals. 24-55-154 UNEMPLOYMENT 2,462 6,761 246 2,550 Budget Notes -2004 Based on lay offs for plowing and summer. 24-55-156 CLOTHING/UNIFORMS 2,690 3,415 2,685 4,000 Budget Notes -2004 Full-time employees. 24-55-200 OFFICE SUPPLIES 961 922 845 1,600 24-55-210 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 4,565 7,293 6,165 9,500 Budget Notes -2004 Parts cleaner, Norco, Mechanic shop supplies. Marking paint, brooms, hand tools, etc. 24-55-220 FIRST AID, SAFETY 53 102 138 300 24-55-240 MINOR EQUIPMENT 6,359 11,389 3,780 12,160 Budget Notes -2004 Traffic control devices -barricades, cones. 24-55-245 SHOP SEAL 0 0 0 0 24-55-250 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBRICANTS 30,474 34,416 25,482 30,500 24-55-300 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,566 8,181 3,330 5,665 Budget Notes -2004 Includes stormdrain cleanouts 2x/yr. 24-55-310 ATTORNEY SERVICES 1,001 3 99 1,000 24-55-350 ENGINEER SERVICES 0 3,958 4,497 1,800 24-55-400 ADVERTISING/LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 247 299 524 900 24-55-410 INSURANCE 13,711 0 0 0 24-55-420 TRAVEL AND MEETINGS 259 350 1,407 1,991 24-55-435 BOOKS/PUBLICATIONS/SUBSCRIPTS 0 0 31 31 24-55-440 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2,005 3,646 2,372 4,978 Budget Notes -2004 Public Works Director, Road & Maintenance seminar, Street S. CITY OF MCCALL Budget Worksheet - FY 03/04 Requested Page: 2 July 31, 2003 (7/03) Aug 12, 2003 04:07pm 2000-01 2001-02 07/03 2002-03 Pri Year 2 Pri Year Cur YTD Cur Year Acct No Account Description Actual Actual Actual Budget PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS FUND PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS (Cont.) 24-55-460 TELEPHONE 3,646 4,105 3,947 4,100 Budget Notes -2004 3 Cells; Verizon, Frontier, and AT&T. 24-55-461 DSL 0 0 0 0 24-55-465 COMMUNICATIONS - RADIO 1,040 837 569 1,500 Budget Notes -2004 Radio repair, and batteries. 24-55-490 HEAT, LIGHTS, AND UTILITIES 20,054 23,869 20,201 25,000 Budget Notes -2004 Power, trash, W&S, and propane. Street lights power bills. 24-55-560 REPAIRS - OFFICE EQUIPMENT 207 239 306 1,600 Budget Notes -2004 Includes new copy machine maintenance 24-55-561 REPAIRS - BUILDING AND GROUNDS 1,106 5,128 19,372 19,835 Budget Notes -2004 Overhead garage doors, shop lighting. 24-55-563 REPAIRS - OTHER EQUIPMENT 0 0 390 500 24-55-580 REPAIRS -AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT 35,782 60,736 29,870 72,500 24-55-582 STREET REPAIR - CRACK SEAL 7,442 7,169 3,739 9,500 Budget Notes -2004 CRF oil for streets repair. 2455583 STREET REPAIR -WEED CONTROL 1,017 0 0 1,200 24-55-584 STREET REPAIR - DUST ABATEMENT 18,159 18,720 12,822 22,500 Budget Notes -2004 Mag Chloride contracted out. 24-55-585 STREET REPAIR - CHIP SEALING 42,841 40,192 0 38,600 Budget Notes -2004 Brundage Meadows, Syringa, Lick Creek. 24-55-586 STREET REPAIR -SNOW REMOVAL 1,003 145 0 2,000 Budget Notes -2004 Minor damage repairs. 24-55-587 STREET REPAIR - STORM DRAIN 1,916 6,859 1,966 2,500 Budget Notes -2004 Culverts, drops. 24-55-588 STREET REPAIR-SIGNS,CONES,POST 935 3,415 447 3,500 24-55-589 STREET REPAIR - REJECT SAND 27,865 11,640 41,899 28,000 Budget Notes -2004 Winter sanding material. 24-55-590 STREET REPAIR -STREET PAINTING 3,207 3,098 2,444 2,800 Budget Notes -2004 Annual street painting project, paint & supplies. 24-55-601 STREET REPAIR - PATCHING 8,818 9,607 9,766 16,000 Budget Notes -2004 Asphalt repair/patch, balsalt. PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS Totals: 644,909 725,116 573,369 825,118 CITY OF MCCALL EXPENDITURES WITH COMPARISON TO BUDGET FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING JULY 31, 2003 PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS FUND ENCUMBRANCE PERIOD ACTUAL TOTAL YTD BUDGET UNEXPENDED PCNT PUBLIC WORKS/STREETS PERSONNEL COSTS 24-55-110 SALARIES AND WAGES .00 27,136.47 268,362.58 348,484.00 80,121.42 77.0 24-55-140 OVERTIME PAY .00 .00 63.37 11,696.00 11,632.63 .5 24-55-147 FICA .00 1,643.57 16,251.20 22,331.00 6,079.80 72.8 24-55-148 MEDICARE .00 384.41 3,800.97 5,223.00 1,422.03 72.8 24-55-149 RETIREMENT - PERSI .00 2,323.42 25,242.62 32,288.00 7,045.38 78.2 24-55-150 WORKER'S COMPENSATION .00 1,270.10 11,710.55 15,496.00 3,785.45 75.6 24-55-151 HEALTH INSURANCE .00 4,429.27 44,362.25 56,784.00 12,421.75 78.1 24-55-152 DENTAL INSURANCE .00 324.81 3,262.63 2,646.00 ( 616.63) 123.3 24-55-153 PHYSICAL EXAMS .00 45.00 973.00 1,560.00 587.00 62.4 2455-154 UNEMPLOYMENT .00 24 98 246.17 2,550.00 2,303.83 9.7 2455-156 CLOTHING/UNIFORMS .00 .00 2,685.09 4,000.00 1,314.91 67.1 PERSONNEL COSTS .00 37,582.03 376,960.43 ( 503,058.00126,097.57 74.9 OPERATING EXPENSES: 24-55-200 OFFICE SUPPLIES .00 .00 844.89 1,600.00 755.11 52.8 24-55-210 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES .00 205.16 6,164.95 9,500.00 3,335.05 64.9 24-55-220 FIRST AID, SAFETY .00 48.88 138.16 300.00 161.84 46.1 24-55-240 MINOR EQUIPMENT .00 813.05 3,780.05 12,160.00 8,379.95 31.1 24-55-250 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBRICANTS .00 1,180.58 25,482.46 30,500.00 5,017.54 83.6 2455-300 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,520.00 168.95 4,849.63 5,665.00 815.37 85.6 24-55-310 ATTORNEY SERVICES .00 34.00 98.75 1,000.00 901.25 9.9 24-55-350 ENGINEER SERVICES .00 1,500.00 4,497.00 1,800.00 ( 2,697.00) 249.8 2455400 ADVERTISING/LEGAL PUBLICATIONS .00 .00 523.95 900.00 376.05 58.2 2455420 TRAVEL AND MEETINGS .00 65.70 1,406.55 1,990.86 584.31 70.7 24-55-435 BOOKS/PUBLICATIONS/SUBSCRIPTS .00 .00 31.00 31.00 .00 100.0 24-55-440 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT .00 735.00 2,372.29 4,978.14 2,605.85 47.7 24-55-460 TELEPHONE .00 392.19 3,946.97 4,100.00 153.03 96.3 24-55-465 COMMUNICATIONS - RADIO .00 227.90 568.90 1,500.00 931.10 37.9 2455490 HEAT, LIGHTS, AND UTILITIES .00 1,478.19 20,200.87 25,000.00 4,799.13 80.8 2455-560 REPAIRS -OFFICE EQUIPMENT 156.00 78.00 462.00 1,600.00 1,138.00 28.9 24-55561 REPAIRS - BUILDING AND GROUNDS .00 .00 19,372.41 19,835.00 462.59 97.7 2455-563 REPAIRS - OTHER EQUIPMENT .00 .00 389.80 500.00 110.20 78.0 24-55-580 REPAIRS -AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT 700.00 2,179.35 30,570.39 72,500.00 41,929.61 42.2 24-55-581 STREET REPAIR - PATCHING .00 519.50 9,765.81 16,000.00 6,234.19 61.0 24-55582 STREET REPAIR - CRACK SEAL 2,400.00 .00 6,139.44 9,500.00 3,360.56 64.6 24-55-583 STREET REPAIR- WEED CONTROL .00 .00 .00 1,200.00 1,200.00 .0 24-55-584 STREET REPAIR - DUST ABATEMENT 4,178.50 742.50 17,000.00 22,500.00 5,500.00 75.6 24-55-585 STREET REPAIR - CHIP SEALING 42,696.52 .00 42,696.52 38,600.00 ( 4,096.52) 110.6 24-55-586 STREET REPAIR - SNOW REMOVAL .00 .00 .00 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0 2455587 STREET REPAIR - STORM DRAIN .00 29.68 1,966.06 2,500.00 533.94 78.6 24-55-588 STREET REPAIR-SIGNS,CONES,POST .00 .00 446.52 3,500.00 3,053.48 12.8 24-55-589 STREET REPAIR - REJECT SAND .00 20,000.00 41,899.07 28,000.00 ( 13,899.07) 149.6 24-55-590 STREET REPAIR -STREET PAINTING .00 .00 2,443.56 2,800.00 356.44 87.3 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 51,651.02 30,398.63 248,058.00 (322060.o' 74,002.00 77.0 v . i FOR ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY 83 % OF THE FISCAL YEAR HAS ELAPSED 08/12/2003 04:25PM PAGE: 6 4/17/03 Holladay Engineering Company RATES ANALYSIS A. Fair Cost Distribution Between the City and the District 1. Treatment system cost allocation to both entities 2. Collection system costs not shared 3. Each entity would have different rates based on costs incurred by the entity. B. Population Projection and Analysis (Completed separately for each entity) 1. Determine general growth assumptions 2. Analyze growth and effects on rate structure 3. Assumed housing occupation rate C. Probable System Upgrades 1. Trunk sewer infrastructure and wastewater treatment upgrades a) trunk sewer infrastructure improvements to be determined by facilities plan (completed separately for each entity) b) wastewater treatment upgrades: step screen, grit removal, sludge removal (joint analysis based on cost sharing formula). 2. System improvements associated with replacing/repairing existing sewer line allocated to all residents and funded by monthly service rates (analysis completed separately for each entity). 3. System improvements associated with demand for increased capacity funded by connection fee increases (if treatment plant upgrade, increases in connection fee allocated to both entities based on cost sharing formula). 4. Probable schedule for trunk and main line upgrades based on population projections and comprehensive growth plan (analysis completed separately for each entity). D. Other Factors Effecting Rates 1. Operations and Maintenance Costs: Determine operations and maintenance costs based on historical budget information and needed improvements. These costs City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 allocated to all residents and funded by monthly service rates (analysis completed separately for each entity) 2. Environmental Regulations Upgrades: These costs allocated to all residents and funded by monthly service rates (if treatment plant upgrade, increases in connection fee allocated to both entities based on cost sharing formula). E. Some Options for Rates 1. Flat rate fee 2. Equivalent Domestic Unit (EDU) analysis and variation with customer groups 3. Water usage basis. City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting DRAFT 4/24/03 April 24, 2003 Bill Keating, Director of Public Works City of McCall 216 Park Street McCall, ID 83638 Re: Joint Powers Board — Septage Handling and Fees Ref. No. 041803 Dear Bill: On April 17, we met with the Joint Powers Board along with you and John Lewinski to discuss a number of issues relating to waste handling and administrative procedures. In preparation for that meeting, we investigated some representative costs for septage handling as well as administrative procedures to track loads to better safeguard the City's treatment system. Based on discussions that took place and from our experience in permitting septage disposal under Section 503 rules, the following recommendations are forwarded for your consideration. 1. Initiate a permit process to limit dumping of industrial waste including septage to only permit holders who have, in turn, signed an agreement with terms and conditions acceptable to McCall's Treatment Facility. Usually a nominal annual fee accompanies the permit application. 2. Raise rates for dumping waste to a minimum of $40 per thousand gallons with a minimum fee of $25 for any size load. Rates will be charged based on tank volume, not on the operator's estimate of gallons. This policy is standard in the industry unless a means of weighing or on -site metering equipment is installed. 3. Construct a dumping headwork with splash or spill containment and washdown water ahead of any screening or grit removal equipment. Again, this is standard in the industry. The cost of construction and maintenance of this feature should be allocated in the rate structure for the treatment service provided. 4. Test each load for pH at a minimum and require it be accompanied by a dated manifest identifying the generator with the generator's signature, type of waste, place of origin, and should also contain the hauler's signature. There are a number of manifests that may be used as a model. 5. If unsupervised waste dumping is permitted, a surveillance system should be installed to record the action. Usually a card -reader gate control and camera can accomplish this. It is acknowledged that all this represents additional control and possibly additional man- hours at the facility. However, the negative experiences of other liquid waste facility operators indicate that fugitive dumping has been problem. As other plants monitor or are closing their facilities to certain wastes or haulers in the Boise valley area, McCall may wish to protect itself against those waste streams. At some point in the ongoing operation of facilities, a cost evaluation should be performed that includes the costs of specific septage handling facilities and management in addition to wastewater treatment. This could better inform the Council and citizens of the cost of treatment provided by the City. Typically where these have been evaluated using similar controls and oversight as those recommended above, the cost of treatment was found to range from $40 to $200 per thousand gallons of septage or other industrial liquid waste. It is our recommendation that, at some point, the rate for dumping be based on the actual cost. Typically, we support the policy that one group of ratepayers should not subsidize another. Respectfully, Holladay Engineering Co. Vernon E. Brewer, Project Manager Shawn Kohtz, Staff Engineer Cc: Robert Strope, City Manager Bill Burke, PLRWSD Earl Ward, Nampa Treatment Plant John Lewinski, Plant Operator 2 :00 Joint Powers Board Meeting YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED, Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2341 (5) (a), that The Representatives of the Joint Powers Board of the City of McCall, and The Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District will hold a meeting at the offices of the City of Nampa Wastewater Treatment PIant at 340 W. Railroad St. Nampa, Idaho on Thursday April 17, 2003 at 10:00 A.M. The meeting will be held for the following purposes: 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Minutes of March meeting 3. Current Issues a .5 year capital improvement plan b. Master plan, review District Analysis c. Refined figures for Labor d. Breakdown of Public Works Transfers e. Flowmeters 4. Other Business 5. Next Meeting Date Adjourn SF1 k-1,11 r \ Holladay Engineering Company 4/ 16/03 AGENDA ADDITIONS FOR JOINT POWERS BOARD MEETING, APRIL 17, 2003. 1. Upcoming EPA-CMOM requirements for sewer collection systems and wastewater treatment facilities 2. Facilities plan and joint scope of work with rates analysis 3. Step -Screen and Grit Removal System 4. Septage Rates For whoever is interested: If time permits, we can visit the Nampa wastewater treatment facility regarding step - screen and grit removal equipment and operation. We can also visit the Fruitland Wastewater Treatment Facility regarding step -screen operation for a lagoon system. Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 AGENDA ADDITIONS FOR JOINT POWERS BOARD MEETING, APRIL 17, 2003. 1. Upcoming EPA-CMOM requirements for sewer collection systems and wastewater treatment facilities 2. Facilities plan, Collection System 3. Sludge Removal a) sludge removal b) step -screen c) grit removal 4. Rates analysis a) sewage rates b) septage rates For whoever is interested: If time permits, we can visit the Nampa wastewater treatment facility regarding step - screen and grit removal equipment and operation. We can also visit the Fruitland Wastewater Treatment Facility regarding step -screen operation for a lagoon system. Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 EPA-CMOM OVERVIEW A. General Points 1. CMOM = Capacity, Management, Operations, and Maintenance for sewage collection systems 2. MOM = Management, Operations, and Maintenance for wastewater treatment systems 3. All owners of sewage collection systems and wastewater treatment plants will be required to implement CMOM requirements. CMOM requirements will be added to the NPDES permit system. 4. CMOM rules are currently in draft form within the EPA. However, now is the time to begin planning for these requirements. B. Goals of CMOM Program 1. Eliminate Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) and, 2. General Goals: Optimize labor, materials, finances, and equipment for collection and wastewater treatment systems. a) Ensure the availability of facilities and equipment for adequate service. b) Ensure conveyance capacity and reliability of the collection system is maintained as originally designed. c) Maintain the value of the collection system investment. d) Planning for ongoing collection system improvements. 3. Specific Goals: a) Design and construct for operations and maintenance b) Inventory of system c) Map of system d) Assessment of system condition/System model e) Plan and schedule work based on condition and performance f) Repair, replace, and rehabilitate based on condition and performance of system C. Proposed Standard Permit Conditions of Program 1. Recordkeeping and reporting requirements for SSOs 2. Public notification requirements SSOs 3. Capacity assurance, management, operation, and maintenance requirements for collection systems 4. Prohibitions of SSO discharges 5. Evaluation of the location of emergency overflow structures City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 D. Satellite Collection Systems 1. Definition: collection systems that do not treat and discharge their wastewater. 