HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-08-19_Agenda_Packet
THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE
www.mwmcpartners.org
MWMC MEETING AGENDA
Friday, February 8, 2019 @ 7:30 a.m.
City of Springfield City Hall, Library Meeting Room
225 Fifth St., Springfield, OR 97477
Turn off cell phones before the meeting begins.
7:30 – 7:35 I. ROLL CALL
7:35 – 7:40 II. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. MWMC 1/11/19 Minutes
Action Requested: By motion, approve the Consent Calendar
7:40 – 7:45 III. PUBLIC COMMENT
Request to speak slips are available at the sign-in desk. Please present request slips to
the MWMC Secretary before the meeting starts.
7:45 – 8:10 IV. EXECUTIVE SESSION – BIOGAS: NW INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kristin Denmark, Josh Newman
Action Requested: The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission will now meet
in Executive Session pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(f) for the purpose of consulting with legal
counsel about information or records exempt from public disclosure because they are
subject to attorney-client privilege.
Adjourn Executive Session and convene Regular Session
Note: Memos presented in Executive Session are confidential and must be turned in at the
end of the meeting.
8:10 – 8:15 V. SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kristin Denmark, Josh Newman
Action Requested: By motion, approve Resolution 19-01
8:15 – 8:35 VI. AMEND BIOCYCLE FARM REPLANTING SERVICES AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . Todd Miller
Action Requested: By motion, approve Resolution 19-02
Continued on next page
THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE
www.mwmcpartners.org
8:35 – 9:05 VII. FY 2019-20 MWMC CAPITAL BUDGET & 5-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Troy McAllister, Josh Newman, Todd Anderson
Action Requested: Provide input to staff
9:05 – 9:15 VIII. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, & WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
9:15 IX. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing-impaired, an interpreter can be provided with
48-hours-notice prior to the meeting. To arrange for service, call 541-726-3694.
All proceedings before the MWMC are recorded.
MWMC MEETING MINUTES
Friday, January 11, 2019 @ 7:30 a.m.
City of Springfield City Hall, Library Meeting Room
225 Fifth St., Springfield, OR 97477
President Ruffier opened the meeting at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken by Kevin Kraaz.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Pat Farr, Bill Inge, Doug Keeler, Walt Meyer, Joe Pishioneri, and Peter Ruffier
Absent: Jennifer Yeh
Commissioner Farr said he would be stepping out around 9:05 for a conference call. Commissioner
Meyer said he had to leave at 8:50.
Staff Present: Meg Allocco, Katherine Bishop, Dave Breitenstein, John Huberd, K.C. Huffman (attorney),
Laura Keir, Tonja Kling, Kevin Kraaz, Shawn Krueger, Troy McAllister, Todd Miller, Michelle Miranda, Josh
Newman, Loralyn Spiro, and Matt Stouder.
CONSENT CALENDAR
a. MWMC 12/14/18 Minutes
MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KEELER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
PISHIONERI TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY 6/0.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM UPDATE
Loralyn Spiro and Laura Keir, Communication Coordinators provided a brief update on the MWMC’s
communication and outreach efforts and a high-level overview of the potential future expansion of the
public information program. The public information program is guided by the 2018 MWMC
Communication Plan and by MWMC’s Commission Goal- Key Outcome #5 (seen in the budget). The
Communications Plan contains four main strategies to reach the overall goal of increasing awareness of
the MWMC and its role in the health and vitality of our community and environment. Some of the
communication tactics implemented as a result of the 2018 Communications Plan include the following:
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 2 of 10
treatment plant tours; Clean Water University (CWU), facility tours, e-newsletters, sponsorships/
community events, community presentations, promotional giveaway items, and pollution prevention
campaigns. The full list is in the 2018 Communication Plan located on the documents page on MWMC’s
website: http://www.mwmcpartners.org/about-the-mwmc/documents/.
Currently the MWMC has a total of 1.0 FTE to implement the MWMC Communication Plan and achieve its
goals, objectives, and tactics. In the fall of 2019, the next market research will be conducted with a
comparison to the baseline of data established in 2015. A final summary of results will be presented to
the Commission in early 2020. In the spring of 2020, the MWMC Communications Plan will be updated
based on the market research results. Some of the future additional tactics and public outreach work
that staff would like to pursue includes the following: expand CWU to reach 50% of the fifth grade
students in the service area; additional videos to expand on MWMC’s work and mission; expand tours of
MWMC facilities to include the Biosolids Management Facility; and increasing social media followers. If
future expansion of the MWMC’s public information and education efforts is desired by the Commission,
additional staffing resources would likely be needed.
Matt Stouder, MWMC General Manager, added that staff would like the Commission’s feedback on
increasing resources in order to expand the program. He stated that staff has been hearing from
community members and teachers that they really value the work we are putting out. There are lots of
suggestions on things staff could do including putting more videos out for the community to use.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Keeler said he had the opportunity to serve on the MWMC subcommittee
that looked at the big picture as well as the branding question. He really appreciates all the work that
has been done and the program we have now; he thinks we made a leap forward. In regards to the Clean
Water University, he thinks whatever we target for a metric there it would be a good thing to put in our
plan.
Commissioner Pishioneri agreed with Commissioner Keeler in that MWMC has gone leaps and bounds
in the last four to five years. He thinks the programs such as Clean Water University really support this
program. He likes the way staff found the metrics to see where we are moving, making it measurable.
He would prefer that instead of hiring a permanent half FTE that it would be a temporary position in
order to see what that position could produce and to see if the demand is still there. To increase an FTE
seems to go straight into perpetuity. He thinks it is a great program but he doesn’t know if it is
something that when projects are completed that level of labor would continue to be needed.
Mr. Stouder replied that staff is not making a request for a half or a full position at this time. We want to
hear from the Commission today on where staff should be prioritizing as we move forward.
President Ruffier said he would like to see an analysis on contracting with some agencies that
specialize in marketing or branding to get a boost for a short term, one year, to move us forward. Then
we could make a decision about the long term need for staffing resources internally. He said he really
appreciates the efforts that staff puts into the program and it is a really good program. But rather than
hire someone initially that doesn’t have the expertise or experience in marketing or branding maybe we
would get a bigger bang for the buck early on if we had some consulting.
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 3 of 10
Commissioner Inge said he is wondering if staff is going to bring to the Commission a specific plan on
what they need. He doesn’t think it is for the Commission to tell staff what they need. He would like to
know very specifically what does staff need and what do they want and where can we go from there.
Mr. Stouder said currently we have a fixed amount of resources; we are able to move forward certain
initiatives that were identified in the 2018 Communications Plan but there are some tactics from that
plan that staff has not been able to get to. As we move forward and continue to expand, we are going to
need additional resources at some level or capacity unless we want to hold steady with where we are
going. When we set our key outcomes and indicators every year we want to expand the outreach. Those
tactics will continue to grow incrementally over time, but the resources have stayed the same. We have
some things that we can look at and present to the Commission within our current budget that would
allow us to expand resources without increasing the budget; we will have a further conversation in
March. As the 2020 plan is developed, there will definitely be more opportunity to provide feedback
about what is needed. Today, we are trying to find out if the Commission is happy with the current level
of service and then, knowing that there is a need to continue to get our message out there, are you in
support of where we are headed.
Mr. Stouder added it feels like we are in a never ending cycle of potentially getting a new permit, but
when it happens there will be new requirements which will require us to affect some behavior change in
the community in order to meet those requirements. Consequentially, staff is trying to position MWMC
out in front of that so people know who we are, what we do and earn their trust. So when those new
requirements come and we have to ask the community to change behavior, hopefully we will have a
more positive outcome because they will know us and trust us.
