Community Program Community Program Advisory CommitteeAdvisory Committee

July 11, 2005July 11, 2005

Today’s MeetingToday’s Meeting

• Program Update• Point Place• River Road• Bay View Wastewater Treatment Plant

• LTCP Update and Options

• Sewer Rates

• Next Meeting

Consent Decree Costs Consent Decree Costs

• $145 million in contracts awarded to date

• Total program estimate – $450 million

Long Term Control PlanLong Term Control Plan

• Ongoing dialogue with EPA

• Deadline for completion extended until at least August

LTCP - CSO TechnologiesLTCP - CSO Technologies

• Floatables Control

• Flow Reduction

• Flow Management

• In-System Storage

• New Storage

• Treatment

• Convey Flow to Treatment

Selection CriteriaSelection Criteria

• Frequency of overflows

• Volume

• Pollutant load

Alternatives Development Alternatives Development ProcessProcess

• Identify potential technologies

• Size technologies for individual or consolidated outfalls

• Review hydraulics and site feasibility

• Identify capital and life cycle costs

• Compare benefits

Cost DevelopmentCost Development

• Objective:

• Provide reasonable projection of cost for City financial planning

• Avoid nasty surprises

Cost Development Cost Development ProcessProcess• Use reference data from constructed projects

with similar or same objectives

• Include a special “scope contingency”

• Use 2008 as a basis for costing

• Add on standard ELAC allowances

Ottawa River AreaOttawa River Area

• Water quality conditions suggest higher level of control required

• Therefore, storage, treatment or elimination (through separation or express flow to plant) assumed for all outfalls

Ottawa River – Water Ottawa River – Water Quality SummaryQuality Summary• 6 active CSOs in a 3-mile span

• 26 overflows/year• 26% of system-wide CSO volume

• Exceedences of bacterial standard• Bacterial exceedences occur upstream and in CSO

reach

• Exceedences of DO standard• Sediment demand affects DO in CSO reach and

watershed-impacted areas

Ottawa River – Water Ottawa River – Water Quality SummaryQuality Summary• Floatables

• Improved but require control

• Toxics • 5 SIUs tributary to CSOs in Ottawa River area

• Non-CSO pollutant sources include cropland runoff, development/nonpoint sources, industry, landfills, upstream CSOs

Maumee River AreaMaumee River Area

• Water quality conditions generally in compliance for bacteria

• Range of alternatives evaluated included full extent from minimal reduction in existing frequency to full control assumed for all outfalls

Swan Creek – Water Quality Swan Creek – Water Quality SummarySummary

• 8 active CSOs (all diverted to tunnels)

• 11 overflow occurrences/year• 14% of system CSO discharge volume

• Was 37% of volume prior to tunnels

• Exceedences of bacterial standard• Bacterial exceedences upstream and in CSO reach

• Exceedences of DO standard• Sediment demand affects DO in CSO reach and

watershed-impacted areas

Swan Creek – Water Quality Swan Creek – Water Quality SummarySummary• Floatables

• Improved but require control

• Toxics • 8 SIUs at outfalls

• Non-CSO pollutant sources include agriculture, development/nonpoint sources, failing septics, upstream CSOs

Plan alternativesPlan alternatives

• A variety of plan options and probable costs have been developed:• Each consider the water body characteristics and

uses• Range of approach developed

• Sample Options:• High level of control• Reduction in untreated volume

Plan ConsiderationsPlan Considerations

• Objectives:• Reduce the pollutants that are impacting the

waterway of interest: bacteria, floatables, solids• Scale controls based on water quality impacts and

extent of public use of the waterway• Recognize the difference between “treated

overflow” and “untreated overflow”• Stage projects where uncertainties exist

Basis of LTCP Alternatives Basis of LTCP Alternatives EvaluationEvaluation• Ohio Water Quality Standards

• Free of floatables and toxicity• Bacterial standard (geomean & 10% of samples)• Dissolved oxygen standard (daily average and minimum)

• Consent Decree• Assessment for a wide range of alternatives of:

• Costs• Effectiveness (pollutant load reductions)• Water quality impacts

• EPA and OEPA Policy and Guidance• Alternative approaches:

• Demonstration: Meet water quality standards• Presumptive: Frequency of overflow and % capture

• Knee of curve• Affordability

Review Sample OptionReview Sample Option

• Reduction in Untreated Volume

Next StepsNext Steps

• Preparing additional alternatives/data for EPA discussion

• Incorporate input into draft plan and submit

• Review plan with you

• 30-day public comment period

• Public meetings for input

Impact on RatepayersImpact on Ratepayers• Current rate plan completed Jan 06

• Beginning to examine rate plan for 2007-2011

Next meetingNext meeting

• Other issues

• Next meeting date, time