2. New NPDES permit coverage for satellite systems regarding CMOM requirements for collection systems E. Details of CMOM for Collection Systems 1. Capacity: a) Flow monitoring b) Manhole and pipeline inspection c) I/I detection d) Rehabilitation 2. Management: a) Employee organizational structure b) Employee training c) Internal and external communication d) Customer service e) Management information systems f) SSO notification g) Legal authority 3. Operation: a) Budgeting b) Compliance c) Monitoring d) Areas subject to hydrogen sulfide generation e) Safety program f) Emergency preparedness and response g) Modeling (model discussed in another information packet) h) Engineering and collection system maps 4. Maintenance: a) Budgeting b) Planned and unplanned maintenance c) Sewer cleaning d) Parts and equipment inventory City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 F. Details of MOM for Wastewater Treatment Systems 1. Management: Same as collection system except record -keeping and reporting section is added and no SSO notification. 2. Operations: Same as collection system except chemical materials management, process control and optimization sections are added. There is no modeling or engineering section. 3. Maintenance: Same as collection system except an emergency maintenance section is required. G. Schedule for Regulation Implementation 1. Proposed CMOM rule not yet submitted to Office of Management and Budget for financial analysis. 2. Rule likely to be released for publication in the Fall of 2003. 3. Publication in the Federal Register likely to occur in the Spring of 2004, and the 120 day public comment period will be initiated. 4. Final rule likely to be published by the end of 2004. 5. Requirements of the rule begin during a system's new NPDES permit cycle (5 years from now for McCall, 2008). 6. Require r s.. the rule for the Water and Sewer District likely to occur near the end of F. Preparation 1. Gather Existing Information: a) existing procedures, maps, studies, and data b) capital improvements history c) O&M history d) Infrastructure inventory e) Budget information 2. Facilities Plan/Study-Hydraulic Analysis: Refer to scope of work and rough probable costs, agenda item for this meeting Holladay Engineering is hosting a free half -day workshop to provide information on the EPA-CMOM requirements. The workshop will be at the Fruitland City Hall on Tuesday, May 13, 2003 starting at 9:00 A.M. Presenter: Rich Dees, Operations Manager for Boise Public Works. (We are working on establishing wastewater C.E.U.s for the workshop) City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 FACILITIES PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY OF McCALL COLLECTION SYSTEM A. Field Work 1. Survey: a) pipe elevations b) pipe lengths and size verification c) pipe alignment d) pipe material and condition e) locations of manholes and pipes 2. I/I Study: a) measure sewer flows due to infiltration and inflow b) gather existing information/reports for I/I 3. Others: a) staff interviews to gather information on line maintenance and problem areas b) gather lift station information on pumps, wet -well size, and discharge line c) gather copies of all pertinent studies, flows, reliable drawings, sewer TV videos. d) land use map, comprehensive plan for unannexed area e) lots contributing flow to specific points of sewer system f) copy of agreements with DEQ affecting collection system B. Analysis Work 1. Prepare a base map of the City 2. Information input and analysis using computer software 3. Prepare sewer map and model 4. Multiple trips to McCall to coordinate efforts with City 5. Prepare facility plan report City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 STEP -SCREEN AND GRIT REMOVAL SYSTEM A. Step Screen Probable Cost: 1. $202,700 (2001 dollar value), identified in Sludge Management Plan B. Grit Separator and Classifier Probable Cost: 1. $230,000 (2003 dollar value) C. Competitive Cost Estimates 1. Competitive equipment bids from other manufacturers may bring costs down. D. Priority Construction: 1. Sludge disposal must occur when efficiency of the wastewater treatment system is significantly reduced due to sludge accumulation. This is expected with the next 4 years. 2. The step screen is the next highest priority upgrade and should be completed as soon as possible due to the proposed land application of sludge. Objectionable material should be removed to make the sludge more palatable to landowners for land application. 3. Grit separator and classifier is a secondary consideration. a) Is this a major problem now? b) Can existing grit removal methods (dredging near influent pipes) continue for a period of time without excessive hardship? c) How long should grit removal be postponed based on current hardships? 4. Sequencing of the step screen and grit removal costs can occur based on the considerations outlined in items 2 and 3. How should each consideration be weighted? City of McCall and Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District Joint Powers Board Meeting Holladay Engineering Company 4/17/03 SEPTAGE RATE ANALYSIS Septage typically means domestic septage from standard septic tanks that has had a long enough residency time to be considered stabilized, but it may include waste from portable toilets, RV holding tanks, and liquid or solid material removed from industrial or commercial sewage systems including grease and grit traps. An analysis of the cost of handling and treating septage waste will identify the following items: 1. Additional treatment capacity of system 2. Specific facilities or headworks modifications for receiving waste a. Septic Tank Waste b. Chemical Toilet c. Other liquid or solid waste materials 3. Specific upgrades or treatment capacity to handle additional waste loading 4. Cost of administration and permits 5. Cost of additional testing, if required 6. Cost of treatment based on flow and composition of waste product 7. Operator time commitment 3 rt. 3 Sr a 7-) /- (1_1 tfrv4r2-0.--LLiA kAf u-±r- g (;(.(0 c (I ( e ./ rt 1:30 16 PfiA"\11°A) c-r). WPA 0, A S IOC!? k 41, , Cofift'vt-,L,J, r • /4A-( iiv1 Pqk fit . 77( _s- ut e rik #.r1 ii r Cnit r. - 2 , S 715.-V•x• , , '--1 ( '1 4 = d ct 4 six'sisAieue asuadxa dorm pJ V0 O W A ▪ Q c) "--.1N N Q0 0 N O N M N N N N J W 01 N 1co V •V O O ' A 0 CO V V - W V ON N W co AV V W W co N CON(0 CO - 0 (VD 0 co co 0 coW .0 IV O 8 !— O O = =D W CO W4P CO N A i0 j0 0 O �O O S ;O 9 O O O IS 10 1 L N ' •-• 01 N N C- 1 • V Co W N as r'((o + (0 V i3 •A 01 0'A A CO V CO'V 0 - CO N A 0 0 • V O • A N V I A I (O 0 O 0 0 CO CIA W N fT O A 0 0 U1 0 A A N 0) Co N V 0 V V 02 N A al Co O c 0' N V 1 01 N W' co A O A Cn O N N 0 0 0 'N -1,1l A N W - • W CO W 03 01 W — NIQ co 44 01 01 co O N —. A A CO N O) 1 p8 co N A N CA UI 0 A CO A CO 0V 0 ColO W A O CAA N -.1I V A I A N bo Oo I O V W ' 0,4 O 0 (O Oo N 01 ' se- 0N V Cn (O O (O A CO 0) A CO CO V 0 CO N V S O O W O CO 0 1V N 00 10 iI 11 IS O 1 o a 3 '0 N N 0 U m 3 N S. 2. 2 d • C v N g 3 N m m N sa!IddnS eoUjO 1 asuadxa eaAojdwe 1V101 0 W IN IA ;A 01W N O I-p 0 I 1O 01 N O) O 10 IO 10 IO 0) S S N 10 !O O 18 1 O 'N I 0) Cn 1N •A 1 .A 15T W V pN' 0 F.0 0 COI 0 I O' O N O O O ;O ,O -O IO 10 •O 0 O A O N N CO A SIN IN 0Si0A1 o m IN 0 5.0 01 V - co N 0 01 co 0 44 Fr, c• on A V CNn 0 IN A <0 01 N V 01 jN :A IN iN A A .P N I� 0 • "co 0 A IJ A CO CO 01 V - 01 A I(O CO A CO 01V1 0 A 0 A N 0 0) oo v 0 N U1 co A A (O A ,0 0- 1 ) .P N NIV Cn 1N71 A A CO 'A 10 Cn N N V (71 na ACO CO • A0 N ▪ • O • 0 0 V 80 ZL4'£ 69796'Z 0 0)0) A 00 Cn - j 1 , I � I Ui CO-16 + CO � COWN 0 0) ' 0 (D 01 0 CD COA I _V L I I C. 01 A mNA 0 N 0 ' A CO Co • A CD N V V CO 0 OD m 0 V 0• N 01 Cn N W (0D 01 CO 0 ' IO IW I, j0 O T A O O , A 1 I 1 Iv. IAo I. i0) 1N IN W 1 I, 010I + 11 io Vi, A N j0 1 .CO "IP' IW (0 l 0) 0) 0 A -CO co •A '0) 0 m 000 (W71 11 w 0 Ien :0;(O !co N N ▪ N' CO' IN • + N N CO 0 130 A il0 0 V A tls' 1) in ae 1 I V , � m ▪ ,_co-.it), o, 41. co Q 0 W fl 0 w E00Z sisiCieuy eieys 1so3 d1MM Item Operating Expenses: Salaries and Wages Overtime Pay FICA Medicare Retirement-PERSI Worker's Compensation Health Insurance Dental Insurance Physical Exams Unemployment Vision Clothing/Uniforms Vacant Office Supplies Department Supplies Chemicals Motor Fuels and Lubricant Licenses and Permits Professional Services Attorney Services Engineer Services Advertising and Legal Insurance Travel and Meetings Dues and Subscriptions Personnel Training & Licen: Telephone Communications -Radio Heat, Lights, and Utilities Management Transfer-GF (City Manager portion removed) Public Works Transfer Sub Total: District Budget Amount: Difference: Capital Items*: Minor Equipment Repairs -Office Equipment Repairs -Building and Grounds Repairs -Automotive Equipment Repairs -Other Equipment Capital Expenses Under $5000 Capital Expenses $5000+ Sub Total: District Budget Amount**: Difference: *this includes those items that we discussed being paid based on I 1/3 in current agreements Identifies items that would be changed to flow -based cost sharing **this is based on City budget amount in current financial statements City Budget $ 45,901 2,666 3,011 704 4,745 1,924 7,627 294 250 500 200 3,500 5,500 800 4,000 2,000 5,000 200 3,400 500 150 750 2,500 200 [ $ 72,000 $ 9,015 �$16,190� Percent Paid By PLRWSD 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1 % 31.1% 31.1% PLRWSD Portion 14,275 ! 829 1 936 219 1,476 598 2,372 91 78 1 156 I 62j 1,089 j 1,7111 PD% 249 1,244 622 1,555 $ 62 $ 1,057 $ 156 $ 47 $ 233 $ 778 $ 62 $ 22,392 ,2a 1„ $ 2,804 $ 5,035 $ 60,187 $ 57,264 $ (2,923) $ 4,000 33.0% $ 1,320 $ 300 33.0% $ 99 i. $ 3,500 33.0% $ 1,155 $ 900 33.0% $ 297 $ 7,500 I 33.06/01 $ 2,4751 $ 3,000 I 33.0% $ 9901 $ 10,000 I 33.0%I $ 3,3001 $ 9,636 $ 4,030 $ (5,606) 3/11/20033:45 PM operating cost sharing.xls R. Strope Cooperative Agreement THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this 15th day of December, 1977, by and between the CITY OF MCCALL, a municipal corporation located in Valley County, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and the PAYETTE LAKES WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT, VALLEY COUNTY, IDAHO, a sewer district organized and existing under and by virtue of Chapter 32, Title 42, Idaho Code, and lying adjacent and contiguous to the geographical boundaries of the City of McCall, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "District", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has a centralized sewage collector system and sewage disposal lagoons which are currently treating the sewage that is or will be produced by the City, and WHEREAS, the District was formed for the purposes (among others) of providing a sewage collection system and sewage treatment facilities for its territory and inhabitants thereof and the District desires to construct a collection system and improve, enlarge and use the sewage treatment system of the City for such purposes, and WHEREAS the parties deem it in the best interest of the City and the inhabitants thereof, as well as of the District and the inhabitants thereof, to cooperate in improving and enlarging the sewage treatment system of the City for the use and benefit of the City and the District and to cooperate in the maintenance and operation of a sewage collection system for the District under the terms and conditions herein set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. CONSTRUCTION TO BE PERFORMED BY DISTRICT. (A) The District shall, at its expense, construct a sanitary sewer collection and outfall system according to the plans ans specifications being prepared by Intermountain Engineers, a joint venture of : McCarter & Tuller, Inc. 327 N. 27th St. Boise, Idaho 83706 Bill Harris, E.M. P.O. Box 806 McCall, Idaho 83638 J-U-B Engineers, Inc. 212 10`h Avenue South Nampa, Idaho 83651 which plans and specifications, when approved by the District, the United States Department of agriculture, Farmers Home Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and the City, shall be incorporated herein by this reference and made a part of this agreement. (B) The District shall, at its expense construct, reconstruct, improve and enlarge the sewage treatment system of the City upon the premises currently owned by the City in Valley County, Idaho, described as follows, to -wit : In Section 17, Township 18 North, Range 3 East, B.M. as follows : NE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4; SE l /4S W 1 /4NW 1 /4; S 1/2NW 1/4SE 1/4NW 1/4; SW1/4SE1/4NW1/4; N1/2SE 1/4SE 1/4NW 1/4; That portion of the S1/2SE1/4SE1/4NW1/4 lying North and West of a diagonal line extending from the Southwest corner of said tract to the Northeast corner thereof; and N 1/2NW 1/4NE 1/4SW 1/4. According to plans and specifications now being prepared by the engineers above named and when such plans and specifications have been approved as above provided, the same shall be incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this agreement, the ownership of which sewage treatment system upon completion thereof shall be transferred to the City and shall be maintained and operated for the benefit of the terms hereof. Section 2. CONSTRUCTION TO BE PERFORMED BY CITY. As part of its complete sewage program, the District agrees to sponsor and the City agrees to pay 10% of the eligible Environmental Protection Agency cost and 100% of non -eligible Environmental Protection Agency costs of upgrading and repairing the existing City sewage collection system to eliminate excess infiltration and inflow, the estimated total cost of which is $125,000.00, according to plans and specifications prepared by the above engineers, subject to the above approvals, which plans and specifications are incorporated and made a part hereof by reference. Section 3. TREATMENT OF SEWAGE. The City agrees to accept and treat sewage from the District collection system in a good and workmanlike manner and as provided by law. Section 4. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF DISTRICT SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM. The City agrees to perform for the District all sewer repair, maintenance and operation of the District's sewage collection system on a full time basis, for the fees hereinafter set forth. Section 5. MONTHLY COLLECTIONS. The City agrees to do the billing and collect the following fees from the District sewer users on a monthly basis: (A) Fees charged in order to accumulate funds for the District's use in meeting any bonded indebtedness obligation; (B) Monthly sewer user charges; ©) Sewer connection fees; (D) Sewer development and extension charges; all of which fees and charges shall be established by the District by appropriate action. After deducting the fees payable to the City hereinafter set forth in Section 6, the City shall remit monthly to the District the remainder of all sums collected by it for the District. Section 6. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES OF CITY. The City and the District further agree that the City shall retain from the monthly sewer charges enumerated in Section 5 hereof, the following sums: (A) Such sum as may from time to time be agreed upon by the parties hereto per connection per month as and for a billing fee for collecting the above charges of the District to its members; (B) Such sum as may from time to time be agreed upon by the parties hereto per connection per month as and for a fee for operation, maintenance and repair of the District's sewage collection system; (C) The actual cost of parts, supplies and power used to maintain and operate such sewer system, including freight, insurance and telephone charges, if any; (D) That percentage of the cost of operation and maintenance of the City sewage treatment system based upon volume of sewage produced by users within the District as compared to total volume of sewage treated. It is specifically agreed that the payments set forth above shall be reviewed after each year of operation and shall by action of the parties be adjusted to cover actual costs of such services. Section 7. EXTRAORDINARY SERVICES. The parties shall mutually agree in advance of each expenditure over $100.00 made by the City on behalf of the District for labor, parts, and supplies required in operation, maintenance, extension and enlargement of said sewer system over and above ordinary maintenance and operation, and the District agrees to pay for such expenditures at its regular monthly meeting immediately succeeding receipt of a billing therefor. Section 9. NOTICES The District shall notify the City promptly as to any and all fees and charges set by the District, the names and addresses of the users in the District and as to any changes in such fees, charges, names and addresses. The City shall notify the District of any failure of any user to pay any of the fees and charges set forth in this Agreement, such notice to be given not more than 15 days after the due date of such payment. All notices herein provided to be given by either of the parties to the other shall be in writing and shall be addressed as follows: Notices to the City: The City Clerk City of McCall P.O. Box 1065 McCall, Idaho 83638 Notices to the District: Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District % Frank T. Elam P.O. Box 703 McCall, Idaho 83638 In the event either party changes its address it shall immediately notify the other party in writing of such change. Section 10. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS. The District shall participate, in relation to benefit derived, in any future improvements to the sewage treatment facilities of the City to which the parties mutually agree. Section 11. ADDITIONAL LANDS. If additional lands are annexed to the District in the future, including lands which may be within the corporate limits of the City, the parties agree that the provisions of this agreement shall apply equally to all lands of the District whether the same lie within or outside the corporate limits of the City, and the sewer lines of the District within the City shall remain the property of the District unless and until turned over to and accepted by the City, and the City shall have no obligation as to such lines except as set forth in this Agreement. Section 12. MEMBERSHIP ON BOARD OF APPRAISERS. The City agrees to have the Mayor of the City appoint, with the advice and consent of the Board of Directors of the District, a person to serve on a District Board of Appraisers if and when such a board is created by the District. Section 13. TERM The term of this Agreement shall be 50 years from the date hereof. Section 14. IMPLEMENTATION. Both parties agree to enact such ordinances, resolutions and agreements that may from time to time be required in order to enable them to implement and carry out the provisions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 15`h day of December, 1977 Amended 12/4/78 Bill Burke Joint Powers Board City of McCall Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District January 10, 2003 Meeting Members Present Earl Ward Robert Strom Advisors Present Jamie Melbo Bill Keating Public Present None Meeting was called to order at 1:45 p.m. July minutes were approved. Current Issues: City of McCall Wastewater Treatment Facility Sludge Management Plan. A study done for the City of McCall by Holladay Engineering Company was presented and discussion followed. Bill Keating stated that the plan had already been submitted to DEQ for approval and preliminary estimates by Holladay for step screens and a grit removal system were estimated at $508,000. All agreed that the screens, although expensive, would pay for themselves several times over in the long term, as they could negate the need for dredging for as long as ten years. The City of McCall chose option 5 in the plan as the most viable and cost efficient of the alternatives and Bill Keating stated their intentions of budgeting accordingly. Bill Burke stated the District would need time to review the study, having just recently received copies. Earl Ward said he may be able to refine some of the numbers having dealt with this issue for many years, and described how the City of Nampa handles sludge management. Robert suggested that perhaps by the next meeting the plan and cost alternatives could be researched, and that this Board could then begin the budgeting process. The current study states that there has been no appreciable reduction of efficiency due to sludge accumulation to date, but that cell 2 will probably warrant dredging within five years. The diffusers and air piping in this cell are outdated and are no longer manufactured. Because of their configuration, dredging will cause major damage to occur when sludge is removed. This requires that a new diffuser and air piping be installed at the time of the first dredging. The new equipment will be configured to allow sludge removal without damage occurring in the process. The City of McCall hopes to budget and plan for the first dredging in five years. The addition of step screens to remove plastics and other Page 1 of 4 solids could drastically reduce the costs of sludge disposal and extend the time periods between dredging. In addition to step screens the updated plan also calls for a grit removal system that would hopefully extend the times between dredging, and reduce costs of disposal. This Board is in agreement that installation of the step screen and grit removal system must occur prior to the first dredging to significantly reduce future dredging costs. The primary reason being the higher cost of disposal if any plastics are present in the sludge, the screen and removal system would prevent these from entering the cells. Robert made a motion that the Joint Powers Board begins formulating a five year capital improvement plan that would prioritize the needs at the Plant to allow planning and budgeting for the future. Earl Ward seconded the motion, motion passed 3-0. J-Ditch Funding: Earl Ward stated that at the last meeting we had spoken briefly about the second pump required on the storage pond, and that Robert had at that time mentioned there may be sufficient BOR funds to purchase and install the pump. Robert stated that all of the BOR funds have been expended without provisions for the pump, and that the second pump was out for bid at this time. The costs associated with correcting defective work ran more than the City anticipated they would. Robert added that they should have withheld more funds from the surety, as repairs on the defective work have been higher than foreseen. Earl asked where this left the District in regards to funding the step screens, as he thought that item was in the original plan. Robert replied that the step screens, while in the original plan, were not part of the plan at the time construction started. Bill Burke asked where that leaves us pertaining to the second pump as far as its funding. Robert stated that the City was going to install the second pump out of Sewer Fund Balance dollars. Bill Burke asked how the litigation concerning the J-Ditch suit was progressing. Robert stated that he and many others had been in Boise recently being deposed, and that the case would go to court next fall. He added that the vast majority of the work on Phase II was complete, but there was still a list of items needing done, including some work on the sedimentation basin on the Seubert property. Bill Burke asked about an item on the City's balance sheet for the J-Ditch titled Farmers Maint. 10%. Robert stated that it was there when he started his employment, and he believed it to be the farmer's share of construction, and that those monies had gone into construction. Robert stated he did not know the origin of the funds, nor the original amounts. Discharge Permit: Robert reported that the Emergency Discharge Permit had passed from EPA down to DEQ and was being reviewed. The City has asked that the permit language and time frames be changed to something resembling common sense. As written, the permit did not allow emergency discharges during certain time frames, and you can't schedule an emergency. He also stated that by limiting the dates for emergency discharges it was conceivable to initiate an emergency discharge during that limited time frame unnecessarily because of the potential for a need later in the season. Page 2 of 4 Robert also reported that the 1:1 ratio land application permit was progressing. Kirby Vickers of JUB engineering is currently reviewing it, and that nine out of ten J-Ditch users were currently on board with the idea. Robert asked if it were possible to eliminate one individual's use of the J- Ditch effluent without affecting other users. The answer was unknown. All agreed that a little more communication with the end users of the J-Ditch was warranted. Robert stated Tim Haener of JUB was working on this problem. Tentative Agreements: After discussion it was tentatively agreed by all parties to leave the Public Works Transfer as is in the current budget. Robert stated that by removing the City Manager components from the general fund transfer, it would lower this transfer amount from 18% of the operating budget, to approximately 15%, and equated this reduction to a $7,000 amount. The District tentatively agreed to this if the reduction amount proved true. Tentative agreement was reached on basing J-Ditch pumping costs on actual flow percentages as a more equitable and fair basis than the equivalent hookup split currently used. Tentative agreement was reached also on basing utilities, chemicals, and treatment supplies on actual flow percentages. Tentative agreement was reached that the District would pay 1/3 of costs on repair items such as the blowers, capital expenses over and under $5,000, engineering, insurance, and minor equipment. Jamie Melbo, District Administrator stated the District's desire to get away from the equivalent hookup split, citing several instances of confusion and different numbers being applied to the same users. Basing costs that were related to flow on the actual flow percentages, and everything else attributing to the facility on a 1/3-2/3 split, including operator hours which would be billed on an hours worked basis, would simplify the equation. Robert stated he would support this scenario as it would simplify some tasks, and negate the need to count, calculate and track equivalent hook-ups and worry over whether your equations were the same as the other entity. Earl supported the idea also stating that this overall scheme would make the problem of I&I and tracking, and associated problems go away. The more I&I either entity stopped, the less they would pay to treat and pump. Agreement was reached on sharing all septage revenues on a 1/3-2/3 split, and putting them in a dedicated account to fund sludge removal. Agreement was reached on outstanding transfer amounts billed to the District. Robert suggested that using the audited budget amounts for the years in question, less capital expenses and debt service, using 10% as an agreed amount for transfers, the District pay 1/3 as their share, after crediting 1/3 of septage revenues. Robert asked Jamie to do the calculations, Bill Burke and Page 3 of 4 Jamie Melbo agreed to this scenario. Robert expressed his wish to revise the present agreements, and incorporate as many other agreements between the City and District as possible into one single document. He suggested that perhaps instead of payments being made back and forth for various contracts and agreements, that with legal counsel's advice of course, an accounting could be done of all, or many of the balances, and one payment made. Bill Burke stated he would speak with the District's legal counsel about the possibilities, and perhaps could start a rough draft. Jamie suggested this may be a question for the auditors of each entity. Robert Strope made a motion that the Joint Powers Board accept and recommend to their respective Board and Council the preceding agreements and terms. Bill Burke seconded, motion passed unanimously. Next Meeting set for March 13, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. at the offices of the PLRWSD Meeting Adjourned Submitted by Bill Burke Earl Ward (Member) Robert Strope (Member) Bill Burke (Secretary) Page 4 of 4 Wy 6E:6 EOM LL/£ C< (7 G) G) D A C �I� (I) cod o o 0_0 co T m y m m O'n m r C7 T 'O C g a, 3 o w m N •C 7 7„ O 01A•;� W O cc Cc. O 0 W O 0 0 0 0 0 •e N.'co N O. V 0 0 0 A V o3) o_ A N n, 0) cr 0 0 0 0 -,'O 0 A 0 n• 0.0 co N.0 0 0 0 WIG N6O 0 0 .AA ti 0 00 0) CA O 0 0 0 -110 N 0 0 A V 0 IV CO O O -) A o O O J 0 0 0 NIW 10 o "0 A N 0: co O N IM1O 'u ICE N? O;IO CAN P00C OOCO l (0 OO 00C1� O +y W v 0 v c0 0 C N e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o O O o'0 o I I EA 6,169 6.06.16.4v VI4F EF 69V �; EH EA A n� Ca W 0) 1'(T Oo �0 ON) cco A 0: co 0 0.) (TCo O, A 000 CI(Co 0 CO V CO 0 IVno Q - Co Qa. 0 V 4fEAVI69 69 b9 V I4AV 1V 01 tiI 0 W`A (CIW - w co C N A I A A (Vn A V CO NI' I0 Co EA V 69V 6.Ef EA 69 03,0 (WC' 0 0 V W W EA69 co N CO v Co CO O 0) V IEA 0 N Ef V EA 69 CO 0) 0 • A ' 4, 0 toCo EA EA CO w 0) K 'co (P W I� A -4 0(0 69 E41 V, W 0 OW) V 69 69 W A 0) N N A 0 49 -4 .Co 'IW 69 10 vAM 44 EA 4A 000 1W'.N N COMM co 0) 69 4A 1 0 CO 0 69 01 4A 01 44 cn w 01 4A 00 b9 COCo EA EA 4A N EA 0) 0) r EA N c V 169 W 00) (0 0) 01 VI4A O A CO cal A IV 0 'co 0 N 10) O co (0 0 0 69 (0 4A W EA V>y, Vl6h EA 69 cn 0 69 o N a "co 0 0 O 4A EA N -Cc 1-0 6.1 G'I� IW CO W 4.9 0 00 O 0 69 co 0) 69 U1 A 0 69 N EA v EA En EA EA Nco "cn co A W O W V O' V 0 ' 0 N 18 O 0 e G) m ID 01 T 7 d ID 0 (0 Vi V 69 EA fA fn — 0' On O OC N U1 NOo • 0) N 01 N (It (X 0 J7"'W O d 0) ('1 W A.0—� Co CO -• N A -4 N V 0) 64 v N N•O N O W W (9 W ((7 �m�rn V V 69 A • Vt 0 V IA 44169 0)11�•W W (WO CA.A A A -' W CO 49 69 VyEA 01 No 0) A V A V N cn coo A 6W EA 169 N.4.O.W W (On A -I0) 69 A V 04 (O0 6T. 01.4, CO 01 A,01 0 0 0 - IO) ry N w 00 IV 0 EA EA 0) W 69 69 61,69 4A 44 69 0) O CO 0) A 00)) V O0i Co Ca 0 ' ' V 0 0 W 0) 0 N N 69 A ' Z 3f 7 O 1Fl 0 0 0 A A W ONo 01 A A 0 V V,in 0o•0o• UN N (,•(n N = r A N A M A 0 W V 00 (D r (f (D CD cD (0 6 (O 0] in 0) {O 3 7 O 0c f f,0i0.O'0.00 (D 4f 69169 fR fA fA a4A'bI W'fA 4f.'01 EA uo'w w'En ER !A w -I 0 n -4 NY 0) W-0 (D A -0 N N 04 A -o 0) -,07 N (O A N N 00 Q) W 0 0o O) 01 W A N W 00 (D N A V 0 O A 64 A A Co -a, W O s V N Co CI) �1 c N? ( i A 0o A A C) N O) N O/ 0) l O W O 0 O O W W W N W A O V W N W W W v 0 0 0 0 W W /401 co 69 cn N 0 V3 0 (n a co 01 0 O O 4A Co -00 EA 69 m 0 0 v N 69 cn 0) 65 6' 0 44 0) 69 EA A 0 N 0 N 01 0 EA 4A W O•V 0 10 CO W 0 T G) 7 (0 d N 7 CI y 01 O M1 69 N W e 01 V EA N 0 W co 4A W 0 0 (0 (OD N 0 0 'fl 0 d 7 O tunowy Iloa,pd G) N n N .d. 0 7 W 08 7 m 01 7 1 .G) 0 CO;IF CD d O, 0) o .. V N S1S0O 40amioNt SISoj 1o321IO £O/ZO Ad sie;sueJi tuewa6eueW Management Transfers FY 02/03 ,c//M'PI' W w I 347/0 t 2ej3 x. 3S J J A GD W J J - J W A N _- _. -a _... A O N N V 0 0 -co W -co N A O 1 CO '(D 0 a) V_ (D V (D -+ -co co O co CD 0 A A C..) O V CD O N Co A A CO O N 01 0 (p 012 O V Cn CO - V (0 (D V A — V A — A CO cc)0o O N Co A o O O b O, O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co O a) O N a) O N O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' 0 O O O O O 0 O 0 o 0 0 o 0 coo 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -CO J CO O 0 , N :J A 0 0 N N 0 co 0 Oo C) 0 (n 01 CO 0 (n 000 0 'N N C1 0 •0 a) V (71 0 co A 0 N Co CD 0 -4 a) 0 V O 0 0 0 CO 0 rn CO 0 N O 0 V C) 0 j A CO 0 V W 0 V C.) 0 j (W CO o CO (ND 0 G) ? N 0 o N -4 0 V A 0 N .P CO 0 V A (.) 0 CO A 0 N Cn C.) 0 V in CO 0 V O 0 N Coo CO 0 4 O 0) 0 V W 0 N— V V CO W N 0 CO 0) 0 — 0 CJ Cr) A , 0 0 (n A in O CO 0 0 V CT v N 0 4o N in -. 0 4 'n CO 0 CO COD 0 CO'V 0 -, 052 o- co N 0 C. N 0 -• C.) 0 Co CD 0 D) O 0 CO V O 0 00)) 0 0 CO •(VD 0 Cn'W o N 0P to O 0) 0 N OD 0 CA co 0 0• (o 0 0 V A 0 co co N 0 N 0 0 (D 0 'a) aD O 0) 0 =o a) V A CD 0 0 r -+ CD 0 0) O a) 0 V V 0 N OoD 0 v V (n o V A 0 O !J CO \ 0 (D . in C\Do 0 Dec-88 21,633,000 Oct-88 14,563,000 Nov-88 17,117,000 Sep-88 16,506,000 Aug-88 21,302,000 Jul-88 22,711,000 Jun-88 21,039,000 May-88 23,276,000 Apr-88 23,276,000I Mar-88 19,499,000 Feb-88 16,452,000 Jan-88 18,180,000 Nov-87 13,810,000 Dec-87 13,810,000 Oct-87 15,240,000 Sep-87 18,344,000 Aug-87 24,067,000 JuI-87 25,005,000 Jun-87 20,879,000 co co V N a) O 0) a) O O O Mar-87 24,470,000 Apr-87 26,036,000 Feb-87 16,449,000 Jan-87 19,546,000 235,554,000 20,153,000 W _— C. O O W 0.) CO 0 O CO• CO 0 O 16,508,000 I 18,844,000 17,190,000 N A V O N Co (D 0 O 18,135, 000 I 15,181.000 13,089,000 243, 692, 0 00 12,806,000 16,683.000 13,885,200 16,396,000 y 20,217,400 20,307.000 CO CO O O L 24,073,400 22,515,800 24,308.000 0 Co O O 18,150,400 210,736.000 I 219.18R nnn Ij(� • o I1 C) N N N co co' co co A co N co N N N co co co co A A A N co V CD A CO O A (D O CJ I OD O W A Cn O V V coA Ul , 0 _ co 01 "'�' _ ,. ). N W N 0 v 0 GOJ 000 W 00D (0D Vig A V ea 0) ,Ap 0 0 O 0 N 0 rye 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ='y. C71 A C.) A A U1 A a) a) U1 . A A Ca) Cr) C.) A Li) Cn Cn a) a) a) -P.