Commissioner Meyer stated he thinks staff is doing a great job, he likes what they are doing, and he
likes how they communicate what they are doing. The area where we really touch most of the people is
the pollution prevention outreach; for example, the people who come to the plant with their
motorhomes, septage dumpers, and the industrial pretreatment programs. The pollution prevention
piece will become more important in the future because it does involve behavior changes. He would
encourage staff to keep thinking along those lines because we do want to get out in front of that so if we
have new requirements that we can’t deal with in the treatment process but have to deal with
pretreatment or other mechanisms, this will be the key to that. Also if there are any opportunities to
collaborate with the two cities because they both have stormwater facilities; a lot of what they do is also
behavior influence. There should be some thought along those lines in what we can do to collaborate
and strengthen both of those programs.
Commissioner Farr said that outreach and communication is what he really loves. Getting the message
out to people in a way they can understand. He stated that Mr. Stouder said that we need to affect
behavior change, and get people to know who we are and trust us. The work that the Communication
staff does is very critical. The suggestion to use an outside agency to accompany your work would be
very effective. The CWU goal of 50% of all fifth grade students by 2020 is an aggressive goal but he
thinks it is achievable, admirable, and a worthwhile goal. He is on board with doing whatever is needed
to reach that goal.
Commissioner Inge stated he fully supports what we are doing so far and he supports expanding to the
degree that we need additional resources. If it is financial resources, then we should put financial
resources at it. He is not concerned about going from 1 full FTE to 1.5 or 2 FTE or whatever. At some
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 4 of 10
point, you have to say we have a mission to accomplish and it takes “X” to accomplish that mission; he is
for putting “X” to the mission.
Mr. Stouder stated we will do some further refinements and analysis. He also stated that we have fully
explored the contracting option, and contract with folks when possible to take advantage of the benefits
outlined by the Commission. There comes a point when there is only so much you can do with 1.0 FTE
even when you are contracting out assignments, coordinating volunteers, working with existing
resources, etc. He appreciates the feedback.
President Ruffier said we need to be more explicit in the [Communication] Plan with what the outcome
objectives are; looking at increasing trust and positioning ourselves to influence behavior. He agrees
with Mr. Stouder that it is going to be really critical in the future. We will not be able to treat for all the
pollutants that will be regulated in the new permit, whenever it gets issued. We will need lots of
cooperation from the rate payers. If we are better known and respected in the industry, we can attract
better talent. At some point we need to expand the view of what other activities we undertake that
influences public perception and understanding of the agency. He said the Plan is good but a little bit in
isolation. If we get ourselves involved in the issues surrounding the homeless situation in our
communities it is bound to raise our visibility. One of the issues that is always raised is more restrooms
are needed. That is certainly one way to get recognition if we want it.
Commissioner Keeler said he likes that idea. We have done great work over the past decades and so
that foundation is laid. We just need to leverage that so the community understands.
Mr. Stouder said in regards to the Communication Plan, it is staff’s intention the 2020 update will look a
little bit different. The 2018 Plan was an update on the 2015 Plan and at that time (2016 – 2017) the
Commission was struggling with if we should have a more robust outward Plan or should we focus on
rebranding ourselves and reinventing ourselves. That led to a subcommittee (on rebranding) and a
more internal working document. It is a public document, though, and is posted on MWMC’s website. It
is something that, he thinks, as we move forward and update it, it will take on a little bit different look
and feel.
Commissioner Inge asked if we are planning on doing it (increasing resources for the Public
Information Program) this year or waiting another year. He suggests to not wait another year but to put
the funds into this year’s budget. Mr. Stouder said staff has just started on the FY 2019-20 budget and
the draft budget will be presented in March. Commissioner Inge stated that we have talked about this
off and on for the several years and he has great confidence in the financial conservativeness of staff and
management. The way we utilize resources is very impressive particularly for a governmental body. He
would hate to wait another year.
President Ruffier referred to the tactics in the presentation and said staff might also consider improved
signage around the treatment plant. He has gone on the bike path another of times and there is nothing
that says what is behind the fence. He thought a sign near the bridge at the intersection would be a
good place to put a sign that says this is a wastewater treatment plant. Commissioner Farr added
“Clean Water Starts Here!”
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 5 of 10
FY 2017-18 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORT
Ms. Allocco introduced Ryan Pasquarella who is a partner at Grove, Mueller & Swank, P.C., MWMC’s
independent auditors, and has been the lead auditor on MWMC’s financial statements for the last two
years.
Mr. Pasquarella went over audit report discussing statements of MWMC’s revenues, expenses, cash
flows, and changes of net position. He pointed out on the Balance Sheet (page 6 in the audit report) the
total assets ($222,645,698) plus the deferred outflows ($2,890,991) were $225,536,689 at the end of
MWMC’s FY 2018 (6/30/18). The total liabilities were $58,956,135 which makes the net position
$166,580,554. On the Income Statement the operating revenues were $33.5 million and total operating
and maintenance expenses were $14.6 million for FY 2018. (For more detail see page 4 in the audit
report under Financial Highlights.)
There were no findings and the audit report is clean.
MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MEYER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KEELER TO
ACCEPT THE AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 6/0.
FY 2019-20 BUDGET KICK OFF: KEY OUTCOMES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Mr. Stouder gave the following budget and rate schedule for FY 2019-20.
Jan 11th Budget Kick-Off
Feb 8th Draft Capital Program
Mar 8th FY 2019-20 presentation and discussion of the operating budget, revenues and
reserves, and rate scenarios
Apr 12th Budget and user rate public hearings and options to adopt
Katherine Bishop, Environmental Services Program Manager (Springfield), gave the budget and rate
highlights. The Commission approved the 2.5% rate increase in July for FY 2018-19. Revenues are on
target year-to-date and expenditures are below budget year-to-date. The reserve balances are being
maintained at appropriate levels and two State Revolving Fund loans were paid off in December 2018;
the payoff was $5.1 million and the savings from that was about $1.16 million.
Mr. Stouder stated the key outcomes drive the work plan and budget. Each year staff looks for changes
to measures, to make incremental changes so outcomes/indicators are more meaningful. Also driving
the budget and work programs are the current capital program requirements which include the active
projects and planned investments in capital improvements.
Mr. Breitenstein said MWMC’s aging infrastructure is close to 40-years-old so staff is making a concerted
effort to insure that they are capturing all the assets and their condition. He pointed out that we are not
alone in this, the Public Works Association said they have identified across the nation that Asset
Management is the top trend in technology. MWMC has three different automated systems to help with
asset management. There is the SCADA system (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) for the
operation of the plant, the maintenance management system, and then there is the financial side. Staff
needs to give a lot more thought to the alignment of those three systems (because they don’t always
talk to each other) and how we track that information and use it for both understanding where we are at
with our assets and decision making.
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 6 of 10
Mr. Stouder stated even though the permit continues on administrative extension it also continues to
drive the budget. We continue to purchase materials, supplies, and chemicals for the processes at the
plant and staff continues to do the planning work to best position the MWMC for when the new permit
is issued. Those things include the work staff is doing with thermal load planning such as the
temperature, toxics, and mass loads.
Key Outcomes and their indicators (Attachment 1, starting on page 2)
1. Environmental Standards: Indicators are performance of permit requirements, biosolids
management, and environmental management system (ISP 14001 conformance).
