08-04-86 S&W Comm MinutesAugust 4, 1986 SEWER AND WATER COMMITTEE 3:00 P.M.
• Chairman Nystul and Councilmen Ruiz and Hafferman in attendance. Mayor
Kennedy, DPW Hammer, Sewer and Water Superintendent Hyde, Chief Operator Olsen,
Wayne Saverud, Paul Stokes and Dave Stably of Stahly Engineering, Ron McLaughlin
of McLaughlin Water Engineers also present.
REVISED DRAFT OF FACILITY PLAN - Paul Stokes stated that the revised
draft has not been sent to the State yet because they wanted the City to comment
before sending it. That is the purpose of this meeting. Basically there
are two alternatives presented: 1) Flathead River or 2) Land Application.
The costs of going to the Flathead River and the effect of the grant on those
costs was covered briefly.
Ron McLaughlin discussed the revised draft and the point of his whole
arguement was that there was really only one alternative. Land application
is not practical because of costs and problems so discharge to the Flathead
River is the only viable alternative. The State has already approved the
facilities plan and the grant to cover phosphorus removal and nitrification
with discharge into Ashley Creek. In 1985 the State objected to the same
position they are now forcing the City to take. They have since revised the
permit and asked the City to Yevise the facility -plan. He also pointed out
that if Kalispell removes phosphorus to 1 mg/1 they will have a much better
effluent than what is allowed.
Mr. McLaughlin went on to talk about phosphorus removal and explained
• that in the west there were no more than 8 - 10 plants in operation. Two
processes were available: 1) Biological uptake organisms that will suck up
phosphorus. The cost for this is not very high but is also is not reliable
below 2 mg/l. 2) Physical/Chemical - precipitation and chemical addition.
In the west the second alternative is the only one used. Cost and operation
comparisons show liquid alum precipitation to be the best.
Mr. McLaughlin explained that in order to keep the digestion process
in the plant healthy the alum sludge would have to be kept separate with mixture
taking place before it was trucked out. Pure alum sludge is not good for
injection but mixed with the regular sludge and injected it makes a good fertilizer.
The choice between going to the mouth of Ashley Creek or directly into
the Flathead River was discussed. S/W Supt. Hyde felt that the City should
get the reaction of the citizens at the public hearing before making that
decision. DPW Hammer asked if there were any plants happy with the process
and requested a list of the plants using the process so that he could contact
them directly.
Mr. McLaughlin explained that the City presently has a low cost anaerobic
system and the conversion cost to take care of the phosphorus (using the existing
storage tank) would be less than $25,000. EPA would not fund this before
but now they will if the City goes to the Flathead River in order to meet
the discharge permit limitations. He stated again that in this situation
there is only one alternative if the City believes the State. The discharge
permit will not allow discharge into Ashley Creek. He said that to argue
• with the State would take thousands of dollars and years - and he saw no reason
to argue when what the State wants is also the cheapest alternative. He commented
on the MIT report by saying that their approach of improving treatment and
seeing what happened would spend the money and then there would be none for
the pipe.
SEWER AND WATER COMMITTEE
• August 4, 1986
Page 2
Mr. McLaughlin said that land application was too expensive for the EPA.
He referred to Page 24 of the report. He said that there was a possibility
that EPA would grant as much money as it would take for going to the river
but the City would have to come up with the rest.
Paul Stokes stated that they needed to know what information the City
wants and they would provide it.
There was discussion of a problem area at the plant. In the first plan
the Purifax system didn't work and there is a question of whether EPA will
cover that. The ABF towers are in the same situation - the replacing of the
media is not covered. Stahly's recommendation would be to cover 100% and
take it out of the report, and then get 75Z for increasing the aeration base,
which basically takes the place of the towers. The towers could then be
abandoned in service (don't count on them). Chief Operator Olsen agreed.
Olsen also wondered if some of the water going to the river could be used
for irrigation on the way. Mn. McLaughlin pointed out that forcing irrigation
doesn't work, but once people see the benefits there will be alot of volunteers.
The following information needs to be included in the City's reply to
Stably Engineering:
• 1. Phosphorus: Include in reply to State and/or Stably only?
How much study/inquiry is wanted?