(n 0 so,. 5 e 1 :I N Cr) N 0 O — O N 0) C)1 a) 0 co a) co co V co W N O " 2: o • - 0 CO V CO .0V I CD CD •01 N — ix) Co <,-I" X encol 0 O 01 Co • C..) IV 0)te00 0 1 Ca C� 0) 0 CO CO 0 U1 co 0 A CJ - o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. \ ( \-1- c. ` V (D (D CD CD V 0 0 CD CO CD CD CD CD CO CD CO CO CO CO CD CD CQ CD CC' r 0 t J • ? --N -I N N A CV _ N-. N A CD A V N CJ N N N r }y`,,M .�_► J,e\ Co - • N O O V V b iv O N V V - -W O N b A CJ O 0 0 I' \ \ a) 0 \° \ \° \ O\o) 0 -4 V W 0 - • 0 •0 — IJ a) CO— C) a) •J • 7' o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \\\\\ \° \° \° "n . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a'. 0 CD -c1)J 'v Co O Sewer District Flow Experience A A Co IV IV J6 A A C) IV j -CO IV A OD -CO Co N O -- 1 N - W - 0o co — CT N N O co (o co • N �{ ✓ C.) N a) N.) (0 N 0')O CD CD N (0 CO -4 v O O A 0) (D 0)O N W �l A W CO O A CT 0 CD CT CO C) 0) (D A A N - CO (0 (T CT top.,_.. O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N v (D 0) O O O O CO N N (0 v CO A C 1 O O O O N co O CO Co CT A W CO N N N N �1 '.1 O A W N N — 0 O ^J W A A in 0) — (o v V v (W 0) 0 O N W A 0) - CT CT CT 0o NJ CD CO A 0o CO A 0) CA.) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N - - N N N O' 0 �1 ' 0 Cr) .1 J N— (D v ti A• A CA co W W O A Oo (o W ^J A 'co O (o N W O (o CT :1 W W N 0 CT (0 0) CD (0 CO IV A A IV 0) CO 0) CO -1 0) 0) CO O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - J J .1 0) 0) 00 -.J 0) - v CO -.1 0) 91 W A 01 CO U1 A (0 - CT O U1 co . O Co I N O Co A co (o Cn CT - PO .A W CO *1 0 0') A *1 CO A 00 CO N CT CO A (0 *1 NJ v CA) O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 v m (0 O 000'Z£ l' l0£ 000'9L9'n Z 0 io co N 0 W 0 v O 0 0 N ▪ Co 0, O 0)• A lb 0 co O 0 C) 0 0 O CT 0 O O O 0) CD 0 0 c_ c 0 O (0 O CO O O O N N N N O 0 (0 U1 'CP (0 N v N N CO CT O O O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 c_ (0 O N CO CT N ✓ O O O a) 0 O N CO W O O O O Z0 0 N co ^J O O O O v co O N A 0 O O 11 co o- 0 O N O N CO CO O O O v (0 O N N 0) O O O O v O CD C) 00 0 N O O 0 O O O CJ N CD O O O O O N O (7) CO O 0 0 000' 9 l £' 88Z Z O co 0 CO 0) 0 O O O 0 C) ao 0 N 00 01 O O O c_ CO 0 N 0 00 (0 O O O W L 7 Cu 0 0 N v N W O O O O (0 W CO O O O O C) 0 C11 O v D ao 0 (0 CO N 01 0 O O O �l 0) 0) 0 A CT J . A 0 m Co 0 000'669'lZ 68-gad (7) O CD CT CT 0 0) 01 CO N_ v O CT O 0 O N N N N N (0 W N N N CO 0 W ,A CO 0 *1 0) ,0 O —1 v A (0 U1 0o N W U1 CT 01 (00 CO U1 CO-4 COO 000 (NO CO 0) A 0 U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O 0 0 O O O 0 O A (.W (.W Ca A A A A A A (.W (.W CO W (.W A A A A CT C) A CO C.) N CT CO .4 CO 0) 0) CO CD N . CT (D -J . A —1 0 CO (7) . CO —1 CD • CO CO . - N W O Co A -1 CO A 01 *CO O A W :NI N N W N 0) O O 00 (0 (0 IV N W - 0 0) -1 CO -1 CO CT CO A CO 0) 0) CO CO — W N 0) 0 0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W ti 'v 'CCP 'O v W iCT ? W CD CO0N 0 O C011 O C) 00) A W v v (0 U1 0) W 00 -1 O A O (0 Co CT Co A O -1 O - CT CT CO v CT N � (0 NJ C) — al v A CO(D N IVCT 0 CD CO 0 Cr) CO COIV0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co CO 'CO (D CO CO CO CD (D Co CO CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO CO N W CO N W co N CO N W A CO CT A W A U1 CO N A CT A A A CO CT 0 (0 0) -1 W O Co CT O A A N C1 C11 0) Co (0 O 00 A W CD A 0) C.)'CA IV N CO'CT • 0) v C.) CO (O C.) �1 W 0) 0) CT O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO O Cr) CO N W Cr) 0 IA ;3ulslp Jamas N N N (T CT CO N N CT CT C. N N -+ N N 0) �.! W A CT NV CO 0) -coCD CO CO CT Cn b V V 0) in 0A N W V N A V CO — CD 0 0) W V CD CO— CT CT CO N N A O N CT CO N V CO OD O) 0) — CD V A 00 CO V V N N CO W (T O O O O O -aO O O -aO b b b O b b O O O O O O C7 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 'O O O O O 'O O O O O O O 'O O O O O W W W 0) A 0 O O CT (O J ;co co o 0) W W 0) N 0 O O O (7) A W W W W W N W W O O CO CT A N A W b 0) • N W — CT A O O —' Co (T 0) N -+ W W in ix)CD W O 0) co A CT CD o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -o 0 0 0 N CD A (T CND O CD N O CD V in 0) A U) N Co v O W CD CO CO 0 CD V 'CO O) 'CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o O o 0) ° cp A N N N V CO O O O Z 0 CO N O CT O co O co O N N OD A N J O O 0 0 CD N O 0 O cn (o CO N 0o co O O O h) O O co 0) 0 O O co co CO CO A (0 V � CD CO 0 0 A A •V a o W v CT CO O O O CD V 0) a Co N CD W 0) O O O C_ c CD N A W V W O O O O CO CD -• • CO CT A CO W -+ A 0) 4 (D 0) 0) A (T 0) A' 0) A W - 0) CO N O CO W V ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° \ ° ° \ ° ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD V CO CO V CO V V Co ko co O W W (O CO W 0) 0) V A W CD N CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD N N W co -co O O CD N CT O O 0 O O N j N O W V CT CD CT CO CT W A 0 0 0 Sv CD N V (T 0) co O O O W CO V co O O O 11 CD 0 CD N N N Co O O 0 O CT ° C 0 7 9 CO CO V CO (D N V O O O Z 0 CO W O N O O O 0 C/ 77 CD CO CO V W CO CO 0) cn (D 01 co N N N W N N co N N N I W CO O (0 (T W (T A CT CO A -co 0) 0 CO V N) V CO COOO CST COT coAcoo O O O O O 0 O O O 0 W N 0) O O O O CNT W .-• V A 0) 0) O 0 O.O CT 01 0) 03 O O O ONO A O U) `-+ •V N A 0 V N W O O O 000 W A A W W A A W A W W W W A A A A CT A W A CO A W CO CO N V CO — CO C) CO CO W O N CD N A CO N i O O W CO (O tD V D1 A CT CT CO O CO CO N 'CO V W in O 0) —— W N— -J 0) W V CO V CD CO 0 W A V •° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° \ ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CT (J) CO CT 0) CO CO CT 0) . V CT .0) CO • CT 'CT CO 0) V 0) ' V ' Co 0) ' CT ' 0) V N (T Q) CO CO O CT N CO W CD CT CT O CT A A O V CO A A -J Oo Co 0) A W A O O 0) — -J (W . — 13 1J (D CT O '�1 I b O 0 00 o Oo 0) 0) o 0 0 0 0 o (0 o 0 o O Oo 0 1 0 o O Oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e e o p e e co Co co v co co COT co co COo (0 CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO (D (D CO CO CD '• — N 1 N N — 0 — V O — A. (O O (in in J O W LJ W V Co 0) G.) O CA O N n W A O GO A 0) ) 0 o Oo O Oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Co 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 .) 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co O A 0o ° 0 0 O 3 o t.. Sewer District Flow Experience N.)N A CT W N IVN No No co(T A W N W N e0+ ? �01 -.P -CO 01 . O W ? O CO �I -J - CO a) "co "co ? V a) 'Y�,}' -• A a) CA V O N V O O V O a) O O A CO CT O W O • 0 CWD O V CT W 0) A V A CT V 0 V CO W O CT N (D 0) W '�T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O C_ O O O O O O O O Ca 0 0 C°"n O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .• W CO CA 0 0 0 J W N IV A CO O (7) A W .P. 'A •A 00) 0V) - — 0)) 0) N 0) CC T 0 -O ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 CO COO V O F 9) CWT A O O O (i1 O v CD CD 000'88£`LOE 000'9l9'9Z 0 CO A N V O N O O O J CO A ? N CO W - W N A V CT :co co 0 o CO Co 0) - o CO P. 'a) Co 0 C) tO A N N 0) (O V O O O J J J 0 Cn 'CD O 'co A Ni 0 ' o CDC A A A Ni OND O (0 J J (00 W Cco OD 0 0 0 Ni Ni Ni Ni W Ni -07 IV 0) W OO A 00 W O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000010 O O O N (0 C tO N a) co(0 a) O 0 0 N "co N O O O 0o a) 0 N O IO C CO N V O W O O O O N 0) N 0 O 0 0 tO (0 W 0 0 0 CO (0 0 CD Ni O O co O 0 N V N Ni a) CWD 0 I0 O a) T 0 CO W co 0 O (0 V 0 O A W W C.) A . A A CT W CD CD CD W CT W CT O � ACT O A 'co Ni a) CO O -� a) A ,CO CT �I V CD N' 0) A A CD A a) o Cr D O O O o O O O O O O O) CT CT 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) V 0) CT a) CT CD CD O CT CO C7) CD O W W 'co a) A O CT Ni A— A CT V V V CD W CO CO CT A 0 W OD CD A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,o 0 0 o (O CD CD CO CO CO CO CD CD CO W CO CD 'A O 'a) W O U>O7 0) N coWV V 0 co CT J G` O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 CO CD W v CO O 0 0 (T 'W co (OO 0 W W CO (D N W COO O O O N CD CD 0 CD 7 C) < . W W A W O C07t 0) aW) O O 0 W W (0 (0 O 0 O N O CO O 01 (o (OT co CO O O 0 co 0 co 01 O 0 0 W O 0 01 V V O CO 0 o CO .co CO 000'66 l'£b£ W W 0 CO 01 CT (3) A N 'co CT O V in Ni ? V 0 (0 O A A N CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co N N O (0 co V O O CO O �v CJI W N J O O O O O O O CO V N O IO 0 tO W Ni A O O O N 0 0) O 0 0 V CO •CT — V (7 O V A W O CO N O O o o O 0 C ` C 0 • _ 7 `G CO CO CO CO CO W W W W C.) CN CND O O -CO A CD W W CO A N 0 C71 A O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 N N N Ni W CO V V A 0) W Ni 0 CO V CO CD CO O IO O O O O O O O O O O O O 1O co co 0)) e V W (0 'C tO A CT A O O O W v tO O a) W O O 0 IV N N 0 0 0 0 tO W O O O L v CO N cD co O O O 0 O y o az W W A A A CT a) V CT W W �' Oi� CT CO 0 A CD O CO -4 N CT CD 4. D 007 O A 01 CT N CCDio D (G) Co 0� iz, f 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ra .... C �- W --II CD O A a) A OD CD A 0 ' O. -. O CT CO A O- a) O Ni A O ,.. 1 c- )) ° co C o -4 Oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O CO N 'O CO coON N N O W .0 7 CND OD (AD 'co O N CO0-4 CVO W Sewer District Flow Experience A N N W CT CT CO 01 A W N N N N CT A A A W N N (O O N N b co CD n) N 'co O A A O -co W(n O A O (r (D 0) O CT -J CO (D CO 0 0 W 0) A Cr (n 0 W O W — CT 0) CO CO 0 A CT (D -1 A (D (D A CT -4 N N CT CO CO CT 0) N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 coo O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O A W CT v O CO CO O O 0 0 0 O (D (n A 0) CD O 'J (D -4 CT CT W A N W '(T (D O CO CO 74 W N N W fV O � CD N O) CD (D v CT O) A N 00 -1 -1 W O (T co co O) Oo ) 0 o Oo 1 o O o (D o O o o Oo .) 0 o co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o f N W N N -1 01 N CO CO N CO v COD (OD OD N — A COO 0 0 0 0 0 o O CT O (D C) (D rn 000'90L'OZ£ 000'Z99'£Z N (n W 0) O CD A W O 11 (n 0 A O) -1 A O Q O O ,O O Z 0 CD rn CO O A O 0 0 c) C- (D - C CO co (D• CD 'CO 0) o) (n o) 0) N CO -J CD A O W A O 0) N 0) -1 CD CT (D N o O O O o O O O N N O co O N N CO O) A O CD A O) O O O W CO 'J 0) N.) O -1 CO CO -1 A A 01 O O O O O O p O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O N v A ' O O A ' O O O A CD en O(T) 0 N A v O(0) 0 CO (T A CT N O co 0 N � CO v O O A CO O CO O W A (AD 0 0 0 0 W W A A -4 COT CT O 0 0 O v O (D O) D) c0 rn W v O O O Cn CT co 0 .42 O Cn m 0 (T rn N 0) D) CO O O 0 N N CO W CD O O O) 0 O (D (D A CO O O D) 7 CD rn N -co crt O O O CO O O O O O (n O (D 0 Cn (n 000`EOZ'99E 000'1LZ'LZ N O O CD O O O 'O W co A O O O O) 0) v Z 0 m (n 000'909' l Z N N N N N O C.T CD O O) CT -` W N Co A W — J. — 0) co A -1 N CT) -4 CO • A 0 . 0 to to 0 0 0 CO ti 0 0 c0 (n O 0) W O O O N O -1 A A O -I CO W A CD O) (D CT W -1 0 0 CO CD G O O N CO GJ O) 0) W A O O O 0 C- CD (n W N v v O O O L g CD m cn cn W A CO W CO CO O O 0 0 D (O (n v v (D O) O O O D) cD (r co 0) O O O • m CD (T (D (n O W O O O c_ m CO (n N O v co O O O N N N N N N W A N N N O 0 O (T CO 0) _ O W 0) O) co CO O OOO 0 -co CO COCO W N (0 (D O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 O O O O O 0 O O O 0 N N CO A A O) O) CT A CO A CO CO CO A (T A -4 CO A A coit - CO CT O) i A A CAD CO A (n (T v CO CO O— CD O— CO O CO '• (n 1- (O N O (T O .0) N -1 (O W CJ) O O O 'J 1,1 A . O) A 0) 0) — -,1co 0) (D (n -1 O (T (n N A N e e e e e e le e e e0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 47. . A O 0) (JD ((On CO 0)ffA CD 0) CO(n0(DD O CO (T 0J W -4 0) ((TO -J O A ' C) 'co O N O ' — O) (n ' . ' A CD O A N -4, W (n 1,1 0) (D — 0 (D (n A (D N (D -+ -4 O 1 CO CO CD N 0 0 -4 CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 co co -,1 co co co co CD co co (D (D (D CO CO CO CO CO (D (O CD CO ;_ r:'g 0` 0) CAD CO C) CT -I CO C) CO O O W -4 ND O O CO N W �i't.w .-4-L N CD O O v O A A (O C.)O CO 0) inA O A C.) O ' O Oo) o C.) 0) CO CD o cD o) -4 CO CO O -4 CO 0o 0 0o N)0 0 (O a .:, 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 CO CD (n 0 Sewer District Flow Experience W N Cn A A A O O CT W N W W N N W O O O 0) V A W A CO N _. "co — (0 A O W in 0) — in O CT . A <T N ✓ N CO N N N CT (0 CD -4 N A N CO • Co CT W CO O 01 V 0 CO CO A uW W W 0 CD 0) W CO O 0 O Ni 01 _. CO CT A V CT 0 W O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O O O O O O O (T (r -4 00 A 0 O 0 O O 0 . 0 0 0 Cr A DD • o V co N (D J � (r G) N 00 CD CD (0 CO 000`808'80£ 000'696'61. 000'686' 19Z 000'06L'91. Z 0 CD CO 0) V Co 0) O O O J V V V N CO V A CT O A A CT N N N W CO- O V 0) Q) 0) 0) W V 0) W A 01 0) (0 V V — (0 V A O 0) O 0 0 o CD CO •,) 0) CO CD (0 - o 0 o CO 0 0' -o, o 0) OO 0 ci 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I W N N N W (.) N Ni W W G) W. N— N.)A N.) N.) N.) A co co h.) W 0) CO A A V 0) CO0) CT CT O N (O 0 CO (0 - • W CO O A V in O (0 co CT —() V L.() V -4 CO V -4 CO CO 0) O O' ' 0) O— A (.n '— V' CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O co (.N) a) A co a) N W A CT CD 0) C7) C..)A I A A 00)) CAD . CDW O. CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co CT V V 0) O O O CD CO O O O co co CT COD A O 00 O O 0 0 c CO co c_ 7 (O CO (D co (x) V O O O Vco co O N O O O N co A W O 0 0 T C- 0 C:0 CO CT 0 v 0 co Z 0 CO V 0 V N N N 0) CO CO O Q) 0- ) V CT A Q) — O o a) CO CD Oo V O O O O CD V A COD O O O O W W (T CJ) .O co O O O CT 0) A O O 0 0) ✓ N O O 0 c V N N W W 0 CO 0) O O O I0 V O co Co O O O V W cn cn O O O O O T (O Q -.4 (O N Co N O O O iO V N ,N W W N N.).N W C...)W IN 0) A 01A CT A A 0) W W C.) Cn 0) ' N O W 0) O CT N CD 0 CT 0) Ni V V A A 0) O CT 0) (O CT Cn N 0) A 0 -4 CD Ni CT N CO CD 0) W A O CO A CO A 0) CD CO O O N CO A O CT O CO W N (T N CT O O O O O b O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 CO N 0) CO O O 0 W Ni N W A A' 0) O) A N 0) N N Ni N' W' A A 0) 0) CT ' A CT 0) V CT CD O O) A 0) CT V O (T A CT CO O — 0) N V V V CO b V CT C.TI 0) N 'co v? in N O W in 0) A W W O (O W W ? CO V CO 0 CO 0) CO N CD 0 A V O A CO CO -4 CO A ,CT - , ▪ V N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , A Ni W 10) 0) -4 CO O 0) A A. C.) C.) C.) A•. 0) . -4 (O O- , • COV CO O 0) CO O co O co O CO CT CO Cn co co0) N O A N (n co v 0) A N - A 00) CY)) CVJ1 A N- (00 N (OO CO CO COO Ni O 01 W CVO O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1714 CO O-4 CO COT) O CO CO CO COT CO CO CO CO CO V • 0 CCDD CO CO VO COO COO b - — (O (b CT ? 01 W O (b 0) . ix) V Ni ? CT 0) in N - 0) A 00 0) V 0) 0) 0) A 0) CO -4 O Cr) CO N 0) A — CO 0 -4 V CO O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (b co N N O CT W O O 0 ►1d 13iosia lamas' N N N W CT -4 W W A N NJ NJNJ-3. IV N.) 0) ND CO 0 O) COIN) W V- N O CO J1 A W -� C)D 0 N N 0 CO N N N 0) co 0) it0 ? A O 0 O O A A O N O 4). N.) CD W W CO 0) CD Co.) A A ; CO O -NI N.)--.10 --..I 0) N.) O CO CO NJ V -J CO C11 A U1 0) A CT _+ m.- O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O o O O O O b O b 0 ;0, O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O O O 0 O c -.+. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O fir., .<. co '<.` .."4. O N O O H A W C1 CT O W V co V A A J 0)) iv 00) COD — - V ▪ O CAD V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1W W � A CT CD CD - • N W N 00 GI ▪ 0) N W 0 A 0 CD V 0) O) 0.,O) O 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 8e 0 w I. (o N 0 0- ) 0 O O 0 IV CD 0 0 0 N 00 ✓ 0) C0 O O O 01 0) co 0) O O CD O V O O 10 0 Co 0 0 A O Z 0 O O (.71 0 O 0 O V A 0 0 J O 0 0 O V - • CT v V U1 W O CT N W 0) CD U1 .) V CO CO A A V CO o .o o .o o .o o 0 O �0 V CO W CT 0 0 O C C C a) lc CU O '0 00 IO O N .UNi .� .N •O W OD ^J N N CT OV Co W 00) 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 • ,N 0 0 1 94.1 CJl co A A CT CT 0) 01 :.. S1,'`'fl N.)I CJ � - N.) W W CT CT 0) iv' 0) Rom?. � A A A A CD (7) C11 V CD V CD k 3 eeeeeeeeeeee G O 91 O N N co CT A 0) ? CD Cr, O 15' _. tN `< A V O W WD. 000 Ni.C00 ? O 000 O O) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,,. ,- - N -A Ni J..'0 O ✓ N.) CO N A O 01 A O' A CT CD C._-..43 7 Cp-:': St A .0) CT O CT N CT N O) O W ,z;; 7 U1 A Co CT CT A O CT A — „lb W 0 0 0 0 8e 0 8e 0 0 to 0 0 1 0) 0 m 0 0 0 0 c ZT A < 0 'O O Co (b 1 CO COO Co COO CD 0 0) 01 . A Q) . Cb A 0) CD N N A CT CO ✓ C. 0 0) 0) V W V V O b a b a ,O o b O cc O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N CO W N co 0 O O c c a) -a CD CD cc)' N 0) C0 CD NJ W 03 W .v A CD 1 W V CD O COo01C 11 CA) O C) O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O T Co CO CD C_ 0) CD Co CO co co co � A O O 0 0 N N N N W W N N CO A 0) CO V CO 0) — 0) A W N A 0) CO CT C.) V — 0) - • U- 1 10 :P.V A V Co V W V W A IV 0) V O CT N O 0 O V CO 0' A N O A CO 0) CT V CT 'NJ W CO N O N CO N W V A CO A CD 0 V Ni V A CT CO CD CO CD A CD CA 0) CO CD 01 0) CO O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O ,O .O 0 ,O O O O O a 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,O O O O W Co 0 io W 0) A - W V 0 0 O N N W CO W CO A W CO N Ni N N W CO A A 0) U1 CO N N 43. V 0 A W A CO Co IO V A CO O O A 0) N CD V CD CD V 10 W W V Ni 0) A W W V O W N V U1 0) A CD V I CO CT Co 1 Co 0 0 W Ni A— W CO V CT CT O W O Co A N O -,. 