Commissioner Keeler asked if the detail listed on the biosolids pollutant concentration
could be summarized. Mr. Breitenstein said the original intent was to be able to show how
close we might get to the less than 50% target for any parameter. If we averaged all of
them, it would be a misrepresentation of where we stand in meeting the requirements.
Commissioner Keeler said that is true.
President Ruffier, in regards to the ISP 14001 conformance indicator, asked if instead of
stating no major nonconformance could staff state how well the program is meeting its
target and objectives from year to year. Mr. Breitenstein said okay.
2. Financial Management: Indicators are achieving clean financial audits, maintaining favorable
bond rating, and updating financial plan policies. The bond rating target for FY19-20 was raised
from A to A+.
3. Intergovernmental Partnership: Indicators are the Industrial Pretreatment programs, CMOM, &
community presentations. Staff strives to maintain a high level of collaboration and coordination
of the Eugene and Springfield pretreatment programs. Although they are implemented locally,
staff wants them to look very similar across the cities so that when an industry comes to town,
they are treated equally regardless where they are going to be sited. The capital budget projects
need to be on schedule and on budget; there were 11 of them this past year. The community
presentations indicator could be in outcome #5 but there are already a lot of indicators in #5 and
this is one that staff felt represented a partnership between Eugene and Springfield in that we are
out delivering presentations to different community groups together.
President Ruffier stated that a lot of the indicators for #3 seem to be action related and
he thinks it would be better to have some indication of what the desired outcome is.
o He isn’t sure how to represent interagency coordination on CMOM other than an
indicator of the effectiveness of the CMOM program. Having a meeting doesn’t
say how effective it is.
o In this section he would like to see some view of MWMC’s challenges with regards
to interagency coordination with possible expansion of the service area or
coordination thereof.
o Potential coordination with other communities that are facing wastewater
treatment issues such as Junction City, Creswell, Coburg, and the expansion into
Goshen.
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 7 of 10
o In regards to the Industrial Pretreatment programs that are consistent, that is a
good indicator and target but maybe not for inclusion in this part of the budget
but for behavior modifications and trust building.
o He wonders about doing a survey with industrial permittees to get input on how
the program is working and try to build some outreach and communication with
the permittees. To see what they think about the program, what they might need,
and how to go forward.
Mr. Stouder replied that staff specifically surveyed the Industrial Pretreatment permittees during
the last focus group and phone survey, and plans to do so again this fall.
4. Reliability/useful life of assets: Indicators are maintenance benchmarks (preventive
maintenance completed on time; preventive maintenance to corrective maintenance ration, and
emergency maintenance required), asset management and plan update (it will be updated
annually).
Commissioner Keeler said that because outcome #4 is about reliability and useful life,
that the indicator in outcome #3 about capital projects might be better placed in #4. He
isn’t sure how the capital projects relate to the intergovernmental partnership.
Mr. Stouder replied the thinking behind putting the capital projects on outcome #3 was because
a lot of coordination is required between Eugene and Springfield staffs in order to successfully
deliver the capital program. If the communication and discussions between Eugene and
Springfield is on target and working well then the projects will be on time and under budget and
reflects well on the partnership between the two cities. Commissioner Keeler replied that he sees
that and the performance shows that we are succeeding there.
5. Public Awareness: Indicators are a community survey in the fall of 2019, a Communication Plan
update in the spring of 2020, social media strategies to grow followers, and pollution prevention
campaigns/sponsorships – trying to reach a larger audience.
Commissioner Keeler asked if the last bullet point, MWMC website, could be replaced
with a specific goal for CWU. Mr. Stouder replied that could be done.
President Ruffier stated under the pollution prevention campaigns it says reaching 40%
of residents in service area. He thinks that the campaigns need to focus on the non-
permitted rate payers such as restaurants for FOG and maybe smaller industries that don’t
qualify for a pretreatment permit but still have pollution prevention opportunities. He
thinks the focus should not just be on residential. Mr. Stouder replied that it was a good
point and it is what we are doing and we can change the wording from residents to 40%
of the community.
Commissioner Farr said he likes what President Ruffier said about extending beyond
residences and into the homeless population; to pay attention to and contribute to the
use of portable bathrooms or establishing a bathroom facilities that people could use
rather than using the side of the river.
President Ruffier said that is an area that he hesitates to suggest that we get involved in.
It is extremely complex.
Commissioner Pishioneri stated there are significant jurisdictional issues.
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 8 of 10
President Ruffier suggested having an open house and tie it to some kind of event, it
might help raise MWMC’s public exposure. We are at a good time with no major
construction activity going on once we finish what we are doing. Mr. Stouder replied his
initial thought is to weave that into the 2019 Communication Plan Update and see how it
shakes out amongst all the communication outreach efforts that we want to do. President
Ruffier said if we are doing a survey in 2019, maybe having an open house would be a way
to get some additional input and participation. Mr. Stouder said we could look at hosting
the focus groups there as well. In the past we have had them in an undisclosed location.
[Commissioner Meyer left]
Budget and Rate Assumptions:
Ms. Bishop said staff is currently assuming a 3% to 3.5% increase in combined personnel services and
materials and services. However, it will be looked at more closely as the numbers start to come in. In
terms of the broader assumptions, staff is assuming steady revenues. User fees are on target year-to-date
and new development activity has been positive. Looking forward at the strategic transfers to the
Capital fund and in this recent year, we have transferred $14 million from the Operating fund to the
Capital fund; that was based on revenues coming in. We are continuing to apply a 4% annual
inflationary factor to the capital projects. If a project is pushed out in terms of timing and phasing, staff is
adding an inflationary adjustment which can then change once we go out to bid. The Engineering News
Record’s Construction Cost Index reflects an average annual inflation of about 3.9% last year and most
recently 3%. Staff has averaged and rounded up to 4% to keep it an even number. The Equipment
Replacement Reserve currently has a balance of about $12.5 million. With all the work that is happening
on the Eugene side with asset management and working towards more condition reporting and
restudying some of the timelines and replacement values, we anticipate to see that grow a bit in terms
of the actual assets. This year we transferred $1 million into the Equipment Replacement Reserve, which
is evaluated annually. In terms of rate changes, we expect to have the lowest responsible rate change.
We try to focus on incremental and moderate rate changes. This will depend on the budget inputs and
the capital program plan. The capital program will come to the Commission next month.
Commissioner Inge asked about paying off loans, is it a significant component of the budget process.
Ms. Bishop said staff is very open to that discussion and believes that we have adequate funds to do so.
The next loan in line is a fairly large balance at about $5.6 million and the interest rate on that is 2.94%
and the remaining interest on that loan is about $1.18 million. Mr. Stouder said staff is planning to bring
that to the Commission in March or April; it wasn’t going to inform the budget process. Commissioner
Inge said what he is thinking about is the conversation with Commissioner Ruffier about reserves and
continue to build reserves. He thinks there is a better way to utilize those funds than just having them
sitting in a reserve fund. Mr. Stouder replied that the direction from the Commission previously was to
pay off the two loans (which was done), and come back in the early spring with the next ones and
analyze how the budget looks. There was a desire to pay those additional bonds down but wait to have
that conversation after we got through the initial budget process to see what position we are in.
Ms. Bishop stated that if we let the next loan play out as planned, it would go to 2031. SRF loans are very
flexible so you could completely pay off a loan or pay down a loan. The money is then reallocated to
another agency. It is not like the bonds where you have to have a major restructuring.
[Commissioner Farr left]
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 9 of 10
Commissioner Keeler asked if there is any kind of objective standard or guidelines that looks at the net
worth of agencies of various sizes and gives a sense of their strength. Although he loves to pay off debt
early, he is always thinking about rates too. Ms. Bishop said it is difficult to compare agencies because all
have different factors.
