comprehensive wastewater planning in your town

Comprehensive Wastewater Comprehensive Wastewater Planning in Your TownPlanning in Your Town

Buzzards Bay CoalitionBuzzards Bay Coalition

2013 Decisions Makers Workshop2013 Decisions Makers Workshop

April 3, 2013April 3, 2013

Robert A. Duncanson, Ph.D.CWMP Program Manager

Director of Health & EnvironmentTown of Chatham

22

33

New Breach 2007

BackgroundBackground

• 1966 Report recommends limited central sewer 1966 Report recommends limited central sewer system, 2 phasessystem, 2 phases

• 1971 11971 1stst phase and WWTP on-line, 2 phase and WWTP on-line, 2ndnd phase phase deferreddeferred

• 1987 DEP Administrative Consent Order1987 DEP Administrative Consent Order– ““Town shall take all necessary steps to plan, design and Town shall take all necessary steps to plan, design and

construct a wastewater treatment and disposal facility to construct a wastewater treatment and disposal facility to serve the Town’s wastewater needs…”serve the Town’s wastewater needs…”

• 1991 Town Meeting rejects 1982 & 1988 Facility Plan 1991 Town Meeting rejects 1982 & 1988 Facility Plan Updates Updates

• 1997 Comprehensive Wastewater Management 1997 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Planning Planning begins begins

44

Background continuedBackground continued

• 2003 (2007)/2006 MEP Reports2003 (2007)/2006 MEP Reports

• 2006-2007 Alternatives (by watersheds)2006-2007 Alternatives (by watersheds)

• 2007 Draft EIR/Draft CWMP2007 Draft EIR/Draft CWMP

• 2009 Final EIR/Final CWMP2009 Final EIR/Final CWMP– July MEPA CertificateJuly MEPA Certificate– October DRI ApprovalOctober DRI Approval

• 2010 Construction commences2010 Construction commences

55

•WhoWho

•WhatWhat

•HowHow

•WhereWhere

•WhenWhen

•How Much?How Much?

66

Wastewater Planning: Critical Wastewater Planning: Critical ComponentsComponents

Wastewater Planning is a Wastewater Planning is a complicated scientific and complicated scientific and engineering process – it needs engineering process – it needs to be simplified for public to be simplified for public acceptance. acceptance.

Repetition – Repetition – Repetition – Repetition – RepetitionRepetition

77

A cooperative, team effort:A cooperative, team effort:

•Citizens Advisory Committee Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)(CAC)•Technical Advisory Group (TAG)Technical Advisory Group (TAG)•MEPMEP•ConsultantConsultant•Regulators (MassDEP, Cape Cod Regulators (MassDEP, Cape Cod Commission/USEPACommission/USEPA•Water & Sewer Advisory Water & Sewer Advisory CommitteeCommittee•CitizensCitizens

Who:Who:

88

Citizens Advisory CommitteeCitizens Advisory Committee

• Established at the onset of the project.Established at the onset of the project.

• Geographically diverse membership.Geographically diverse membership.

• Integrated into all aspects of the project.Integrated into all aspects of the project.

• Meetings televised.Meetings televised.

• Minutes provided on town’s website.Minutes provided on town’s website.

• Regular updates to the Board of Selectmen.Regular updates to the Board of Selectmen.

• Sponsors public outreach activities: Sponsors public outreach activities: educational workshops, flyers, speakers educational workshops, flyers, speakers bureau, etc. bureau, etc.

“We want citizens to study why we’re doing what we’re doing, we want them to question us as we go along and maybe lead us in another direction.”

“We need this to be supported by the taxpayers, because it’s going to cost us one way or another.”

“…pro-actively develop, village by village, public involvement and support for a plan of action.”