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 W A A C11 C31 C11 V U1 A A W W W A C11 V O CO C11 A A -4 — 0) N 0 N CJ CD CT -I V A CD CT N O A U1 V, CD A N.) CO A O U1 W A W W Co A CT CD c0 "co 01 CT U1 Ni V N Co N O 0 A CO 0 V 0) O N — A 0) N W Co 0 CT Co CO V CO CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00) C011 CO CO - N CO 0CO 0) C00 CO CO CO CO 00) 0)VCV11 C00 W 00i CO C0J1 CO CO O V C0 A N O W O A V O C.31 • W A CO A V 0 V W W CD a)co Ni0 CT co 0) ) QW ) N CT CT CD (7) C1 CT Q1 O CT 0) CD W V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 03 W W :P U1 O) Co o 0 rn- o Sewer District Flow Experience 4 N N CT 0) A W W N N N N N N CT O) co A N N N N O g. v CT A W CT N O N N W N CT 0) ix)N A co W O O A V Cn V A c....)Cb N O O N N -+ N C7) CO N W W V CO O N O CO A 0) ; I. CD CT CT W W V A O V N N CT A A V CT CO CT O CT CO CT -I. c) 0 c) 0 0 b c) c) o c) c) 0 o o c) 0 0 b o b 0 0 0 L .O O O 000000000000000000000 (� �' 1 (WJ1 coco rG , --4 N m.'.. To O O O O 04, 0 0 19+i`. 0 e J J 1 J -:Va_Q or 0 N A A 0 V CT CT A A A A I W A A CD V V A in A CT ^A ¢+13 V O 'co cn A Iv A A CD CD N v CO W -� 01 (D O O A A -. CD O V N co Co N V Cn CD A CD CO A Cr CT 1 Cr A CJC CJC O KL1. , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ." .tea, i :0: 5 W C...) N N C...) N N — �''0. 0 Cr pp '( ' W 0 A N' V V Iv NA A 0 Ts.) C.)CD ' CT-, N C.)CT A (71 ` -' >Sl < O Cn in iv Cn A N Co a O W N CD A in 'o in W W A O W ,0.; O— W CT co co) Cn — CD -.4 A W V W— A Cn A A (4 0) 0) CD A , a0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N NN — ' \ 3 J J J O O CD CT CT Cn rn CD N CD A A A O A O Cn N V co O co co V A C O (T G.) . N po N A C71 N N N A A al V CD V O O rn po Cn CD V 4 "' ? C.A.) — 0.)A CD CD V A (.4 CD 0 0 CO — CD 0 CO 0 N CD N (4-'� ..411 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,�4' p v •S'r4:1 _G Cr \ < c) ,= La CINO o _ tO ` Z '0 cn A` D T o 1c N N CD 0 c')CD c c N v p) CD CD C) < 7 tQ 7 .� CT ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -• I 0 0 0 0 ,O o 0 0 0 0 0m; co N N N N N N N N N _ �'•" N N N N 1W N N N N N �� W CJC CT O C..)O CT A 0) CT V A N W CT O CA)CO A V O A CO A ,CD rn (1 ,� :in O).-co ,no CT V Cn 0.) W W ,O ,Cn O N ,N .-co -d .V W 0 Cn V CO CDC71 CT V CJC Co A - - - C7) Co A — CJC CO CT A N — 0) 0) (4 0 CJ CO A A CD 0) O) CO N CT CO CO A N CO O O O ,O ,O O O O ,O ,O O O O O O O O ,O O O O O O ,O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o co O O O O O o O O O o O , I , N N co V O zA O O KJ CO W W ,CT V ,CA ,,W W CT ,O ,N A V ,CT O ,A ,V N CJC cT OD A V O W Ul A O) CD W N CD A O O Cn N N CO CJ1 — CD CO 0) V CJ7 O CT N coCn W W CT7 CD CO CO CO CO A CD A A --4 4p;"� N ,V ,6) .W CO 0) O) ,W — N N A N N - V -� W W CO ,Cfl W CD ' `O► O 0. .0 -0 O O O O O O O -0O O O O o O O O O O O _ 61 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z 0 O 0 CO O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ,O ,O ,Os, Jr: CO A A O. r -' co 0-1: " 1 N O O 1 O O ," -eo )0 01 N N N N CJ W A U7 N N N N N N N C...)N W A W N N M . O N A A -4 N O-a CO C71 A CO N Co cm co V N CO V 0) N N CD d'�' O O Co in ix) N Cn 'CT CT O rn N � A N ' Cn 'o O N O 'co 'Cn A CT "-"71 OO ' O O A CD CO -. Cn W CO CT CD A W N Cr O W W Co N O W co S v , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , `. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,o 0 0 0 0 0 cz�a v o c., c., W A A A Cn CO W W A C....) N W W A A A CT Cn A W A 0 c...., �! V N po , C71 N V CO �! N CO CD O CT O CO N 0) CD CO , W , A - O O G7 V N N W co N CoV O W N— V -1 'o O W O O V 'co) 'co • p;, <' O -0 A CD CTA -a CD CD V CO cw -a A CO CO 0 CT A CD ca CT CT CD , , , , , , , , , , , e , , , , , , , , , , , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 CO CO A. V V CO CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO V V CO CO CD CO CO C)o C CO A A W CO O V O CT CT CT1 571 W A W W O W fn N U7 CO A 'V V in A :-4V O inN O N O O A W O N o CD o 0 0 0 o a) o o 0 0 o 0 0 o O o Oo po - Wo 0 (1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 N C]r 0 O co N co to Sewer District Flow Experience CITY OF MCCALL September 25, 2002 Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District 201 Jacob Street McCall, Idaho 83638 re: Cost Sharing Issues Dear Chairperson and Board of Directors, I am writing on behalf of the City Council in response to your letter dated August 29, 2002. I must first clarify that your characterization of the "proposal" as the City Proposal is incorrect. The Joint Powers Board voted 3-0 on the motion, therefore it is not a City Proposal, but rather an action taken by the Joint Powers Board. As such, at our next meeting, that Board will review your comments and provide an appropriate response. On a somewhat related matter, the District has stated that under the agreement between our two entities the District has an obligation to pay a portion of the administrative costs associated with the operation of the treatment plant. The City uses the term management transfer to account for those costs, although the vast majority of the costs are administrative rather than management in nature. Attached is a current accounting of the unpaid billings to the District for those costs from January 2001 to the present. The District has unilaterally decided not to pay any amount toward the administrative costs since the City resumed operation of the treatment facility. I ask that you remit payment for the amount outstanding. If you would prefer, we will accept an amount equal to 10% of the operating expenses incurred since the transition while we work towards resolving the cost sharing issues. It is our position that continued failure to make any payments towards these costs would be in violation of our agreement. I remain optimistic that we can work together to resolve the matters outstanding. Sincerely, Robert A. Strope City Manager cc: City Council Joint Powers Board Attachments 216 East Park Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 • (208) 634-7142 • FAX (208) 634-3038 City of McCall 216 E. Park Street ,A McCall, Idaho 83638 (208) 634-2103 fax 208-634-3038 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Payette Lakes Recreational Water/Sewer District 9/18/2002 Bill Burke 201 Jacob Street McCall ID 83638 DUE: UPON RECEIPT City January Invoice #20011 2001 Payment February Invoice # 20020 2001 Payment March Invoice 20021 2001 Payment Aperil Invoice 20022 2001 Payment May Invoice # 20023 2001 Payment June Invoice is 20024 2001 Payment July Invoice # 20025 2001 Payment August Invoice #20026 2601 Payment September Invoice #20027 2001 Payment October Invoice #20028 20028C 2001 Payment November Invoice #20029 2001 Payment 20029C December Invoice # 20030 20030C January Invoice #20031 2002 20031C February Invoice # 20032 2002 20032C March Invoice # 20033 2002 20033C Payment April Invoice # 20034 Desc 1ption \ / Pymt Date TOTAL $4,922.78 Received 04/26/01 ($3,777.00) $5,151.87 Received 04/30/01 ($4,006.09) $3,975.81 Received 04/30/01 ($2,830.03) $2,836.82 Received 08/31/01 ($1,691.05 $3,514.55 Received 08/31/01 ($2,368.78) $4,773.47 Received 08/31/01 ($3,627.70)I $4,730.23 Received 11/12/2001 ($2,914.18) $5,430.82 Received 11/12/2001 ($3,854.40) $5,288.60 Receieved 11/12/01 ($2,878.39) 4,588.51 ($118.84) Received 2/27/02 ($3,190.55) $4,765.12 Received 2/27/02 ($3,282.15) ($123.40) $ , 722.23 1$91.93) $4,341.38 ($112.44 ) $4,468.78 ($115.73) $ ,390.27 ($165.50) Received 4/11/2002 ($6,019.97) $4,409.65 TOTAL $33,142.76 1 City of McCall 216 E. Park Street ,A McCall, Idaho 83638 (208) 634-2103 fax 208-634-3038 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Payette Lakes Recreational Water/Sewer District 9/17/2002 Bill Burke 201 Jacob Street McCaII ID 83638 DUE: UPON RECEIPT Qty J Description Pymt Date TOTAL 1 Previous Balance $33,142.76 I May 2002 Invoice #20035 $5,915.40 I Payment Check #4 85 Received June 6, 2002 ($3,137.16) Payment Check #4186 Received June 6, 2002 $5,023.99 June 2002 Invoice #20036 I $4,856.69 Payment Check #4256 Received July 8, 2002 ($3,164.76) Credit #CM20035 ($23.41 Credit #CM20036 I $42.69 Payment Check #4335 Received August 20, 2002 ($8,330.93 July 2002 Invoice #20037 $5,021.47 August 2002 Invoice #20038 $7,819.89 I TOTAL 1 $37,033.27 PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 201 Jacob Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 office 208-634-4111 • fax 208-634-7613 4t.mail-Hg13.4sdast.o.geb,44et- ernail:p1rwsd@citlink.net August 29, 2002 Mayor and Members of City Council City of McCall 216 E. Lake Street McCall, ID 83638 Re: Resolution of cost -sharing issues at the Wastewater Treatment Plant Dear Mayor and Council Members, As you are undoubtedly aware, there are unresolved issues surrounding the cost -sharing agreements in place between our two entities, namely the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Cooperative Agreement, as well as management issues in general, at the shared facility of the wastewater treatment plant. At the Joint Powers Board meeting of July 12, 2002, City representative Robert Strope presented a list of unresolved cost -sharing and management issues with his proposed remedies. The Joint Powers Board resolved to present this package to the respective governing bodies of the City and the Sewer District. At the regular meeting of the Board of Directors on July 19, 2002, Bill Burke, District representative to the Joint Powers Board, presented the package of proposals. The District's Directors have reviewed these proposals, and our response is attached, along with concerns of the District not addressed by Mr. Strope. It is the general consensus of the District's Directors that to resolve these issues most expediently, a special joint meeting of the City Council and the District Board be held. We look forward to resolving this matter as soon as your schedule allows and would ask that you please respond to this request at your earliest convenience. erely, Paul Bianchetti Chairperson, Board of Directors Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District cc: Robert Strope Earl Ward RECEIVED SEP 0 3 2002 PLRWSD Response to City Proposals At the July 12, 2002 Joint Powers meeting Robert Strope, McCall City Manager, outlined a proposal he wished to present to the City Council and District Board. The following is a summary of that proposal and the District's responses, and other matters of concern. • Septage dumping revenues be identified and applied to capital expenditures at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. ( City currently retains all revenues ) • This remedy is acceptable to the District with the following stipulations: That any unused amounts roll over to the following fiscal year to be used for the same purpose. That the District and the City be in agreement over capital projects for which the funds are used. • An agreement that the District pay Management and Public Works transfers as written in most current version of the City budget. • After removing collection billing from the management transfer amount, the 7/08/02 City budget worksheet stated $9,970 in management transfers. Subsequent versions have increased this amount to $14,343. The District feels the original amount to be in a reasonable category, but it continues to climb with each successive version. Bill Keating stated at the Joint Powers Meeting that a portion of the Public Works transfer of $16, 054 was for project management on Phase II of the J-Ditch. The District does not feel this is an operational cost of the Plant, it is a construction cost, therefore should not be included in the Operations budget. The District agrees there are administrative costs incurred running the Plant, but an amount has not been agreed upon. Management is, by agreement, a function of the Joint Powers Board, and each entity should bear their respective costs in this area. • City installs second pump on J-Ditch. This item was, along with fine screens, in the original plans. Both were discarded in the final plans after switching back to the original site at Seubert's, along with a 90 million gallon downsizing of the storage facility. The second pump is required by DEQ. The City Manager stated he believes there is sufficient BOR funding remaining to accomplish this item. The City should install the pump. and the.fine screens if funds are available, both are necessary to the future of the Plant. City compensates District for excessive I&I flows at the Plant in high runoff months at a rate as yet unspecified / District pays all costs on equivalent hook up split. The original agreement between the District and City was based on flows to the Plant, and required both to install flow meters. This agreement was revised by the Fifth amendment in part because the City found it financially prohibitive to do so. The Distict monitors its flows, but agreed to equivalent user based costing with the understanding that the City would aggressively pursue its I&I problems. As evidenced by flows to the Plant, this has not happened. With the added costs of now pumping all effluent to the J- Ditch, the District would like to return to flow based costing. The members of the Joint Powers Board have stated this is the simplest, most accurate, and fairest way of dividing costs at the Plant. This would also mitigate any I&I problems by lowering costs to either entity whose flows decline at the Plant. Each entity would pay costs based solely on its own flows to the Plant. In 2001, of the total influent to the Plant, 17.62% came from the District system, 82.38% came from the City system. Obviously the cost allocations based on equivalent users are not an accurate basis for billing or they would more closely reflect the percentages of influent to the Plant. Even at our peak flows, at the height of summer, we are not contributing 33% of the influent to the Plant. District agrees to fund all future capital expenses at the Plant and J-Ditch on the equivalent hook up equation. (Approximately 33% - 66%) This proposal is unacceptable, and this issue is addressed in our current agreement.(section 6 of the Fourth Amendment) "Any capital expenditures associated with expansion of the treatment facility shall be entirely the responsibility of the party requiring such additional capacity unless the parties agree to allocate that capacity on some mutually acceptable basis," City assumes all responsibility for litigation over J-Ditch. The District has not been named in any litigation over the J-Ditch. The District, and its personnel have had no part in the decision making, final planning, project management, or construction of J-Ditch Phase II, other than a seat on a Citizens' Advisory Committee that recommended the site for Phase II be changed back from the Bezates site to the Seubert site, • Other issues of concern to the District. • Capacity of the J-Ditch Storage Pond. • Because the storage capacity of the Pond was downsized to 277 million gallons from the original design the District is concerned if this capacity will suffice to meet future needs. Our present agreement states that whichever party is needing capacity expansion, that party will fund said expansion. The District believes this covers the capacity of the storage pond, and the capacity of the Treatment Plant. The City currently runs the plant with five people putting in part time hours, plus supervisory personnel. The District has concerns over the lack of a full time responsible charge operator at the Treatment Plant. The need to cross train personnel is recognized, but the cross working of so many people, (another 1, perhaps 2 employees are expected to start soon) at a facility that has historically been run by one full time operator is definitely a concern. This practice would seem to increase costs dramatically in supervisory, training, scheduling, tracking hours, and administrative functions. Added to this is the fact that no one person seems to know the complete operation of the facility, it has become a piece meal operation. This practice may perhaps be a contributing factor to what the District considers to be excessive Management and Public Works transfers. At present, the transfers asked for in the City budget for the Plant total over $30,000. Aside from snow plowing and grading the road at the plant, and some time for the City mechanic to work on equipment, most of this figure represents management and administrative costs. While the transfer amounts represented may work well in the overall City Budget, the District does not feel they are an equitable and fair basis for third party billing. The Treatment Plant can be run by one qualified operator, it has a monthly set of bills to pay that vary but little, and a yearly budget that has changed only slightly with the addition of the J- Ditch. Aside from capital projects and the yearly budget, which by agreement are to be set by the Joint Powers Board, the Plant has always run with little to no management or supervision. $30, 000 would seem to the District to be excessive for administration of this facility. The configuration of City employees working at the Plant has changed recently, this hopefully makes this a non -issue. 