President Ruffier said that he likes paying down debt when we can but the question is are we making
more money on the investments of the reserves than what the interest rate on the loan is. Ms. Bishop
replied that there is also a lot of staff time attached to the loans. There are two annual payments for each
loan and there are transactions that occur and result in staff time as well.
President Ruffier said another option might be utilizing some of the reserves to mitigate a rate increase
in the next year. We plan to have as low as responsible on the rate changes.
Commissioner Inge said in general he agrees with that but the one concern he has is once you get into
that mode, which we have been there before, and you go extended periods without increase all of a
sudden there is this great big increase. There is a savings to rate payers ultimately in the projections that
we do when we don’t pay interest on loans.
President Ruffier stated he wouldn’t advocate offsetting entirely a rate increase. If we brought it down
by a half percent, to soften it a bit.
BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, AND WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
General Manager:
Poplar Ceiling Tiles: Gave kudos and thanks to Todd Miller for coordinating the project and Jim
Polston who led the effort to get it installed. There are plans to have a small plague with information
about the project.
RNG Update: We are continuing to make progress on the NW Natural interconnection agreement.
There are two outstanding issues. The indemnification provision has been modified a bit; the
provisions are narrower but still reciprocal. Second, we continue to negotiate information relating to
the easement and termination of the easement and ownership of the facilities in the event the
agreement would be terminated. We are currently waiting for NW Natural to respond with a meeting
scheduled Tuesday, January 15th. Staff expects to have the final agreement or at least an agreement
the Commission can authorize staff moving forward with in either February or March.
Commissioner Keeler asked about the high level table that he requested at the last meeting. Mr.
Stouder replied that Mr. Newman is working on that. There are a number of factors and variables
there and we are trying to incorporate all of those. There are two or three follow-ups to be done.
He expects to have it done in a month or so. Commissioner Keeler replied that was good.
Springfield’s Development and Public Works Department (DPW) Director has traditionally served as
MWMC’s Executive Officer. The director position has been vacant for 11 months or a little longer.
There have been a couple of recruitment efforts and it has been challenging to fill that position. The
City Manager has determined, at this time, to look internally about whether or not the current
structure of DPW makes sense for the City. Human Resources is leading an effort to discuss with
management staff how we might best structure ourselves. Mr. Stouder said he is involved in that
process. What it means for the Commission is that we still have an acting Executive Officer, that may
or may not change in the future, but he will keep the Commission apprised as that moves forward.
MWMC Meeting Minutes
January 11, 2019
Page 10 of 10
Wastewater Director:
Year End Reports: Submitted the groundwater use report, the recycled water application report, and
currently working on the annual biosolids report.
Winter Season: The plant is operating well. The weather has been mild so far, although there was one
storm event that got us up close to where we might initiate blending but we didn’t have to. Eugene
had two small SSOs due to root intrusions. Eugene’s Maintenance staff was able to respond to those
in time to maintain and clean them up before there was any discharge into the waterways.
Brown Lane Property: The demolition of the manufactured home got underway this week.
ADJOURNMENT
President Ruffier adjourned the meeting at 9:15 a.m.
Submitted by: Kevin Kraaz
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Kristin Denmark, Legal Counsel
SUBJECT: Sole Source Procurement
ACTION
REQUESTED:
By Motion, approve Resolution 19-01, awarding a contract for goods without
competition and through a sole-source procurement
ISSUE
Staff is requesting the Commission to approve Resolution No. 19-01, which awards a contract for the
services of receiving and distributing Biomethane produced at the MWMC’s facilities, and related
services, to Northwest Natural Gas Company (“Northwest Natural”) without competition and through a
sole-source procurement.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Oregon Revised Statutes and the MWMC Procurement Rules require that all contracts for goods
and/or services be based upon competitive bids or proposals. An exception to this requirement is
permitted when the goods or services are available only from one source. In order to procure this
service from Northwest Natural, the Commission must make specific findings. The findings are:
1. The efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible goods or
services. MWMC produces Biomethane as part of wastewater treatment. In order to efficiently
utilize the MWMC-produced Biomethane, the MWMC requires the acquisition compatible
services, which are only available from Northwest Natural.
2. The goods required are available from only one source. Northwest Natural is the only
distributor in Lane County and in the region. As such, the receipt of Biomethane from MWMC’s
facilities and the distribution of the Biomethane is only available from Northwest Natural.
When the estimated cost of a contract exceeds $150,000, the MWMC Procurement Rule 137-047-0275
requires the MWMC to give public notice of its determination that the services of receiving Biomethane
from MWMC’s facilities are available from only one source. Staff expects the contract for services of
receiving Biomethane from MWMC’s facilities to exceed $150,000. Affected persons shall have at least
Memo: Sole Source Procurement January 31, 2019 Page 2 of 2
seven days from the date of the notice to protest the sole source determination. Once the notice is
published and the protest period has passed (and no protests are received and/or all protests are
resolved), the MWMC can award the contract and directly negotiate with Northwest Natural.
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff requests that the Commission approve Resolution 19-01 awarding a contract for services without
competition and through sole-source procurement.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 19-01
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution 19-01, Page 1 of 1
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION 19-01 ) IN THE MATTER OF AWARDING A CONTRACT
) FOR SERVICES WITHOUT COMPETITION AND
) THROUGH A SOLE-SOURCE PROCUREMENT
WHEREAS, the Oregon Revised Statutes and the MWMC Procurement Rules require that all contracts
for goods and/or services be based upon competitive bids or proposals. An exception to this requirement is
permitted when the goods or services are available only from one source. Sole-source procurement must be
justified by “findings” pursuant to Oregon law. The following are those “findings.”
WHEREAS, the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible goods or
services. MWMC produces Biomethane as part of wastewater treatment. In order to efficiently utilize the
MWMC-produced Biomethane, the MWMC must acquire the services of receiving and distributing the
Biomethane, which is only available from Northwest Natural Gas Company.
WHEREAS, the services required are available from only one source in the region. Northwest Natural
Gas Company is the only distributor of Biomethane in Lane County and in the region. As such, the receipt of
Biomethane from MWMC’s facilities and the distribution of the Biomethane is only available from one source,
Northwest Natural Gas Company.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION THAT:
1. The specific “findings of fact” set forth above are hereby adopted;
2. The “findings” show that award of the contract without competition and through a sole-source
procurement complies with the requirements of Oregon law, and the MWMC Procurement Rules, for sole-
source procurements;
3. Once any protest period has passed and no protests being received and/or such protests being
resolved in accordance with MWMC Rule 137-047-0275, the duly authorized Executive Officer of the MWMC,
or his designee, is hereby authorized to: (a) negotiate and execute an agreement for services of receiving and
distributing Biomethane from MWMC’s facilities, and related services, up to the Not to Exceed (NTE) amount
of $397,163 for Phase 1 Work; and (b) as needed, execute amendments to the agreement not to exceed a
cumulative total of 15% of the initial price agreement.
ADOPTED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OF THE
SPRINGFIELD/EUGENE METROPOLITAN AREA ON THE 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019.
________________________________________
President: Peter Ruffier
ATTEST: _______________________________
Secretary: Kevin Kraaz
Approved as to form: _______________________
MWMC Legal Counsel: K.C. Huffman/Brian Millington
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Todd Miller, Environmental Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Amend Biocycle Farm Replanting Services Agreement
ACTION
REQUESTED:
By Motion, approve Resolution 19-02, to increase the cooperative agreement
budget by $31,725 for a total not-to-exceed value of $133,787.