99

Technical Advisory GroupTechnical Advisory Group

• Town ManagerTown Manager• Finance Director Finance Director (as needed)(as needed)

• Community Development DirectorCommunity Development Director

• Director of Health & EnvironmentDirector of Health & Environment

• Water & Sewer ManagerWater & Sewer Manager

• Health AgentHealth AgentResponsible for direction to the Consultant.

1010

WhatWhat::

• What is the problem – not always evident/may not always be agreement/may be multiple problems.

• Develop the data – some may exist/some may have to be developed.

• Identify goal(s)

MEP ProcessMEP Process

Linked Model & Report:

Nitrogen Loading

Hydrodynamic Model

Water Quality Model

Thresholds Analysis

Watershed Delineation

Land Use Data

Data Collection

TMDL Development

CWMP & more model runs

Implementation!Slide Courtesy of MEP

1212

Watershed Watershed EvaluationsEvaluations

Watershed Watershed EvaluationsEvaluations

1313

• Plan a town-wide Plan a town-wide response to a town-response to a town-wide problem.wide problem.– More efficient.More efficient.– More cost-effective.More cost-effective.– More environmentally-More environmentally-

sound.sound.– Cost control through Cost control through

phasing.phasing.

• Don’t lose sight of the Don’t lose sight of the forest for the trees.forest for the trees.

How:How:How:How:

1414

Technology

Typical Nitrogen

Concentration in the Effluent

Typical Percent Removal

Title 5 Septic System 20 to 40 mg/l 23%

Individual Nitrogen Removal Septic System 15 to 25 mg/l 50%Community/Cluster System 5 to 15 mg/l 75%

BAT WWTF 3 mg/l 93%

Summary of Typical Nitrogen Removals for the Wastewater Management Options

Ecotoilets?

WastewaterWastewater

1515

Non-wastewaterNon-wastewater– Hydrodynamic ModificationsHydrodynamic Modifications– Boat/Pet Waste ManagementBoat/Pet Waste Management– Fertilizer Management Fertilizer Management – Freshwater AttenuationFreshwater Attenuation– Shellfish/Macroalgal Shellfish/Macroalgal

HarvestingHarvesting– Stormwater ManagementStormwater Management

1616

Site Site EvaluationsEvaluations Site Site EvaluationsEvaluations

1717

Hydrogeologic and Site Hydrogeologic and Site EvaluationsEvaluations

Hydrogeologic and Site Hydrogeologic and Site EvaluationsEvaluations

• Hydraulic load Hydraulic load testing and testing and groundwater groundwater modelingmodeling• WhereWhere• How muchHow much• MoundingMounding

1818

Watershed Watershed Evaluations Evaluations (sewersheds) (sewersheds) Watershed Watershed Evaluations Evaluations (sewersheds) (sewersheds)

1919

– Nitrogen TMDLsNitrogen TMDLs– Other TMDLsOther TMDLs– Low costLow cost– Fiscal fairnessFiscal fairness– Fewer raised systemsFewer raised systems– Address needs in Address needs in

other Areas of other Areas of ConcernConcern

• Plan wastewater management Plan wastewater management to meet Town goals:to meet Town goals:

2020

Plan No. 1: No Action Alternative

Plan No. 2: Combination of Sewers and I/A Technology in Selected Watersheds

Plan No. 3: I/A Technology

Plan No. 4: Sewer Extension to Meet Nitrogen TMDLs

Plan No. 5: Town-Wide Sewer Extension

Alternative Plan Formation Alternative Plan Formation and Evaluation and Evaluation Alternative Plan Formation Alternative Plan Formation and Evaluation and Evaluation

2121

Recommended Plan Recommended Plan Recommended Plan Recommended Plan

2222

When:When:

Everything takes longer than you expect or plan for.

2323

Schedule•Start?•Year-round construction?•SRF Funding Cycle•Local Fiscal Impacts•Community Impacts•Business Impacts!!

2424

Where:Where: • Environmental Sensitivity

• Project Coordination• Maximize Impact• Community Input• Funding• Nimby• Banana

2525

2626

How Much?:How Much?: How Much?:How Much?:

The preverbal moving target.

