4.1. SR 07-27-1998.~ity of
iver
Item #4.1.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor & City Council
Pat Klaers, City Ad~rator
July 27, 1998
Review 1998 Annual Evaluation and
Planning System Report on the WWTP
Attached for your review is a report from the MPCA regarding its 1998
annual evaluation and planning system process which is based on
information provided by the city regarding the Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP). This report indicates that the city WWTP is in compliance with
standards set by MPCA.
The only issue of note in this report relates to the financing and I believe the
ranking reflects the high amount of debt that we have due to the recent plant
expansion. From a city audit point of view and budgeting point of view the
treatment plant is in an acceptable financial condition.
The City Council is requested to review this report with WWTP
Superintendent Darrell Mack. Following a review by the City Council we
will certify to MPCA that the report has been discussed. This report is rather
timely considering that in May the City Council had a tour of the expanded
treatment plant.
Action Requested
City Council motion indicating that the report has been reviewed and
accepted by the City Council.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
July 13, 1998
Mr. Darrell Mack
Wastewater Superintendent
City of Elk River
City Hall
13065 Orono Pkwy., Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: 1998 Annual Evaluation and Planning System
Dear Mr. Mack:
Thank you for participating in the 1998 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 identified 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 (MPCA). 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.
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 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
Enclosures
cc: Hon. Hank Duitsman, Mayor(without enclosures)
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 containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers.
>>> MD/~-/CIPALITY: ~.T.K RIVER
This report contains responses to questions you answered in the 1998 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 ~-arious 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 re~iew the report responses for this section
to determine if your system is operating effectively and efficiently. If you
need assistance in impl~nenting 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: TREATMENT SYST~4 PHYSICAL CONDITION
Score for SECTION 1: 0f WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIFi~. If your score
is greater"than ~50, carefully review the survey you filled out and our _report
responses for this section to determ/ne if your system is operating efficiently.
>>> SECTION ~40: SYST~q LOAD~ AND PERFORMANCE~ (fr0~ ~our DMR's)
Based on the monthly D.M.R. data you have ~hnitted Over the last calepd~r year,
the following conclusions can be drawn:
Score for SECTION 2: 0 WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIML~. If your score
is greater' than 50, ex~hmine your DMR's for the last Calepdar year and note if
your system is operating efficiently.
>>> SECTION THREE: COLL]~.C'Iq20N SYST~4
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, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAX/lVi~. If your score
is greater-than 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and cur report
responses for this Section to determine if your system is operating efficiently.
:71. ~,,~. -:~ ~-~ ~ ::* ::- /-,' 'J,?,.' '-' ',,~' ,' ~,, '~ - /X~, c4. , i)~ ./~:~' ,- i ~, /':~! ~' e .,"/,*' .'
>>> 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 informati.on on the application process, please
contact Jo~ja Dufresne at 1-800-657-3864.
Score for SECTION 4: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAX//~/4. If your score
is greater ~ 50, carefully review the survey you filled out and cur report
responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently.
>>> SECTION FIVE: SEPTAGE
Score for SECTION 5: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXI~¢~4. If your score
is ~reater' trmn ~U, care~±±y review the survey you filled out and our .re~ort
responses for this section to determine if your system is operating efficiently.
>>> SECTION SIX: TREATMENT SYST~4 OPERATION AND MA/lVffENANCE
Score for_ SECTION 6: 0, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE MAXIFi¢4. If your score
is greater than 50, carefully review the ~urvey 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 cc~plex and
confusing. Munici~ities which received funding frcm the federal or state
construction grants program or the State Revolving Fund (loan pro,ram) 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 Deb
Lindlief at 1-800-657-3864.
Question 69. An eguipment replacement account cOntains funds set aside for
replacement of eqult~ent 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 equit~_nt
replacement and he~ps your municipality avoid ecaer~ency funding problems.
Question 76.5. Your sewer use ordinance should require annual notification of
cost to all userD. Users should be notified annually re~ard~ng what is
enccmpassed 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 municipal wastewater treatment, you should require inspection
and maintenance plans for such systems. As of january 1, 1998, all existi.n_$
ordinances governing individual sewage treatment systems must cc~ply with Minn.
R., ch. 7080 and must be sutxaitted to the Agency for review.
Question 78.4. When new hc~es 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 cc~pliance
inspection by a firm licensed to inspect individual sewage treatment systems.
Score for SECTION 7: 42, WHERE 0 IS BEST AND 100 IS THE ~. 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