ISSUE
The MWMC’s Biocycle Farm, Management Unit 2 (MU-2) is currently being replanted by the Northwest
Youth Corps (NYC). Additional NYC services are needed to address a modified replanting strategy.
Previous amendment budget authority under Resolution 18-08 has been fully utilized. Additional
amendment budget is needed in the amount of $31,725. Approval of Resolution 19-02 is requested to
authorize the needed amendment.
BACKGROUND
MU-2 was initially planted in poplar trees in spring 2007 and was scheduled to be harvested in 2018. Due
to the extensive damage on MU-2 trees from the winter 2016-2017 ice storm event, the unit was
harvested a year early, in 2017. The MWMC contracted with GTFF Mill Corp (GTFF) in July 2017 to provide
harvest services, including market sales and final site cleanup and soil restoration. The MWMC gave
notice-to-proceed to GTFF in mid-August 2017. The outcomes of the MU-2 harvest and market sales
were presented via an April 2018 staff communication memo to the Commission.
After harvest, the MWMC solicited separate bids for replanting of MU-2, which resulted in a cooperative
agreement with NYC. NYC is a qualifying youth development organization, and as such, falls outside of
the requirements of certain contracting statutes, including the MWMC’s Procurement Rules. Although
NYC submitted a bid in response to the MWMC’s solicitation and thereby was identified as the lowest
responsive bid, the suspension of procurement rules provided the MWMC with the opportunity to
negotiate the agreement with NYC independently of the bid process. The cooperative agreement with
NYC presented a partnership development opportunity to enhance local youth skills in environmental
management projects, while potentially establishing a sustainable relationship to complete planting,
pruning, and vegetation management services at the Biocycle Farm.
Memo: Amend Biocycle Farm Replanting Services Agreement
January 31, 2019
Page 2 of 3
In addition to the opportunity to integrate youth education via poplar management services, other new
strategies under the MU-2 replanting plan included:
Replanting of new cuttings between stumps that were left in place after harvest
Self-sourcing of poplar cuttings from the MWMC’s stock of OP367 varietals growing in MU-1
Planting of alternating blocks of self-sourced OP367 cuttings, nursery-sourced OP367 cuttings,
and proprietary varietals sourced from GreenWood Resources
Planting alternating blocks of each cutting type with short (approximately 13 inch long) and long
(approximately 20 inch long) cuttings
Using manual weed control methods instead of herbicide in the new planting area
DISCUSSION
The MU-2 replanting plan called for complete replanting in June 2018 and any replacement of non-
viable (failed) cuttings in early July 2018. The replanting schedule started on a later-than-ideal date due
to delays in post-harvest cleanup and field preparation activities, which were not completed until mid-
June.
As a result of challenges presented under summer weather conditions, planting did not get completed
until late-July. Replacement planting in August was deemed inadvisable, and under direction of staff,
NYC postponed replacement planting until spring 2019.
This postponement was made in part on the extensiveness of replanting necessary and the uncertainty
for survival of cuttings at that time. NYC’s survey of tree survival in October 2018 indicates 22% of the
MU-2 plantings need to be replaced; the target survival rate is 95% (or less than 5% failure). Furthermore,
additional planting needs were identified, including:
MU-1 die off of two-year old trees due to extensive vole infestation in 2018
High mortality of cuttings planted in the southwestern-most 5 acres of MU-2 (representing over
4% of MU-2)
The replanting strategy for 2019 identifies 4.5 crew-weeks of additional NYC services. The strategy
includes:
Collection of all OP367 replacement cuttings (including longer “whips”) from MU-1 in February
(under dormant conditions)
Procuring replacement non-OP367 cuttings from GreenWood Resources
Planting whips in MU-1 in February during cutting collection (to replace trees lost to voles)
Replanting the southwestern 5 acres of MU-2 in entirety (after staff has completed herbicide
application and tilling to improve planting conditions)
Replanting as needed in MU-2 to replace other non-viable tree locations.
The 4.5 weeks of NYC labor requires additional budget of $31,725. The initial agreement was based on
NYC’s bid amount of $88,750. A previous amendment allocated the full 15% amendment authority of
$13,312 provided under MWMC Resolution 18-08. That amendment addressed additional planting
services needed due to the conditions described above. NYC cost-shared $15,583 of the additional
planting costs.
Memo: Amend Biocycle Farm Replanting Services Agreement
January 31, 2019
Page 3 of 3
To date, over $70,000 has been spent, with approximately $30,000 remaining for end of year two
pruning and vegetation management tasks. The requested amendment will bring the total agreement
not-to-exceed value to $133,787. This amended value is 65% of the competitor’s bid received for MU-2
replanting in spring 2018.
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff requests Commission authorization of MWMC Resolution 19-02 to increase the cooperative
agreement budget by $31,725 for a total not-to-exceed value of $133,787.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 19-02 (In the Matter of Amendment of Cooperative Agreement with Northwest Youth
Corps for Poplar Harvest Management Services: MU-2 Replanting, Project P80083)
2. Amendment No. 2 to the Poplar Harvest Management Services P80083 – Biocycle Farm MU-2
Replanting Cooperative Agreement
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution 19-02, Page 1 of 2
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 19-02 ) IN THE MATTER OF AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
) THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH
) NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS FOR POPLAR
) HARVEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES:
) MU-2 REPLANTING, PROJECT P80083
WHEREAS, the fiscal year 2018/2019 budget includes Biocycle Farm Poplar Harvest
Management Services Project P80083;
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) authorized
Resolution 18-08 on May 11, 2018 to enter into a cooperative agreement with Northwest Youth
Corps (NYC) related to Project P80083 for an amount not to exceed $88,750;
WHEREAS, the MWMC amended the agreement with NYC on September 10, 2018 with a
budget increase equal to the 15% maximum amendment authority of $13,312 as provided under
Resolution 18-08;
WHEREAS, the MWMC requires additional services from NYC to appropriately complete
the scope of work as revised based on site conditions;
WHEREAS, the NYC is a qualifying Youth Development Organization (YDO) pursuant to
ORS 344.415-425;
WHEREAS, ORS 279A, 279B, and 279C and the MWMC’s procurement rules do not apply to
YDOs;
WHEREAS, designated qualified staff is managing the agreement to ensure the services
meet the agreement specifications; and
WHEREAS, the additional services needed from NYC require a budget increase of $31,725;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION:
The duly authorized MWMC executive officer (or authorized designee) is hereby
authorized to execute or designate qualified staff to execute an amendment to the cooperative
agreement with NYC increasing the total agreement not-to-exceed value to $133,787.
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution 19-02, Page 2 of 2
ADOPTED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OF
THE SPRINGFIELD/EUGENE METROPOLITAN AREA ON THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019.
________________________________________
President: Peter Ruffier
ATTEST: _______________________________
Secretary: Kevin Kraaz
Approved as to form: _______________________
MWMC Legal Counsel: K.C. Huffman
ATTACHMENT 2
NYC Amendment 2
Page 1 of 3
AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
Poplar Harvest Management Services P80083 – Biocycle Farm MU-2 Replanting
Cooperative Agreement
This Amendment No. 02 to the Cooperative Agreement (AGREEMENT) dated May 21, 2018
between Northwest Youth Corps (NYC) and the Metropolitan Wastewater Management
Commission (MWMC) shall become a part of that AGREEMENT as fully and completely as all
original provisions and subsequent amendments. All provisions of the AGREEMENT and the
Amendment No. 1 not modified herein shall remain in full force and effect.