2. How much alternative selection on phosphorus removal is wanted?
S/W Supt. Hyde commented on the need for additional study. The text
and drawings should show some essential items - should stand on its own. He
wants a well -thought out plan consistent with the existing plant. C. Nystul
requested that DPW Hammer and S/W Sutp. Hyde read through the report, outline
the work that they want done, meet with the Committee, and send the results
to Paul Stokes. He also asked if all this was within the agreed upon price
and Paul Stokes agreed.
Stably Engineering is to provide the City with a list of other plants
in the vacinity where phosphorus removal and/or land application is used so
that the City can contact and inquire, and a list of plants happy with the
process that Stably is proposing so that can be checked out.
WOODLAND PARK FACILITY PLAN - The revised pages have been sent to the
State. The State send a list of additional things needed to W/S Supt. Hyde.
The June 25 list from Randy Nelson says that the Woodland Facility Plan can
be segregated from the Evergreen plan.- S/W Supt. Hyde and Paul Stokes will
meet and work this out. C. Nystul pushed to get this underway before freezing
weather. S/W Supt. Hyde said the State thought they might have another 50%
of the 1986 allocation in.the bank and that they should have the plans and
specifications reviewed this week.
SEWER AND WATER COMMITTEE
• August 4, 1986
Page 3
ONE YEAR CERTIFICATION - This is a certification for Stahly Engineering
on the success of the project. DPW Hammer gave to the City Attorney to review.
S/W Supt. Hyde said the only real problem is the pumps, and an "unusual amount
of operation and maintenance costs". DPW Hammer and S/W Supt. Hyde will discuss
the certification.
USE OF CITY'S 40 ACRES - The question was asked if Siderius was haying
this acreage. Siderius had leased it to Altenburg. The Mayor found this
out through Doug Wise who wanted to put horses there and was willing to fix
fences (which he did after having Marquardt survey). Mayor will check into
this.
SOUTHWEST SID - C. Nystul asked if the City was interested in filing
for EPA funding on this project. DPW Hammer said the staff recommendation
was for it IF annexation was required. C. Hafferman objected to the project
and said she would research the reasons and bring them back to the Committee.
It was explained that residents were willing to ,annex and to pay for water
and sewer, but the only way they can afford it is to get EPA funding to help
with the sewer costs. C. Ruiz said the City should apply for the funding
and get on the list and the decision could be made later.
• SAVERUD OBJECTION TO WATER DEPARTMENT CHARGES - Citizen Saverud said
he wanted to react to some things in the minutes of the last meeting, which
he was unable to attend. He said that the part about the line being offset
with a kink was definitely true, but the full excavation was done before that
was discovered. He wondered what the regular procedure was, and questioned
the added costs. He also stated that the part about the owner being given
an estimate ahead of time did not happen in his case. He questioned whether
some of the backfill could be reused (it took 30 yards), and the fact that
$25/hr was charged for each employee when he knows they are not paid that.
He felt the City needed to cover all expenses but didn't realize that it was
a profit making venture. S/W Supt. Hyde explained that the excavation was
constrained to a very small area between the sidewalk and the curb and the
very wet conditions warranted the extent of the excavation. He explained
that they try to reuse backfill but on this job it was so saturated that was
not possible. Use of the saturated material could cause a liability problem
if someone stepped on it and sunk to their knees, and settlement would be
a real problem. Hyde said he also questioned the billing, but the answer
was that the $25/hr covers depreciation, insurance, gasoline, pickups, etc.
The enterprise fund is supposed to make a profit according to the City accountant.
DPW Hammer suggested that the biggest problem is that different jobs
can have different problems and he objects to charging such extremes. His
recommendation would be to have a lump sum price (arrived at by taking an
average of a year's worth of jobs) and this could be shown to owners ahead
of time so they could choose who would do the work. A discussion followed
about the components of private plumbers bills and how they compared with
011
City charges. DPW Hammer said he had seen alot of latitude in the sundry
account bills and it seemed that whether or not the work was for "friends"
seemed to make a difference in the speed of the job and therefore in the amount
of the resulting bill. After more discussion C. Nystul asked that S/W Supt.
Hyde and DPW Hammer gather information on private hourly rates. DPW Hammer
SEWER AND WATER COMMITTEE
• August 4, 1986
Page 4
stated again that he would like to set a fixed fee, and if the Water Department
was efficient they would make money, if not they will lose money. Clerk Halver
stated that they can't have a sympathy factor and be fair to the enterprise
fund.
ajg
•
•