Loading...
03-20-85 S&W Comm Minutes• March 7.0, 1985 SEWER AND WATER COMMITTEE 3:00 P.M. Chairman Nystul, Committee members Palmer, Ruiz, Springer, and Manning attended. Also present were Mayor McDowell, City Attorney Neier, Pic Olsen, DPW Hammer, Roger Hopkins, reporter from the Daily Interlake, Steve Cummings, and four guests: Ed Barth, environmental engineer with Barth Tec, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, Richard Sedlak, Research Director with The Soap and Detergent Association, NY, NY, Damann Anderson, Soil Scientist with RSE, Madison, WI, and A.G. Payne, Regulatory Services Division of Proctor and Gamble Company, Cincinnati, OH. C. Nystul opened the meeting and turned the meeting over to Ed Barth. Mr. Barth has retired from 30 years with EPA and is author of a phosphorus removal manual. He presented a handout, "Brief Outline of Phosphorus Control Technology," to each person present and his presentation was based on the information in the handout. The stated reason for the meeting was information, not solicitation. The presentation included engineering approaches to phosphorus, efficiency ranking of systems, an overview of facilities around the country and what may be expected in the future. Choices of systems included biological, chemical and chemical/biological control, and the addition of chemicals to the biological system at some point in the process. Mr. Barth pointed out that there is always a need for a chemical back-up system. • There was discussion of the phosphorus coming into and out of. the Kalispell plant, the cost of phosphorus removal, and the developing technology for biological phosphorus removal. The committee agreed on the need to address the phosphate problem in Ashley Creek and Flathead Lake. The guest -persons testified that the 3% discharge rate will not affect the lake. C. Palmer stated that 15% of the problem comes from 40% of the population (the city) and yet controls are placed on the city residents rather than on the whole basin population. Attorney Neier asked if anyone was dealing with non -point sources run-off, erosion, etc. There was some discussion of phosphate detergent bans and how effective they were in bringing down the phosphate levels. The guests indicated that in the 6 Great Lakes states bans were tried first, treatment plants followed. Studies in 4 states indicated bans do not change phosphate content. Mr. Barth left a copy of a study on detergent phosphate bans and water quality with Mayor McDowell. C. Ruiz asked why plants are not designed to take care of any and all chemicals:? Or are new chemicals being introduced which then must be dealt with as they appear? The answer Mr. Barth gave boiled down to the fact that new research and knowledge leads to new controls. Early records indicateall people were interested in was removing the lumps, and the progression then went through BOD and suspended solids, sudsing, and other • non -specifics until in the 1970's on we are dealing with specifics: NH4, nitrogen, and now pesticides and heavy metals. Mr. Barth indicated that some EPA mandated regulations show a lack of gathered information and assumptions of problems without adequate proof. Page 2 Sewer and Water • Pic Olsen indicated that each mg. of phophorous removal costs money and that everyone in the drainage should share in these costs. Kalispell at this time is not adding anything for phosphate control. Alum compounds are the most commonly used and we would need to check the surrounding area for suppliers before coming up with a cost figure. Gladstone, MI compares with Kalispell and it costs the city approximately 2.2�/1000 gallons. C. Ruiz made the point again that the treatment plant contributes less than 25% of the problem, leaving 75% due to other sources. He asked if there was not a sewage treatment with NO discharge. Land - treatment has no discharge but a large amount of land is needed for winter lagoon storage. Then soil removes phosphates by absorption. However, nitrates may be a problem with this system. ajg • Chairman Nystul closed the meeting.