Must be addressed as early as realistically possible (level of confidence).

Simplicity.

The only thing anyone really cares about.

2727

Fiscal PlanningFiscal Planning

• Town-wide approachTown-wide approach

• AffordabilityAffordability

• Fiscal CredibilityFiscal Credibility

• Identify All CostsIdentify All Costs– Connection FeesConnection Fees– Annual User ChargesAnnual User Charges– BettermentBetterment– Tax RateTax Rate

“To demonstrate the fiscal impact of the implementation of the Wastewater Plan, and thereby the affordability of the balance of the capital facility plan.”

Demonstrate the worst case fiscal impact to homeowners.

Discuss betterment versus property tax payment options.

2828(1) All costs are rounded to two significant digits and are referenced to a date of June 2007 .

Total Phase 1 and 2 Cost Summary (in Millions of Dollars)Total Phase 1 and 2 Cost Summary (in Millions of Dollars)

ComponentComponent Capital Capital Costs Costs

Phase 1Phase 1(1)(1)

Capital Capital Costs Costs

Phase 2 Phase 2 (1)(1)

Capital Capital Costs Costs

Total Total (1)(1)

WWTF upgrade and expansionWWTF upgrade and expansionConstruction CostsConstruction CostsContingenciesContingenciesFiscal, Legal, and EngineeringFiscal, Legal, and EngineeringTotalTotal

$25$25$5.0$5.0$4.9$4.9$35$35

$6.0$6.0$1.2$1.2$1.6$1.6$8.8$8.8

$31$31$6.2$6.2$6.5$6.5$44$44

Collection System ExpansionCollection System ExpansionConstruction CostsConstruction CostsContingenciesContingenciesFiscal, Legal, and EngineeringFiscal, Legal, and EngineeringTotalTotal

$110$110$28$28$28$28

$170$170

$60$60$14$14$14$14$88$88

$170$170$42$42$42$42

$250$250

2929

Property Tax ImpactProperty Tax Impact

3030

Total Cost Total Cost ($600,000 ($600,000 Valuation)Valuation)(yearly/monthly)(yearly/monthly)

Multiple Funding Multiple Funding SourcesSources

• Debt DropoffDebt Dropoff• Targeted Tax Surcharge Targeted Tax Surcharge

(Real Estate Transfer, Meals, (Real Estate Transfer, Meals, Hotel/Motel)Hotel/Motel)

• Property TaxProperty Tax– DeductibleDeductible

• BettermentBetterment– Improves value to Homeowner Improves value to Homeowner

(some vs all)(some vs all)– Payment may be banked by Payment may be banked by

towntown– Not DeductibleNot Deductible

DEBT

DROP OFF

Stable Tax rate

3232

Federal and State Funding SourcesFederal and State Funding Sources

•State Revolving Fund (SRF)State Revolving Fund (SRF)• O’Leary LegislationO’Leary Legislation

• SRF funds targeted to nutrient SRF funds targeted to nutrient projectsprojects• Eligible towns able to borrow @ Eligible towns able to borrow @ 0% interest 0% interest • 2009-20192009-2019

•USDA, Rural Development, Rural USDA, Rural Development, Rural Utilities ServiceUtilities Service

• Low interest loansLow interest loans• GrantsGrants• Population/Income basedPopulation/Income based

3333

•Growth ImplicationsGrowth Implications

•Shared WatershedsShared Watersheds

•Point of CompliancePoint of Compliance

•MonitoringMonitoring

•Watershed Watershed PermittingPermitting

•Adaptive Adaptive ManagementManagement

Other ConsiderationsOther Considerations

Questions?Questions?

“How many times must I tell you, the sea is not one vast, inexhaustible refuse

dump.”For more info: http://www.chatham-ma.gov/public_documents/ChathamMa_CWMPlan/CWMP