8/7/02 version 1 Bill Burke ar Joint Powers Board Meeting YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED, Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2341 (5) (a), that The Representatives of the Joint Powers Board of the City of McCall, and The Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District will hold a meeting at the offices of the City of Nampa Wastewater Treatment Plant, 340 W. Railroad in Nampa, Idaho on Friday July 12, 2002 at 11:30A.M. The meeting will be held for the following purposes: 1. Ca11 to Order 2. Approve Minutes of 6/14/2002 meeting 3. Current Issues a. Administrative costs at Treatment Plant b. Pumping costs to the J-Ditch c. J-Ditch facility plan update d. Phase II costs e. 2003 operations budget 4. Other Business 5. Next Meeting Date Adjourn 2) 6An,.,wT" br(At.t W fV N N CJ1 O W A N N N N CA -CO N - W W -CO O --A V Q) �I N W N CJl N W W -I Co O N 0 co A O) O �J N N (71 A A �1 CT CO CJ1 O U1 W CT -' O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 O O O 0 0000 CD CD CD CD O 0 0 O O 0 CD 0 0 0 CD CD 0 CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000'Z8E'6C N N I A A CD j - • v v A CT A CJ1 -L A . U1 • CTC71 A CT (r - • CD-� O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MOH Ie4O1 le4o4 0% •de3 0% O to D c fi)D ▪ w O O O - O O CD O O • 0 O 0 j - Ct) N N- • N N N - -- A CA U7 -1 A N COCT 0 C...)CD -A ••4 0 A CO - , Cn • V U1 CD A 0) CD -A. CO C.) U1 A 0 W CO -A. -A. CD 0) 0) CO N CJ1 CO W A N 03 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O IO ,o iO iO 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 ,0 O O O O fV W v 0 O 0 0 U1 W N N 0 0 0 0 000' 9ZL' 1, 8l 000'796' l • N O N A -J N O A -1 N CT O W O N CA a) in --. CD co co (J1 J N Ni co • 0 W CD CD W CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 CT N N N N W N CO A C N N CO CT A CO N CD O W -1 N W -J Q) N N CD CJ1 O (A iv A f71 0o N O A W O in A in oO CT C) - A W N CT O W W CD N O W CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO W W A W N CO W A A W CT CO A W A CO CD v N CO Co -1. C) • CO U1 CO CD CO A •�1 A v Git Ja O --• N 01 A CA �1 N CD 00 Q) •-1 - A A A CD A - W CD 0) Ni A CD W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %G 3 Sewer District Flow Experience City ofMcCall Date: May 6, 2002 To: Joint Powers Board Cc: Bill Keating From: Robert Strope, City Manager RE: Management Transfers Listed below is a comparison of data to illustrate what I believe is a validation of the City's management transfer calculation. I welcome the opportunity to review the Sewer District's financial records for the timeframe when the District was responsible for the entire operation to further illustrate the costs associated with the management of the treatment plant: PLRWSD fee to the City under amendment 7 for management under WW Treatment: $33,780 Current year City management and public works transfer total for WW Treatment: $45,674 Assuming that the District's contract with the City reflected billing for 2/3 of the cost associated with a given function, the total cost for management associated with WW Treatment would be $50,644. Since the City 's independently determined figure is less than $5,000 different from the amendment 7 number, it appears that the amount attributed to management in the current City budget is well within reason. Barring any significant deviation that may be discovered when reviewing the actual financials of the District, it would be my position as a member of the Joint Powers Board that the JPB support the City's calculations for the cost of the management aspects of the WW Treatment plant and incorporate them into the draft agreement revision. PAYETTE LAKES WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT VALLEY COUNTY, IDAHO STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES - ACTUAL AND BUDGET For the Years Ended November 30, 1998 and 1997 OPERATING REVENUES User fees Hook-up fees Other Dienhard Lane excess capacity lease income City of McCall WWTP maintenance contract City of McCall maintenance contract Total Operating Revenues OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries and related expenses Office expenses Insurance and bonding Professional fees System utilities System operation and maintenance Building maintenance - ') Lagoon fees Board expense Other expenses City of McCaII WWTP maintenance contract expenses City of McCall maintenance contract expenses Total Operating Expenses OPERATING LOSS See notes to financial statements. 7 1998 Actual Budaet $ 242,957 $ 16,000 3,824 6,703 '141,599 148.441 559,524 147,670 18,105 13,183 16,204 28,915 25,986 6,009 *42,961 2,400 22,962 115,341 141,833 581.569 (22,045) Variance Favorable (Unfavorable' 269,280 $ (26,323) 20,000 (4,000) 3,824 17,311 306.591 180,670 18,570 13,000 11,750 31,150 30,415 13,000 51,361 3,000 20,495 373,411 (10,608) 141,599 148,441 252.933 33,000 465 (183) (4,454) 2,235 4,429 6,991 8,400 600 (2,467) (115,341) (141.833) (208,158) (66.820) 44.775 i r i r i l Travis -Jeffries, P.A. • Certified Public Accountants May 7, 2002 Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District 201 Jacob Street McCall, Idaho 83638 re: J-Ditch Phase I Dear Jamie: I am responding to your letter regarding the costs associated with Phase I of the J-Ditch Project. In my last meeting with Bill Burke he asserted that the PLRWSD had agreed to pay 1/3 of the actual construction costs, less the growth element. He went on to state that the District had no responsibility for costs associated with the update to the facilities plan that is part of the DEQ loan. I contacted DEQ to inquire about the facilities plan, specifically why it was included in the loan. In speaking to Jack Gantz, he informed me that the facilities plan update was required to obtain the loan. I contacted George Wagner of JUB and asked if the updated plan included both the District and City, he stated that not only does the facility plan include the both the City and District's requirements, but also that they were interviewed by both the City and the District for the job, and that during the preparation of the plan they regularly reported to both the City and the District. He went on the state that the plan was in essence part of the design work, which the District has stated is a shared responsibility. Based on the fact that the update was required by DEQ as part of the project and that it included the District's use of the treatment plant, that the District was involved in the selection of the engineer to complete the plan, and that the plan is in essence part of the design, it would appear that the cost associated with this update should be shared under the same breakdown as the rest of the project. I would ask that the District adjust the budget projections accordingly. Sincerely, Robert A Strope City Manager PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 201 Jacob Street • McCaII, Idaho 83638 office 208-634-4111 • fax 208-634-7613 email: plwsd@ctcweb.net Mayor Allen Muller City Council Members City of McCall 216 E. Park Street McCall, ID 83638 Re: Operational Expense at the Wastewater Treatment Plant Dear Mayor and Council Members: November 9, 2001 The Board of Directors of the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District have directed me to provide you with a copy of a letter written to Robert Strope dated September 11, 2001 regarding sewer treatment plant cost sharing. To date, we have not had a response from him, and those issues remain unresolved. Since that letter was written, another expense issue has arisen, and the Board has instructed me to correspond directly with you. This concerns a study commissioned by the City from the Holladay Engineering Company for a sludge management plan. While reconciling the June billing from the City for cost -sharing, a line item of $2326.25 for "sludge removal and disposal plan" prompted a question to the Public Works Director, Mr. Keating, who provided the District with a copy of the study and mentioned its approximate cost of $14,000. These expenses were not authorized by the Board, nor budgeted for, as they had no knowledge of the study prior to the billing. The June payment was apparently a portion of the total cost, and subsequent amounts have appeared on the July, August and September billings. The District's share of the June portion was paid. However, upon advise from District Counsel, the Board has directed me to inform you that until such time as the District is apprised of projects and included in discussions and decision making prior to expenditures being committed, the District will not share in costs for studies nor support any contracts awarded. According to page 1 of the Alternative Study, Wastewater Treatment Lagoons Sludge Management Plan. the District is mentioned as being joint operator of the treatment facility with the City, but is not named as being part of the decision process. "The City of McCall will select the alternative or alternatives that are in the best interest of the City." (Holladay Engineering Company. Payette, August 2001). Unilateral decisions by the City regarding the wastewater treatment plant and related projects will not be supported financially by the District. The City and District have a binding agreement for co -management of the wastewater treatment plant in the current Cooperative Agreement up through and including the Fifth Amendment. These Agreements also provide for a management body in the form of a Joint Powers Board. In hopes that a working relationship between these two entities can be restored, the District Board of Directors requests that the Joint Powers Board be reconvened to manage the wastewater treatment plant and resolve the disagreements in cost -sharing that currently exist. Should you need any further clarification, or background information, I would be happy to provide it to you. Sincerely, rn,e,th-- Jie Melbo District Administrator Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District cc: Robert Strope Bill Keating enclosure PAYETTE LAKES RECREATIONAL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 201 Jacob Street • McCall, Idaho 83638 office 208-634-4111 • fax 208-634-7613 email: plwsd@ctcweb.net September 11, 2001 Ciry of McCall Robert Strope, City Manager 216 E. Park Street McCall, ID 83638 Re: Sewer Treatment Plant Costs Dear Robert, I would like to thank you and Cathleen for attending the workshop on July 27, 2001 with Bill Burke and myself. This letter will address some of the issues we discussed as well as serve as a response to your letter, dated June 26, 2001 but not received until the day of the workshop. The terms of the Fourth Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the City of McCall and the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District establishes joint and equal control over, and responsibility for, the operation and maintenance of the sewer treatment facilities through the establishment of a Joint Powers Board. The Joint Powers Board was duly authorized to administer and be responsible for operation and maintenance of the treatment facility. That Board has not met since Mr. Shimun left his position as City Manager. Due to the resignation of the District's representative in July of 2000, the Board of Directors named Operations Manager Bill Burke to represent the District on the Joint Powers Board. The other representative is Mr. Earl Ward of Meridian, who has held the position since its inception. The funding of the Joint Powers Board would be the only management costs the District Board recognizes (Section 20.1). The District's Board of Directors recognizes that there are costs incurred by the City's finance department in conjunction with the operation of the sewer treatment facility. These costs would include the portion of time spent on accounts payable, cost -sharing billing to the District, and payroll, by the finance department, and supervisory time of those activities. All other supervisory duties are delegated to the Joint Powers Board, as mentioned above. Section 28 of the Fourth Amendment specifically excludes collection of hookup fees and user fees from joint operation, therefore, the costs of the City's utility billing clerk cannot be passed through to the District. The Directors have a fiduciary responsibility to the District's patrons to fulfill the contracts between the City and the District as written. Estimated management costs in the form of enterprise fund transfers are not acceptable, and the Directors request that actual time spent by the Finance Department on the sewer treatment plant be tracked, in order that actual costs incurred are correctly billed (Section 29). For the current fiscal year, an amount was calculated for District staff to do these tasks at approximately $6,800 annually, including overhead costs. The Directors are willing to pay the District's portion of that amount. Also in regards to attributing costs at the treatment plant is the issue of the septage dumping. This effluent is very expensive to treat, and the City collects fees from such users. The Directors would like these fees to be applied to expenses before the District's 1/3 share of costs is billed. The other equitable way to deal with these "ghost" users would be to assign equivalent user hook-ups to gallonage dumped, and calculate these figures into the City's total before allocating cost -sharing percentages to the District. Regarding the repayment of the J-Ditch Phase I loan, the Directors have previously conveyed their position to you in a letter dated July 11, 2000; and to the Mayor and Council Feb 23 and July 16, 1998; January 7 and April 29, 1999. Again, I will refer you to the terms of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, which govern the sharing of costs between the City and the District, specifically Section 21-6 of the Fourth and Section 3 of the Fifth. To recapitulate, the District has agreed to be responsible for 1/3rd of the actual costs of J- Ditch Phase I, excluding any costs attributed to growth -related components. J-U-B Engineers have provided a breakdown of the growth related components in the construction of Phase I totaling $347,591.50. Since the J-Ditch Phase II was to be grant - funded in total, the District has assumed no financial obligation. Especially of concern to the Directors (and conveyed to the City in the correspondences noted above) are cost - overruns on the project due to unilateral decisions made by City staff and council members to switch from the Seubert site to the Bezates site and back again, as well as engineering analyses, design, litigation and settlements resulting from that switch. Obviously the District has no interest in funding shortfalls arising from those decisions. The City's budgeted amount to be received from the District for the J-Ditch Phase I loan repayment is not a figure that has been agreed upon by the Directors. Please forward a copy of the loan agreement for this obligation and any details as to final costs of Phase I to me at your earliest convenience. The District is prepared to begin payments in fiscal year 2002, however, the amount of repayment needs to be formalized. One final issue that I will address at this time concerns pumping costs from the storage ponds to the J-Ditch. Because the City is responsible for a much greater share of the effluent treated at the sewer treatment plant, and thus responsible for a greater proportion of effluent requiring storage and pumping, the Directors would like to negotiate an agreement for cost -sharing of pumping costs based on inflow figures rather than equivalent hook-ups. In light of the City's desire to rework all the various contracts and agreements between our two entities, this matter could be incorporated into the new document. The Directors feel that if an agreement on the cost -sharing issues of the treatment plant, particularly your demand for payment of management transfer fees, cannot be satisfied through correspondence between the two entities, the Joint Powers Board should be convened to settle the dispute. Sincerely, ?tab-- Jarjyfe Melbo District Administrator Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District 2-2 7-2FJE1' : 2 /PM FROM PAY ET TE 'LAKES SEWER 2286347613 12/26/01 WED 08:$1 FAX 4079184 Naapa WwrP P. 2 Resume: John EKLWard P.O. Box 188 Kura, Idaho. 