Scope of Amendment: Service, Compensation & Schedule
Amendment No. 02 is to increase the project budget and revise task requirements and
schedule of activities. The below revisions apply to Exhibits A and B and their numbered
subsections as noted.
Amendments to Exhibit A – Project Tasks
(I) Table of Objectives/Tasks
Re-Planting MU-2 – Prepare cuttings for planting. Replanting cutting preparation is amended
to include the collection of short and long cuttings of OP367 varietals in MU-1 for use in
replanting of MU-2, as well as collection of OP367 whips for interplanting in MU-1.
Specifications for cutting collection, storage, handling, and planting are provided in the
attached replanting plan (Attachment 1) and per in-field instruction provided by MWMC’s
contractor, GreenWood Resources.
Vegetation Management – Remove and control weeds and grass around planting areas.
Attention to weeding and vegetation management around trees shall include pre-planting
field grubbing as necessary and full attention to MU-2 trees at least 3 times over the year,
approximately in April, June, and August.
Vegetation Management – Seed alleyways. Attention to weeding in alleyways to promote
growth of dispersed grass seed shall be conducted as needed depending on the
density/extent of weedy infestation.
ATTACHMENT 2
NYC Amendment 2
Page 2 of 3
(III) Schedule
(d) Re-Planting. Unless otherwise directed by the MWMC as mutually agreed to by NYC, the
re-planting schedule is:
Week of February 18, 2019: collection of all cuttings for immediate planting as well as
storage of cuttings for April planting. Immediate planting will include all MU-1
interplanting of whips per the replanting plan and replanting of MU-2 as appropriate
per the replanting plan. Replanting therefore may start as early as February 18, 2019,
amending the date of April 1, 2019 set via Amendment No. 1. Replanting may
continue after the week of February 18, 2019 and prior to the April planting described
below as mutually agreed to by NYC and the MWMC.
April 2019: upon adequate bud-break/leaf-out of trees necessary to identify viable
from non-viable plantings, complete replanting of MU-2 as appropriate per the
replanting plan.
(g) Pruning. As timing and conditions allow, NYC may opt to single MU-2 plantings concurrent
with February or April work, preferably; later singling as necessary per the schedule in
Amendment 1.
Amendments to Exhibit B – Project Costs
(I) Cost and Reimbursement Limits. The following changes to costs for each objective are
hereby implemented:
• Add $14,000 to Planting (commensurate with 2 crew-weeks of labor)
• Add $15,987 to Vegetation Management (bringing total remaining budget to
$28,000, commensurate with 4 crew-weeks of labor)
• Add $1,738 to Pruning (bringing total remaining budget to $21,000,
commensurate with 3 crew-weeks of labor)
Such that the total not-to-exceed value of the objectives listed in section (a) are:
i. Planting = $68,000
ii. Signage = $4,800
iii. Vegetation Management = $40,000
iv. Pruning = $21,000
(II) MWMC Provisions. This Amendment No. 02 recognizes that the MWMC is providing
additional materials and services towards completion of the project, including:
a. Field treatment for complete replanting of southwestern 5 acre area of MU-2.
b. Procurement of additional (non-OP367) cuttings for as needed for replanting in
MU-2.
c. Up to 4 days of additional professional oversight and instruction for cutting
collection, replanting techniques, and pruning.
ATTACHMENT 2
NYC Amendment 2
Page 3 of 3
d. Ongoing cross-mowing weed management across MU-2.
e. Additional watering of MU-2 to facilitate proper establishment of Year 2
replanting’s.
Amended AGREEMENT not to exceed value:
Original Contract Amount: $88,750.00
Total of Previous Amendments: $13,312.00
Amendment Amount: $31,725.00
Total Contract Authorized Amount After
Amendment:
$133,787.00
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER CONTRACTOR
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION Northwest Youth Corps
By: By:
Tom Boyatt Jeff Parker
Title: MWMC Executive Officer Title: Executive Director
Date:
Date:
____________________________________________________________________________
After this change order is approved and accepted by both parties, copies with attachments will be
sent to:
Contractor
Project File
MWMC Legal Counsel
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM:
Troy McAllister, Managing Civil Engineer
Josh Newman, Managing Civil Engineer
Todd Anderson, AIC Maintenance Manager
SUBJECT: FY 2019-20 Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Capital Budget and 5-Year Plan
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Commission review and input for finalization of the Draft FY 2019-20 RWP Capital
Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan
ISSUE
The first draft of the FY 2019-20 (FY 19-20) RWP Capital Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan is attached for
Commission review and comment. Staff will provide a presentation of the RWP Capital Budget and 5-
Year Capital Plan at the February 8, 2019 MWMC meeting.
DISCUSSION
The Capital Program budget has two major components: 1) The Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
budget, and 2) the Asset Management Capital Program (AMCP) budget. The Capital Program section of
the draft FY 19-20 MWMC budget document (attached) provides a detailed discussion of these budgets
including:
An overview of the RWP Capital Program and objectives
An overview of the RWP Capital Program funding and financial planning methods
A description of the CIP status and FY 19-20 CIP Budget
A description of the AMCP status and FY 19-20 AMCP Budget
A summary of the 5-Year Capital Plan
The proposed draft FY 19-20 budget document anticipates the following:
CIP FY 19-20 proposed budget $17,359,000
AMCP FY 19-20 proposed budget $1,141,000
CIP 5-year planning subtotal $46,688,000
AMCP 5-year planning subtotal $10,002,000
RWP Capital Program 5-year planning total $56,690,000
Memo: FY 2019-20 Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Capital Budget and 5-Year Plan
January 31, 2019
Page 2 of 2
At the February 8, 2019 meeting, staff will provide a presentation summarizing the proposed FY 19-20
Capital Program budget and the 5-Year Capital Plan. Input provided by the Commission will be
incorporated into the final draft of the RWP Capital Budget, to be presented at the March Commission
meeting, along with the first review of the FY 19-20 Operating Budget.
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff requests that the Commission review the draft FY 19-20 Capital Program Budget and the 5-Year
Capital Plan and provide comments for finalization.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft FY 19-20 Regional Wastewater Program Capital Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM CAPITAL PROGRAMS Overview
The Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) includes two components: the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the Asset Management Capital Program (AMCP). The FY 19-20 CIP Budget, the FY 19-20 AMCP Budget, and the associated 5-Year Capital Plan are based on the 2004
MWMC Facilities Plan (2004 FP) and the 2014 Partial Facilities Plan Update. The 2004 FP was
approved by the MWMC, the governing bodies of the City of Eugene, the City of Springfield,
Lane County, and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in 2004. The 2004 FP and its 20-year capital project list was the result of a comprehensive evaluation of the regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
The 2004 FP built on previous targeted studies, including the 1997 Master Plan, 1997 Biosolids
Management Plan, 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), and the 2003 Management Plan for a dedicated biosolids land application site. The 2004 FP was intended to meet changing regulatory and wet weather flow requirements and to serve the community’s
wastewater capacity and treatment needs through 2025. Accordingly, the 2004 FP established the
CIP project list to provide necessary facility enhancements and expansions over the planning
period. The CIP is administered by the City of Springfield for the MWMC. The AMCP implements the projects and activities necessary to maintain functionality, lifespan, and effectiveness of the MWMC facility assets on an ongoing basis. The AMCP is administered by
the City of Eugene for the MWMC and consists of three sub-categories:
Equipment Replacement Program Major Rehabilitation Program Major Capital Outlay
The MWMC has established these capital programs to achieve the following RWP objectives:
Compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations Protection of the health and safety of people and property from exposure to hazardous
conditions such as untreated or inadequately treated wastewater Provision of adequate capacity to facilitate community growth in the Eugene-Springfield
metropolitan area consistent with adopted land use plans Construction, operation, and management of the MWMC facilities in a manner that is as
cost-effective, efficient, and affordable to the community as possible in the short and long
term Mitigation of potential negative impacts of the MWMC facilities on adjacent uses and
surrounding neighborhoods (ensuring that the MWMC facilities are “good neighbors” as judged by the community)
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 1 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Capital Program Funding and Financial Planning Methods and Policies This annual budget document presents the FY 19-20 CIP Budget, the FY 19-20 AMCP Budget,
and 5-Year Capital Plan which includes the CIP and AMCP Capital Plan. The MWMC CIP
financial planning and funding methods are in accordance with the financial management
policies put forth in the MWMC 2005 Financial Management Plan. Each of the two RWP capital programs relies on funding mechanisms to achieve RWP objectives
described above. The CIP is funded primarily through Capital Reserves, which may include
proceeds from revenue bond sales, financing through the State of Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan program, system development charges, and transfers from the Operating Fund to Capital Reserves. The AMCP is funded through wastewater user fees.
