Loading...
3.12. SR 08-18-1997** ITEM 3.12.** City of iver MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Sandra Thackeray, City Clerk August 18, 1997 SUBJECT: WWTP 1997 Annual Evaluation and Planning System (AEPS) Attached for your review is a report that was written following the 1997 Annual Evaluation and Planning System (AEPS) of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. This evaluation is completed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The report indicates that the Wastewater Treatment Plant is in compliance with the standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Please review the attached report and contact either Darrell Mack or Pat Klaers with any concerns or questions. WWTP Superintendent Darrell Mack encourages the council to visit the wastewater treatment facility. ACTION REQUESTED: Council motion indicating that the AEPS report has been reviewed and approved by the City Council. \Xelkriver\sys\shrdocXcouncil\wwtpaeps.doc 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency At]G - 5 1§97 August 1, 1997 Mr. Darrell Mack Wastewater Superintendent City of Elk River City Hall 13065 Orono Parkway, Box 490 Elk River, Minnesota 55330 RE: 1997 Annual Evaluation and Planning System Dear Mr. Mack: Thank you for participating in the 1997 Annual Evaluation and Planning System (AEPS) process. Your evaluation was reviewed and enclosed is a report based on your responses. We recommend the report be discussed at an upcoming municipal council/board meeting. In some cases, items identffied in the report may require immediate attention. Comparing this year's data with that of past evaluations may help identify areas of concern for your wastewater system. After the meeting, the mayor/municipal chair should certify that the report has been discussed and submit this certification to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. If possible, this should be done within 30 days of your receipt of the report. The certification can be in the form of a letter signed by the mayor/chair. Many municipalities are using the AEPS as a planning tool for their wastewater system. Review of the report provides a great opportunity for municipal councils/boards to learn about their investment in pollution prevention. Take this opportunity to encourage them to visit your facility and see it in action. We hope the report information will prove useful in planning for the future of wastewater treatment in your municipality. If you need any assistance or have any questions regarding the AEPS process, would like assistance in implementing suggestions from the report, or would like 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612) 296-6300 (Voice); (612) 282-5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth · Brainerd · Detroit Lakes · Marshall · Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer · Printed on recycled paper containin9 at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers. August 1, 1997 Page 2 a copy of the summary report, please feel free to contact me at (612) 296-8766 or 1-800-657-3864. Sincerely, Deb Lindlief Point Source Compliance Section Water Quality Division DL:mbo Enclosures cc: Municipal Official (without enclosures) >>> MUNICIPALITY: ELK R/VER This report contains responses to questions you answered in the Annual Evaluation and Planning System form. Although you answered all the applicable questions in the form, not every answer received a response in this report. We provided a response only when an answer indicated that there is an issue which may need resolution. MPCA staff have assigned a point value to the various questions in this form, with the exception of questions in Section 8, Future Needs. Points are given to responses that indicate that there may be a problem to be addressed. Each section is worth 100 points. If your system received a score greater than 50 in any section, you should carefully review the report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating effectively and efficiently. We hope this report proves useful both in planning for future wastewater needs and in resolving current problems. If you need assistance in implementing any of the suggestions in this report or have questions concerning the report or survey process, please feel free to contact Deb Lindlief at 1-800-657-3864. >>> SECTION ONE: TREATMEBTf SYST~ PHYSICAL COI~ITION Score for SECTION 1: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score ls greater than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION TWO: SYSTEM LOADIN~S AND PERFORMANCE (from your DMR's) Based on the monthly D.M.R. data you have submitted over the last calendar year, the following conclusions can be drawn: Score for SECTION 2: 0 WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAX/24UM. If your score is greater than 50, examine your DMR's tor the last calendar year and note if your system.is operatin~ efficiently. >>> SECTION THREE: COT,T,~CTION SYSTEM Question 27. Review the influent flows into your treatment system to determine if infiltration and inflow are a problem and establish a plan for correcting any problem identified. Score for SECTION 3: 8, ~ 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score zs greater than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION FOUR: BIOSOLIDS Question 34.6. You indicated that you plan to obtain new landspreading sites. Be aware that the approval process takes one to three months. If you have not completed an application or need information on the application process, please contact Jozja Dufresne at 1-800-657-3864. Score for SECTION 4: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score is greater than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION F/VE: SEPTAGE ~/~ / Score for SECTION 5: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score is greater than 50, carefully review th~ survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION SIX: TREA~ SYSTEM OPERATIONANDMAINTENANCE gcore for gECTION 6: 0, WHtAqE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score is greater than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION SEVEN: FINANCIAL AND ORDINANCE STATUS The area of sewer service charge systems and sewer use ordinances is complex and confusing. Ymmicipalities which received funding frc~n the federal or state construction grants program or the State Revolving Fund (loan program) face certain requirements in the area of ordinances. We have sample ordinances and charge systems which you can use to create your own documents. If you have questions concerning ordinances, charge systems, rate setting, or whether you must meet the requirements of specific funding programs, please contact the MPCA Training & Information Management Unit at 1-800-657-3864. Question 69. An equipment replacement account contains funds set aside for replacement of equipment that will wear out during the life of the system. Such an account should be part of your operation and maintenance budget. Depreciation information will provide the dollar amounts to be set aside each year for this account. This both ensures adequate funding for equipment replacement and helps your municipality avoid eraergency funding problems. Question 71. Your sewer service charge system should be reviewed by munici.pal officials annually. User rate adjustments should be made as a result of this review. Your charge system should describe, at a minimum: the different kinds of wastewater generators in your municipality; what constitutes n®rmal strength demestic waste; how user charges are calculated; what the surcharges for greater than normal dcraestic strength w~ste; industrial rate schedules; and whether users are charged proportionately to their water use. Question 76.5. Your sewer use ordinance should require annual notification of cost to all users. Users should be notified annually regarding what is encc~passed in the user charge. Question 78.1. Since you have individual sewage treatment systems (such as on-site septic tanks), your sewer use ordinance should deal with such systems. As one aspect of munic[pal wastewater treatment, you should require inspection and maintenance plans for such systems. After January 1, 1998, all existing ordinances governing individual sewage treatment systems must comply with Minn. R., ch. 7080 and must be submitted to the Agency for review. Question 78.4. When new hcmes are constructed in your service area, you should consider what is the optimal approach to treating the resulting wastewater. Any new Construction should be consistent with your municipality's long-range development plans. All new construction or replacement of an individual sewage treatment system (such as an on-site septic tank) requires a compliance inspection by a firm licensed to inspect individual sewage treatment systems. Score for SECTION 7: 42, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIMUM. If your score is greater than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our report responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently. >>> SECTION EIGHT: FUTURE NEEDS Question 85. Connection of currently unsewered homes to your treatment system will add flows and loadings to your treatment system. If your system does not have capacity for these additional flows and loadings, an expansion will be necessary. In addition, a sewer extension may be needed.