83634 (208)467.6292 DOH 7-14 44 Licensor: Idabo Class IV Wastewater Certification Idaho Class I Water Certification Experience: City of Nampa, Wastewater Dept, Maintenance Supervisor, May 18,2000 - Present. • Con -Agra Foods: Armour PSemt (%1** pa) Wastewater Operator, Oct. 09.19% -- May. 17,2000 City of Meridiem, Wastewater Superintendent, Aug. 14, 1978 - Oct. 01, 1992. Eagle Sewer District, Operations, (Start Up New Plant) Apr. 01, 1984 - Oct, 31, 1985 Self Employed, General Contractor. Nov, 01, 1977 - Aug. 14, 1978 City of Hood River, Ore. Asst. Superintendent, Sept. 07, 1976 - Nov. 01, 1977 City of Newport, Ore. Wastewater Superintendent, Aug. 05, 1974 - Sept. 05, 1976 City of Rupert, Id. Wastewater Operator, Feb. 01, 1973 - Aug. 01, 1974 Advisory Boards Joint Powers Hoard Mcotber for City ofMcCaldPayrtte Lakes Water do Sews District, Sept. 1964 - Present Boise State University, Wastewater Advisory Committee, Aug. 1984 -Oct, 1992 Idaho Water/Wastewater Certification Board, 1981-1983 References: Grant Kingsford, Former Mayor City of Meridian, 884-5388 1844 Lawndale, Meridian, ID. 53642 Gary Smith, City Engineer, City of Meridian. 888-4433 City of Meridian, 33E Idaho.Mericiien. ID. 83642 Kirby Vickers, P.E.,1.U.B. Engineers Inc. 3'76-7330 250 Beerhwood Av. Boise, ID. 83709 James D. Felton, 743-4324 220 71° Ave, -Lewiston, ID, 83501 CITY OF McCALL Wastewater Treatment Facility Sludge Management Plan December 2002 Prepared by HOLLADAY ENGINEERING COMPANY Payette, Idaho ML015401 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2002 Prepared by Holladay Engineering Company Payette, Idaho Job No. 015401 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Page 1 MUNICIPALITY AND FACILITIES Page 1 REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS Page 4 GENERAL PLAN FOR SLUDGE MANAGEMENT Page 5 MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE Page 5 BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS Page 12 TABLES Table 1. McCall Wastewater Treatment Facility Summary Page 2 Table 2. Pollutant Concentrations Page 8 Table 3. Cumulative Pollutant Loading Rates Page 9 Table 4. Minimum Buffer Distances Page 10 Table 5. Class B Site Restrictions Page 11 o ft oft .r► oft Oft oft Oft o ft O ft Oft Oft Oft Oft O ft Oft oft Oft ✓ Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft oft Oft Oft Oft Oft O 11 poi APPENDICES Appendix A. Estimated Sludge Volume Appendix B. Application Rate Worksheet Appendix C. Sludge Records Statement Appendix D. Probable Costs 00 00 100 HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO 100 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 1004 SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN %1► INTRODUCTION Ole This study is written in compliance with Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Rules, IDAPA 58.01.02.650 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 503 in order to oil provide the City of McCall with a management plan for removal and disposal of sludge produced in the wastewater treatment lagoons. Management alternatives were selected based on potential health effects, economics, and compliance with applicable state and federal regulations. The City of McCaII reviewed five alternatives and selected the alternative that is in the best interest of the City. The following sections describe the oil sludge management plan that will be followed by the City of McCall. 0111 oil MUNICIPALITY AND FACILITIES The City of McCall in Valley County, Idaho, is a recreation and tourist -oriented community 0111 with an estimated population of 2,084 (US Bureau of the Census, April 1, 2001). City staff indicated that the actual resident population is approximately 3,000, with a peak single 010 weekend population exceeding 15,000 during the summer. The average summer population is estimated to range from 6,000 to 10,000 for most of July and August. Seasonal peaks also occur in the winter. The large fluctuations in population are due to the number of second -home owners and tourists who visit McCall seasonally. 010 The City owns and operates a single wastewater collection system and wastewater treatment facility with a design capacity of 2 million gallons per day (mgd). McCall jointly operates the treatment facility with the Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District. The oil SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 1 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO treatment facility is located in the southwest section of McCall and can discharge to the Payette River under National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit number ID-002023-1. The treatment facility was constructed in 1978-79 and includes an influent Parshall flume flow meter, a septic tank dump station, a blower/control building, three bentonite-lined lagoon cells with diffused aeration in Cells 1 and 2, a chlorine contact chamber, and ftir sand filters. Table 1 presents a summary of the treatment facility. Table 1. McCall Wastewater Treatment Facility Summary NPDES Permit # ID-002023-1 Design Capacity 2 mgd Peak Flow 1.9 mgd Minimum Flow 0.4 mgd Cell #1 Area: 2.5 acres Design depth: 9 feet Average sludge accumulation: 15 inches Aeration: EDI diffusers Cell #2 Area: 5.8 acres Design depth: 5 feet Average sludge accumulation: 10 inches Aeration: Schramm Aqua -Puss diffusers Cell #3 Area: 2.2 acres Design depth: 5 feet Average sludge accumulation: 9 inches Aeration: none The recently completed "J-ditch" project eliminates discharge to the Payette River. This project allows all effluent to be used for irrigation on agricultural land with storage of effluent in a lined storage cell during the non -application winter months. SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 2 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO Sludge depths were measured in all three treatment cells on May 15 - 17, 2000. The design depth of Cell 1 is 9 feet and the measured sludge depth varied between 0 to 48 inches, with an average depth of 15 inches. Grit has accumulated near the influent pipes. The grit depth in this region was approximately 24 to 48 inches and was not consistently measured due to plugging of the sludge measuring device. The design depth of CeII 2 is 5 feet and the measured sludge depth varied between 2 to 18 inches, with an average depth of 10 inches. The design depth of CeII 3 is 5 feet and the measured sludge depth varied between 0 to 14 inches, with an average depth of 9 inches. The total sludge volume, before dredging, is estimated to be 15,684 cubic yards or about 3,168,000 gallons (see Appendix A). It is generally assumed that the liquid sludge volume will approximately double due to dilution when dredging. The operating data shows that there has been no appreciable reduction of efficiency due to sludge accumulation in these cells. However, the sludge accumulation in CeII 2 will probably warrant removal within five years due to negative impacts on the process such as detention time reduction and seasonal re -mobilization of pollutants entrained in the sludge. The date of the initial sludge removal will be determined by the wastewater treatment plant operator. Annual sludge depth surveys will be performed by the City to track sludge accumulation. The existing "Aqua -Puss" diffusers in CeII 2 were manufactured by Schramm, Inc., which no longer supplies aeration equipment. Due to the existing configuration of the diffusers, major damage will occur to the equipment when the sludge is removed. For these reasons, all existing aeration equipment should be removed from CeII 2 prior to sludge removal. After the initial dredging operation, the City will install new aeration equipment in CeII 2, similar to the equipment in CeII 1. The City should budget for changing to another diffuser type as a part of the sludge removal project. SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 3 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO IttittmittststtstsststIttststsstitsttstsss HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS Disposal of sewage sludge is governed by the regulations published as 40 CFR Part 503, dated Friday, February 19, 1993. These regulations are oriented to encourage ultimate disposal of sewage sludge by land application as a fertilizing soil amendment in agriculture, horticulture and landscaping applications. To assure that these uses, which are expected to have the secondary effect of returning plant nutrient minerals from the sludge into the food supply, do not promote any conditions harmful to health, the requirements of Part 503 include pathogen content and vector attractiveness parameter limits. These limits are set to control possible modes of communicable disease transmission and "metals" constituent limits are set to control potential toxic metal ion contamination of soils and crops. In addition, rates of land application of plant nutrients are required to not exceed agronomic crop requirements, in order to reduce the likelihood of land application becoming a source of eutrophying nutrient loading to lakes and streams, or of nitrate contamination of groundwater. The pathogen control standards of Part 503 Sections 503.30 through 503.32 are more adaptable to local conditions than the interim Federal standards they replaced, as a result of a change from a specified -process standard to a specified -quality standard as the basis of operating and administrative decisions. With respect to communicable disease control, Section 503.32 defines Class A sludge and Class B sludge (on the basis of pathogen presence as determined by colony growth tests or microscopic examination) and sets forth rules and conditions for land application for each class of sludge. In McCall's treatment lagoon systems, sludge pumped from lagoon cells is thought likely to meet the requirements for classification as Class B sludge. However, testing is required to verify the sludge quality. Part 503 also sets standards, listed in Section 503.33, for control of the vector attraction SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 4 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO potential of sludge applied to land. Reduction of Volatile Solids by 38 percent is the most general of the criterial alternatives listed for this purpose and the criterion most applicable to lagoon sludge, although there are alternate criteria listed for sludges from other types of processes. Reduced Volatile Solids content of sludge in after -primary lagoon cells at McCall is Tess definitively documented than coliform reduction, but what information there is indicates that the material after approximately a year of separate lagoon detention may be stabilized and comply with the 38 percent volatile mass reduction requirement. If test results are not available to confirm the 38 percent reduction, the requirements in 503.33 (b)(10) can be met by incorporating sludge applied to the land surface into the soil within six hours after application. This also acts to reduce nuisance odors. GENERAL PLAN FOR SLUDGE MANAGEMENT Sewage sludge in the McCall wastewater treatment facility will be managed by agricultural land application as Class B Biosolids or by land application for reclamation of disturbed nonagricultural land as Class B Biosolids. The ultimate disposal method and location will depend on the availability of suitable disposal sites and support from property owners. It is anticipated that liquid sludge will be hauled in tanker trucks and land applied on properties currently receiving effluent from the wastewater treatment plant through the "J- ditch" project and other agricultural land. Preliminary support from agricultural land owners has been sought and must be verified by the City prior to sludge removal and disposal. Finally, the City must prepare and submit a sludge disposal plan to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) before the initial sludge removal and disposal. MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE The following steps should be implemented as part of the City plan for sludge management. Sludge accumulation must be monitored to determine when sludge removal is necessary. Monitor sludge accumulation and perform sludge testing as follows: SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 5 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO 1. Survey sludge accumulation in each cell at least annually for two years. The survey frequency can be reduced to a period that will give timely detection of filling of the allowable sludge storage volume after a baseline of data is established by annual surveys. 2. Construct a fine screen with a wash press system at the headworks of the wastewater treatment facility to remove plastics and other objectionable material from the influent stream. A step screen or semi -cylindrical screen are both acceptable methods which will reduce the existing aesthetics, operation, and maintenance issues at Cell 1. It will also limit the quantity of nuisance material in the sludge. This is an important consideration if a land application alternative is selected for sludge disposal because many landowners find these items objectionable. Much of the existing material, already in the sludge, can be screened out when the cells are dredged. 3. Construct a grit removal system to reduce the accumulation of grit in CeII 1. The grit removal system will follow the fine screen. The fine screen is not designed to remove grit, so a separate process is needed to reduce grit accumulation near the influent pipes in CeII 1. There are various manufacturers who supply grit removal equipment. The grit size from CeII 1 is approximately 61 percent larger than a 65 mesh screen, based on one grit sample. Equipment manufacturers assert the capability to remove 90 percent of 65 mesh grit and larger. Therefore, approximately 55 percent of the overall grit entering CeII 1 can be removed by comparable grit removal equipment. The grit removal system may be constructed as a process independent of the fine screen or as a combined unit with the fine screen. 4. The sludge stored in the cells will be removed when the sludge accumulation is SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 6 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO Itissitissitssitissititittlistsistsittttivvwil HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO equal to or greater than the allowable sludge storage volume. Reduced dissolved oxygen (DO) levels, especially in the winter, and increased biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) levels at the cell discharge points will be evidence of sufficient sludge accumulation to warrant removal. The wastewater treatment plant operator will determine when sludge removal is necessary. The sludge will be removed by dredging of the cells. Prior to sludge removal and disposal, the City will prepare a sludge disposal plan that meets the State of Idaho requirements contained in IDAPA 58.01.02.650 for sludge usage. 5. Remove and replace all aeration piping and diffusers in Cell 2. The in -cell aeration equipment will be nearly impossible to protect and the existing diffusers in CeII 2 are obsolete. Therefore, the aeration equipment will be removed from CeII 2 prior to dredging and replaced after dredging with piping and diffusers that will accommodate future dredging operations without damaging the aeration equipment. The City anticipates that the new diffusers will be the same type as those in CeII 1 so that only one set of spare parts must be kept in stock. 