The RWP’s operating fund is maintained to pay for operations, administration, debt service,
equipment replacement contributions and capital contributions associated with the RWP. The operating fund derives the majority of its revenue from regional wastewater user fees that are collected by the City of Eugene and City of Springfield from their respective customers. In
accordance with the MWMC 2005 Financial Plan, funds remaining in excess of budgeted
operational expenditures can be transferred from the Operating Fund to the Capital Reserve fund.
The Capital Reserve accumulates revenue to help fund capital projects, including major rehabilitation, to reduce the amount of borrowing necessary to finance capital projects.
The AMCP consists of three programs managed by the City of Eugene and funded through
regional wastewater user fees: The Equipment Replacement Program, which funds replacement
of equipment valued at or over $10,000; The Major Rehabilitation Program, which funds rehabilitation of the MWMC infrastructure such as roof replacements, structure coatings, etc.;
and the Major Capital Outlay Program for the initial purchase of major equipment that will be
placed on the equipment replacement list, or a one time large capital expense.The MWMC assets
are tracked throughout their lifecycle using asset management tracking software. Based on this
information, the three AMCP program annual budgets are established and projected for the 5-Year Capital Plan.
For planning purposes, the MWMC must consider market changes that drive capital project
expenditures. Specifically, the MWMC capital plan reflects projected price changes over time that affect the cost of materials and services. Accoridingly, the 2004 FP projections were based
on the 20-city average Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENRCCI). Since
2004, local construction cost inflation accelerated even faster than the national average. City of
Springfield staff identified this trend and subsequently modified their inflationary projection
methodology accordingly.
The MWMC continues to monitor inflationary trends to inform our forecasting of capital
improvement costs. Accordingly, based on historical inflationary rate trends from 2006 through
2017, capital project budgets now reflect a 4% annual inflationary factor in the FY 19-20 Budget and 5-year Capital Plan.
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 2 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Regional Wastewater Capital Program Status and Budget CIP Project Status and Budget
The FY 19-20 CIP Budget is comprised of the individual budgets for each of the active
(carryover) or starting (new) projects in the first year of the 5-Year Capital Plan. The total of these FY 19-20 project budgets is $17,359,000. Each capital project represented in the FY 19-20 Budget is described in detail in a CIP project sheet that can be found at the end of this document.
Each project sheet provides a description of the project, the project’s purpose and driver (the
reason for the project), the funding schedule for the project, and the project’s expected final cost
and cash flow. For those projects that are in progress, a short status report is included on the project sheet.
Completed Capital Projects
The following capital projects were completed in FY 18-19:
Increase Digestion Capacity
Electrical Distribution System Replacement and Upgrades
Carryover Capital Projects
All or a portion of remaining funding for active capital projects in FY 18-19 is carried forward to the FY 19-20 Budget. The on-going carryover projects are:
Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Upgrade Facilities
Decommission WPCF Lagoon
Class A Disinfection Facilities
Operations & Maintenance Building Improvements
Poplar Harvest Management Services
Riparian Shade Credit Program
Thermal Load Mitigation: Pre-Implementation
Recycled Water Demonstration Project
Facilities Plan Engineering Services
Resiliency Planning
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 3 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Overall, the budgeting for these projects follows, and is consistent with, the 2006 CH2M estimated cost of the listed capital projects and new information gathered during design
development.
New Projects Aeration Basin Improvements - Phase 2
Administration Building Improvements
FY 19-20 Capital Budget Summary (Exhibit 12)
Exhibit 12 displays the adjusted budget and end-of-year expenditure estimates for FY 18-19, the
amount of funding projected to be carried over to FY 19-20 and additional funding for existing
and/or new projects in FY 19-20.
FY 18-19
ADJUSTED
BUDGET
FY 18-19
ESTIMATED
ACTUALS
FY 18-19
CARRYOVER
TO FY 19-20
NEW
FUNDING
FOR FY 19-20
TOTAL
FY 19-20
BUDGET
Project to be Completed in FY 18-19
Increase Digestion Capacity 3,968,092 3,900,000 0 0 0
Electrical Distribution System Replace / Upgrade 4,904,482 2,200,000 0 0 0
Projects to be Carried Over to FY 19-20
Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Upgrades 7,261,666 3,346,666 3,915,000 2,150,000 6,065,000
Decommission WPCF Lagoon 5,561,312 861,312 4,700,000 0 4,700,000
Class A Disinfection Facilities 750,000 4,000 746,000 1,554,000 2,300,000
Operations & Maint Building Improvements 9,924,165 9,124,165 800,000 0 800,000
Poplar Harvest Management Services 94,631 118,486 (24,000) 449,000 425,000
Riparian Shade Credit Program 205,081 94,782 110,000 306,000 416,000
Thermal Load Mitigation: Pre-Implementation 277,542 171,424 106,000 189,000 295,000
Recycled Water Demonstration Project 300,000 0 180,000 0 180,000
Facility Plan Engineering Services 131,582 130,943 0 90,000 90,000
Resiliency Planning 739,036 651,000 88,000 0 88,000
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update 1 130,000 130,000 0 0 0
Thermal Load Mitigation: Implementation 1 0 (47,736)0 0 0
New Projects Started in FY 19-20
Administration Building Improvements 0 0 0 1,000,000 1,000,000
Aeration Basin Improvements - Phase 2 0 0 0 1,000,000 1,000,000
TOTAL Capital Projects $34,247,589 $20,685,042 $10,621,000 $6,738,000 $17,359,000
EXHIBIT 12
Summary of FY 19-20 MWMC Construction Program Capital Budget
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 4 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 19-20 Asset Management Capital Project Status and Budget
The AMCP consists of the following three programs: Equipment Replacement
Major Rehabilitation
Major Capital Outlay
The FY 19-20 budget and status of each program is described below.
Equipment Replacement Program - Budget
The FY 19-20 Capital Programs budget includes $621,000 in Equipment Replacement purchases that are identified on the table below.