6. A representative set of seven samples of aged sludge from the cell requiring sludge removal will be collected, prior to removal of sludge from any cell. Laboratory analysis will be perform to determine fecal coliform count, restricted pollutants (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium and zinc) content, nitrogen content as nitrate, ammonia and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and volatile solids content. A sample of Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) will be obtained from the primary aeration cell and analyzed to determine the volatile solids content of the MLSS. The volatile solids values for the aeration basin material and the aged sludge will be used to compute the percentage reduction of volatile solids mass. The results will be compared obtained with the following criteria: SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 7 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO a. For the material to qualify as Class B Biosolids, the geometric mean of the density of fecal coliform from seven samples of sewage sludge must be less than either 2,000,000 Most Probable Number per gram of total solids (dry weight basis) or 2,000,000 Colony Forming Units per gram of total solids (dry weight basis). b. For the material to be suitable for land application to agricultural land, forest land, a public contact site, or a reclamation site, the concentrations of the individual restricted pollutants must all be less than the respective limits in Table 3 of 40 CFR 503.13, which are listed in the following Table 2. Also, the cumulative loading rate for each pollutant shall not exceed the values listed in Table 3. Table 2. Pollutant Concentrations Pollutant Monthly Average Concentration (mg/kg) Arsenic 41 Cadmium 39 Copper 1500 Lead 300 Mercury 17 Nickel 420 Selenium 100 Zinc 2800 I SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 8 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Selenium Zinc HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO Table 3. Cumulative Pollutant Loading Rates Pollutant Cumulative Pollutant Loading Rates (kilograms per hectare) (pounds per acre) 41 36.8 39 34.8 1500 1338.3 300 267.7 17 15.2 420 374.7 100 89.2 2800 2498.2 c. For the material to meet the vector attraction reduction requirements of 40 CFR 503.33 to allow placement on land without incorporation into the soil within six hours, injection below the surface of the land, or covering with soil at the end of each operating day at an active sewage sludge unit, one of the requirements of 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) shall be met. The requirements include achieving a mass reduction of volatile solids greater than or equal to 38 percent, bench - scale testing, or raising the pH of the sludge to 12 or higher for a specified time by alkali addition. If conditions a, b, and c are all confirmed by test data and the Public Works Director does not choose to use an alternate mode of disposal, the sludge from the treatment lagoons will be dredged and land applied at an approved site SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 9 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO IIIIIIIIbbbbI11Ibbi HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO under City supervision as a soil amendment material. Dredging and land application will be performed by a qualified contractor. 7. A suitable land application disposal site(s) will be located. A letter of approval from each property owner and/or an agreement between the City of McCall and the property owner will be obtained prior to land application. 8. If land application is performed under City supervision on agricultural land, application will be made at agronomic rates based on plant -available nitrogen as determined by the procedure outlined in the appended Application Rate Worksheet (Appendix B). Soil testing and crop information will be required for each approved land application site to determine the site specific rate of application. All application sites will comply with the cumulative pollutant loading rates listed in Table 4. 9. The buffer distances in Table 4 will be maintained for Class B land application sites, but may be increased or decreased by the regulatory agency based on site specific conditions. Sprinkler application will typically double the buffer distances for residences and public roadways. Table 4. Minimum Buffer Distances Description Buffer Distance (feet) Residences 300 Public roadways 50 Surface water or drainage ditches 50 Public water supply wells 500 Community water supply wells 1,000 SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 10 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO 10. The applicable site restriction requirements of 503.32 (b)(5) shall be met for each land application site and the specific crop grown at the site, if any. Agricultural land and forest land is defined as land with low potential for public exposure. Public access to such land shall be restricted for 30 days after sludge application. Food crops are defined as crops consumed by humans, feed crops are crops produced primarily for consumption by animals, and fiber crops are crops such as flax and cotton. The site restriction requirements for Class B sewage sludge are summarized in Table 5. Table 5. Class B Site Restrictions Food crops with harvested parts that touch the sewage sludge/soil mixture and are totally above the land surface shall not be harvested for 14 months after sludge application. Food crops with harvested parts below the land surface shall not be harvested for 20 months after application when the sludge remains on the surface for 4 months or longer prior to incorporation into the soil. Food crops with harvested parts below the land surface shall not be harvested for 38 months after application when the sludge remains on the surface for less than 4 months prior to incorporation into the soil. ► Food crops, feed crops, and fiber crops shall not be harvested for 30 days after sludge application. ► Public access to land with a high potential for public exposure shall be restricted for 1 year after sludge application. ► Public access to land with a low potential for public exposure shall be restricted for 30 days after sludge application. 11. Records of material produced, samples taken, lab reports, and mode of disposal (land application or transfer to others) will be written and kept for five years at the SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 11 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO tibiSibbbttitittipttlAttlibb&lbbbbilobbbbbbbils.0 HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO office of the City Administrator. Each record will include a statement, signed by the Wastewater Superintendent, and narratives of the means of attainment of pathogen reduction and vector attraction reduction as required pursuant to 40 CFR 503.17. Sample statements are included in Appendix C. DEQ will require an annual biosolids report for each year that biosolids are applied. The report must include the following information: • A biosolids analysis for nitrogen, phosphorus, and pollutants from Table 3 of 40 CFR 503.13 • Crop type • Total pounds applied • Total area applied to • A site map showing the application area and buffer areas • Certification that the vector attraction reduction requirements, pathogen requirements, and applicable management practices of 40 CFR 503 were met. 12. It is expected that intervals between required sludge removal events will be longer than one year, so sludge soundings will continue to be the critical criterion for scheduling of subsequent events of final disposal. BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS It is recommended that the City of McCall budget each year for sludge removal and disposal and the aeration upgrades so that the funds will be available to cover the associated costs when they become necessary. It is unlikely that grant funds can be obtained for these items since they may be considered standard maintenance procedures for a lagoon system. The recommended annual budget for sludge removal and disposal and aeration upgrades is $93,979. Detailed probable costs for these items are included in Appendix D. SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 12 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO. PAYETTE, IDAHO The probable costs for the step screen and grit removal system are $240,603 and $268,180 respectively (see Appendix D). The probable costs assume all work will be performed by a contractor and that the screening and grit removal equipment will be procured by the City of McCall. These improvements may be eligible for grant funds. However, it is recommended that the City of McCall budget each year for these improvements to ensure that the funds are available when needed or that the City has the required local match. The recommended annual budget for the step screen and grit removal system is $101,757. Detailed probable costs for these items are included in Appendix D. DOfto, 7 Qj _5 SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 13 CITY OF McCALL, IDAHO APPENDIX A Estimated Sludge Volume IIII/IbbittblAbbitt4ttbItttbbbblil•bipbbbbipbb41 Approximate Quantity of Sludge to be Removed City of McCall ML 015401 Pond 1 Pond 2 Pond 3 Length 330 ft Width 325 ft Area 107250 sq. ft Avg. Sludge Depth 1.25 ft Approx. Sludge Volume 134388 cu. ft 4977 cu. yds Length 670 ft Width 375 ft Area 251250 sq. ft Avg. Sludge Depth 0.87 ft Approx. Sludge Volume 218964 cu. ft 8110 cu. yds Length 320 ft Width 300 ft Area 96000 sq. ft Avg. Sludge Depth 0.73 ft Approx. Sludge Volume 70128 cu. ft 2597 cu. yds Total Estimated Sludge Volume: 15684 cu. yds (In Lagoons) or 3,167,849 gallons Total Estimated Sludge Volume: 31369 cu. yds (With Dilution During Dredging) or 6,335,698 gallons Probable Dry Quantities: Solids Content Appliction Rate Dry tons to apply Approximate area 3.40% 4.47 dry tons/acre 449 tons 100 acres Pond 1 Sludge Depth Survey May 15 - May 17, 2000 3 1.5 1.5 1.33 1 1.5 1 1.25 1.67 1.5 2 21 3 1 0.5 0.67 0.67 2 1.5 1.25 0.17 1.25 1 21 3 1 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 1 0.67 1 3 1.251 3 0.67 0 1.17 0 1.5 0.67 0.67 1.25 0.67 1.5 1.51 3 1 0 2 0 1.5 0.67 0.5 1 0.5 2 1.51 3 1.5 2 1 0.5 1.5 0.33 0.5 0 0.5 2 1.5 3 0.67 2 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 0.67 1.25 0.67 1.5 1 3 0.17 1 1.5 0 2 1 0.67 1.25 0.67 2 1.25 3 1 1 1.5 0 1 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.5 2 3 0.67 0 1.5 0.17 1 0.5 1.67 1.25 1.67 1.75 21 3 0.5 0 0.5 0 1 1 1 1.67 1 1 11 Average Sludge Depth = 1.25 ft Pond 2 Sludge Depth Survey May 15 - May 17, 2000 1 1.25 1.33 0.67 1 0.5 0.17 1.25 2 1.5 1.25 1.5 0.33 1.17 0.83 1.25 1.5 1.25 1 1 0.67 0.5 0.5 1 1.25 'I 1.5 0.67 1 0.83 0.5 0.67 0.67 1.5 0.67 1.5 0.58 1.17 1 1 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 0.67 0.5 0.67 0.5 0.67 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 'I 0.5 0.5 0.83 1 0.67 0.5 1 1 0.67 0.67 0.67 1 0.67 1.25 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.67 0.67 0.5 Average Sludge Depth = 0.87 ft IIIIIIibbbbbbII Pond 3 Sludge Depth Survey May 15 - May 17, 2000 0.5 0.67 0.5 1 0.67 0.67 0.5 0.33 0.5 1 1 0.67 0.67 1 0.5 0.5 0.67 0.67 1 0.5 0.5 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.67 1 1 0.5 1 1 1.17 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 'I 1 0.5 0.5 0.67 0.5 1 0.67 0.67 1.17 1 0.67 1 1 1 1 1 0.67 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.67 1 1 0.67 0.5 0.5 0.67 0.67 0.5 0.67 1.17 0.67 0 0.17 0.67 0.67 1 0.5 0.67 1 Average Sludge Depth = 0.73 ft APPENDIX B Application Rate Worksheet i�i����iliiii�i�i�i�fifiilii�i�itililiiili��� BIOSOLIDS APPLICATION RATE WORKSHEET 1. Field Description 2. Crop to be grown Yield Target 3. (a) Agronomic lab's recommended nitrogen (N) application rate lbs/acre (Attach a copy of the lab report) 4. N Content of Biosolids (Attach lab reports from biosolids tests): (b) NH4 = lbs/ton (dry basis) (c) Nitrate-N = lbs/ton (dry basis) (d) Total Kjeldahl N (TKN) = lbs/ton (dry basis) (e) Organic N = (d) - (b) - (c) = lbs/ton (dry basis) 5. (f) Available N = 0.20 * (e) + 0.85 * (b) + 1.0 * (c) = lbs/ton (dry basis) 6. (g) Application rate of biosolids (dry basis) per acre = (a) / (f) = tons/acre (dry basis) (h) Solids content = % (i) Volume of sludge to apply = gallons (j) Dry tons to apply = (i) * 8.34 / 2000 * (h) / 100 = tons (dry basis) 7. Minimum area required = (j) / (g) = acres 8. Table 2 of § 503.13. — Cumulative Pollutant Loading Rates Pollutant Cumulative Pollutant Loadine Rate (ke/hectarel lbs/acre Arsenic 41 36.8 Cadmium 39 34.8 Copper 1500 1338.3 Lead 300 267.7 Mercury 17 15.2 Nickel 420 374.7 Selenium 100 89.2 Zinc 2800 2498.2 Metals from Test Results (me/kg). Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Selenium Zinc Dry Weieht lbs/ton lbs/acre (mg/kg*0.002)(lbs/ton*(g) ilititt441444614441)1144tt4Stbirtioblititittioblitti4 APPENDIX C Sludge Records Statement 1444141446144114144bM11446/blobbib111111110141 §503.17 Recordkeeping. (a) Sewage sludge. (4) If the pollutant concentrations in §503.13(b)(3) and the Class B pathogen requirements in §503.32(b) are met when bulk sewage sludge is applied to agricultural land, forest, a public contact site, or a reclamation site: (i) The person who prepares the bulk sewage sludge shall develop the following information and shall retain the information for five years: (A) The concentration of each pollutant listed in Table 3 of §503.13 in the bulk sewage sludge. (B) The following certification statement: "I certify under, penalty of law, that the Class B pathogen requirements in §503.32(b) and the vector attraction reduction requirements in [insert one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in §503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) if one of those requirements is met] have been met. This determination has been made under my direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information used to determine that the pathogen requirements [and vector attraction reduction requirements if applicable] have been met. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment." (C) A description of how the Class B pathogen requirements in §503.32(b) are met. (D) When one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in §503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) is met, a description of how the vector attraction reduction is met. (ii) The person who applies the bulk sewage sludge shall develop the following information and shall retain the information for five years. (A) The following certification statement: "I certify, under penalty of law, that the management practices in §503.14, the site restrictions in §503.32(b)(5), and the vector attraction reduction requirements in [insert either §503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10), if one of those requirements is met] have been met for each site on which bulk sewage sludge is applied. This determination has been made under my direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information used to determine that the management requirements and site restrictions [and the vector attraction reduction requirements if applicable] have been met. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment." (B) A description of how the management practices in §503.14 are met for each site on which bulk sewage sludge is applied. (C) A description of how the site restrictions in §503.32(b)(5) are met for each site on which bulk sewage sludge is applied. (D) When the vector attraction reduction requirement in either §503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10) is met, a description of how the vector attraction reduction requirement is met. 144444441,44M144114%11•411%11111111‘4144110 APPENDIX D Probable Costs Probable Cost - Step Screen Description Probable Cost Mobilization $18,700 Step Screen with Wash Press $68,500 Installation and Cold -Site Building $66,200 Headworks Modifications $55,500 Construction Contingency (10%) $19,020 Engineering / Administration (15%) $31,383 Step Screen Subtotal $240,603 Annual Budget for Project in 5 Years $48,121 Probable Cost - Grit Removal System Description Probable Cost Mobilization $19,500 Vortex Grit Separator and Gritt Mitt Classifier $57,000 Cold -Site Building and Electrical Work $80,000 Headworks Modifications and Installation $55,500 Construction Contingency (10%) $14,500 Engineering / Administration (15%) $14,500 Grit Removal System Subtotal $268,180 Annual Budget for Project in 5 Years $53,636 Probable Cost - Cell 2 Aeration Upgrades r Description Probable Cost Mobilization $7,400 Diffusers $22,000 Air Piping $44,100 Construction Contingency (10%) $7,350 Engineering /Administration (15%) $12,128 Cell 2 Aeration Upgrades Subtotal $92,978 Annual Budget for Project in 5 Years $18,596 Probable Cost - Initial Dredging with Liquid Class B Land Application Disposal Description Probable Cost Mobilization $31,100 Sludge and Soil Testing $4,500 Dredging Cells 1-3 $66,200 Class B Sludge Disposal (within approx. 5 miles) $198,700 Site Fencing and Signs $11,000 Construction Contingency (10%) $31,150 Engineering, Bid Review, and Administration (10%) $34,2650 Initial Dredging and Sludge Disposal Subtotal $376,915 Annual Budget for Project in 5 Years $75,383