Equipment Replacement Projects
Project Description FY 19-20
Proposed Budget
Three Farm Tractors – BMF and Biocycle Farm $420,000
Cargo Van – Operations 60,000
Compact IC Pro Anion MCS Chromatograph with Laptop – Operations 40,000
Segmented Flow Analyzer – Operations 40,000
Small Shop Vehicle/Box Van – Plant 26,000
Computer File Server (cesrv300) – Operations 15,000
Sludge Blanket Level System – Secondary 10,000
LEL Detection System – Digesters 10,000
Total $621,000
Farm Tractors – Replacing three John Deere tractors that were purchased in 2004 for year-round use at the BMF and Biocycle Farm. Cargo Van – Replacing 12 year old utility van used by sampling staff to conduct water quality sampling work in the field
Compact IC Pro Anion MCS Chromatograph with Laptop – This laboratory instrument is used to analyze groundwater samples (e.g., chloride, fluoride, sulfate, etc.) as required for NPDES permit
compliance. This replacement will update obsolete technology and take advantage of technological
improvements. Segmented Flow Analyzer (SFA) – This is a permit required piece of laboratory equipment used for analyzing treatment samples (e.g., TSS, CBOD, ammonia, etc.) from all process areas. Used daily, the current SFA was installed in 2009 and has an expected life of 10 years.
Shop Vehicle/Box Van – Electrical maintenance staff currently use an electric cart that is due for replacement and intend to replace the cart with a larger vehicle that is road licensed to provide greater
utility.
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 5 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Cesrv300 File Server – Most applications and file shares (directories) at Eugene WW Division are run from or routed through the Cesrv300 File Server. Used heavily by staff, the Cesrv300 File Server is a
mission critical computer and storage system with an expected service life of five years. Sludge Blanket Level System – These are elements and transmitters in the secondary clarifiers to
measure the sludge blanket levels and communicate data to the distributed control system (DCS) at the operations console. Purchased and replaced as a package for all 10 clarifiers, the current electronics were
installed in 2006 and are due for replacement.
Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) Detection System – Due to construction of Digester #4, replacement of
the boiler, and reconstruction of the boiler piping system, the current LEL detection system needs
upgraded with newer compatible technology and expanded to cover a larger area.
Major Rehabilitation Program - Budget
The FY 19-20 Capital Programs budget includes $520,000 for Major Rehabilitation projects that are
identified on the table below.
Major Rehabilitation Projects
Project Description FY 19-20 Proposed Budget
Dome Interior Coating Repair – Digester #2 $150,000
Dredge Rebuild – BMF 120,000
Collector Mechanism, Clarifier Rake Arms Recoating – Secondary 80,000
Yokogawa Vnet DCS Migration – Operations 60,000
Operations/Maintenance Building Improvements – Plant 50,000
Roof Replacement – Gravity Belt Thickener Building 45,000
Roof Replacement – MWMC Modular Building, Plant 15,000
Total $520,000
Dome Interior Coating Repair, Digester #2 – When evaluated at last cleaning, the interior coating on the dome of Digester #2 showed evidence of delaminating.
Dredge Rebuild, BMF – The dredge used in the lagoons at BMF is rebuilt every 10 years and is on schedule for overhaul in FY 19-20.
Secondary Clarifier Rake Arms Recoating – There are ten secondary clarifiers and two of the clarifier
rake arms are scheduled for recoatLQJ each year to remove corrosion and prolong equipment life.
Yokogawa Vnet DCS Migration – The Yokogawa software used at the DCS Operations Console was
installed in 1995 as a loop (“chain”) network with all connected computer systems in sequence. Vnet
(“mesh”) virtual network architecture is much more stable and secure but requires the re-installation of all communication cables among all computer systems integrated into the DCS at the WPCF.
Operations/Maintenance Building Improvements – This expenditure will go towards miscellaneous improvements, repairs, and renovations to prolong the life and improve functionality of existing MWMC
buildings.
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 6 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Roof Replacement, GBT Building – The gravity belt thickener (GBT) building is a standalone facility at
the WPCF with its own roof, constructed in 1993, which has reached the end of its useful life.
Roof Replacement, MWMC Modular – The modular building at the WPCF used by MWMC staff was constructed with a 20-year shingled roof, which is now in need of replacement.
Major Capital Outlay
There are no new requests for Major Capital Outlay in FY 19-20.
Summary of FY 19-20 Asset Management Capital Budget
Category of Capital Expense FY 19-20 Proposed Budget
Equipment Replacement $621,000
Major Rehabilitation 520,000
Major Capital 0
TOTAL $1,141,000
5-Year Capital Plan (Exhibit 13)
For each fiscal planning cycle, only the first year of budget authority is appropriated. The
remaining four years of the CIP and AMCP Capital Plans are important and useful for fiscal and work planning purposes. However, it is important to note that the funds in the outer years of the Capital Plan are only planned and not appropriated. Also, the full amount of obligated multi-year
project costs is often appropriated in the first year of the project, unless a smaller subset of the
project, such as project design, can be identified and funded without budgeting the full estimated
project cost. For these multi-year contracts, unspent funds from the first fiscal year will typically be carried over to the next fiscal year until the project is completed. Accordingly, the RWP
Capital Plan presented herein is a subsequent extension of the plan presented in the adopted
FY 18-19 Budget that has been carried forward by one year. However, changes to the plan
typically occur from year to year as more information becomes available. In addition to these
yearly adjustments, RWP staff were further informed by a Partial Facilites Plan Update that was completed in June of 2014. Finally, those changes were reflected in the MWMC FY 18-19
budget and continue forward in the FY 19-20 for the 5-Year Capital Plan.
Exhibit 13 displays the MWMC 5-Year Capital Plan programs budget, which includes
$46,688,000 in planned capital projects and $10,002,000 planned asset management capital projects for an overall 5-Year Capital Plan Budget of $56,690,000.
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 7 of 24
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Exhibit 13 Regional Wastewater 5-Year Capital Program
FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 TOTAL 5-YR
MWMC CAPITAL PROJECTS
Biosolids Management
Poplar Harvest Management Services 425,000 230,000 175,000 830,000
Non-Process Facilities and Facilities Planning
Facility Plan Engineering Services 90,000 105,000 110,000 305,000
Resilency Planning 88,000 88,000
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update 1 2,080,000 2,080,000
Conveyance Systems
Glenwood Pump Station 1,300,000 1,300,000
Plant Performance Improvements
Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Upgrades 6,065,000 6,065,000
Decommission WPCF Lagoon 4,700,000 4,700,000
Class A Disinfection Facilities (1)2,300,000 2,300,000
Administration Building Improvements 1,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000
Aeration Basin Improvements - Phase 2 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 3,500,000
Operations & Maintenance Building Improvements 800,000 800,000
Riparian Shade Credit Program (1)416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 2,080,000
Thermal Load Mitigation: Pre-Implementation 295,000 295,000
Recycled Water Demonstration Projects (1)180,000 565,000 500,000 1,245,000
Thermal Load Mitigation: Implementation 1 1,600,000 2,000,000 500,000 4,100,000
Tertiary Filtration - Phase 2 3,500,000 8,500,000 12,000,000
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 17,359,000 7,191,000 7,091,000 4,521,000 10,526,000 46,688,000
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Equipment Replacement 621,000 2,179,000 1,451,000 1,096,000 1,022,000 6,369,000
Major Rehab 520,000 732,000 1,842,000 357,000 182,000 3,633,000
Major Capital Outlay ------------
TOTAL ASSET MANAGEMENT 1,141,000 2,911,000 3,293,000 1,453,000 1,204,000 10,002,000
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 18,500,000 10,102,000 10,384,000 5,974,000 11,730,000 56,690,000
Notes:
(1) The funding for new projects is allocated from the Thermal Load Implementation 1 budget plan
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 8 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 9 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 10 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 11 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 12 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 13 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 14 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 15 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 16 of 24
Administration/Operations Building
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 17 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 18 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 19 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 20 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 21 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 22 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 23 of 24
ATTACHMENT 1 FY 19-20 BUDGET AND CIP, Page 24 of 24