Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-12-19 Agenda Packet THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE www.mwmcpartners.org MWMC MEETING AGENDA Friday, July 12, 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 6/14/19 Minutes b. Increase Digestion Capacity Final Report – P80084 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 – 7:55 IV. STORMWATER MASTER PLAN CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Josh Newman Action Requested: By motion, move to approve Resolution 19-12 7:55 – 8:20 V. MWMC PROCUREMENT RULES ADDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K.C. Huffman Action Requested: By motion, move to approve Resolution 19-13 8:20 – 8:35 VI. RNG COMMUNICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Josh Newman & Laura Keir Action Requested: Informational only 8:35 – 8:55 VII. STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING – PHASE 2 . . . . .Loralyn Spiro & Laura Keir Action Requested: Informational and discussion 8:55 – 9:10 VIII. BIOCYCLE FARM POPLAR HARVEST MANAGEMENT PROJECT UPDATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Todd Miller Action Requested: Informational only 9:10– 9:20 IX. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, & WASTEWATER DIRECTOR THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE www.mwmcpartners.org 9:20 X. 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, June 14, 2019 at 7:30 a.m. City of Springfield City Hall, Library Meeting Room 225 Fifth St., Springfield, OR 97477 Vice-President Pat Farr opened the meeting at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken by Kevin Kraaz ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Pat Farr, Bill Inge, Walt Meyer, and Joe Pishioneri Conference Phone: Doug Keeler Commissioners Absent: Peter Ruffier and Jennifer Yeh Staff Present: Meg Allocco, Todd Anderson, Jolynn Barker, Steve Barnhardt, Katherine Bishop, Dave Breitenstein, Kristin Denmark (attorney), John Huberd, Laura Keir, Tonja Kling, Kevin Kraaz, Barry Mays, Troy McAllister, Todd Miller, Michelle Miranda, Josh Newman, Sharon Olson, Loralyn Spiro, Matt Stouder, and Valerie Warner. Guest: John Brown, public Ron Cutter, Brown & Brown Northwest Agent of Record Matt Stouder, MWMC General Manager, introduced Valerie Warner, City of Springfield, Finance Associate Program Manager. CONSENT CALENDAR a. MWMC 5/10/19 Minutes b. FY19-20 MWMC Budget and CIP Ratification MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER INGETO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5/0. PUBLIC COMMENT John Brown, 101 E. Broadway, Eugene, OR 97401: Stated he is speaking on his own behalf as a strong clean water advocate and not for any board or commission that he currently holds a position on. He would like to enter into the record RLID data and a couple of aerials of property that MWMC owns that is continually being used illegally for camping. He stated there were six camps on this property during the recent April floods, and all were washed into the waterway. He is very grateful and proud of the work the MWMC does with cleaning the water before it enters the waterway but finds it ironic that because of the June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 9 illegal camping untreated human waste, amongst other things, is entering the river. The particular property he is talking about is five acres with 1.5 acres in the floodway. He said if the MWMC is going to allow camping on the property, let them camp up on the bench and not down by the water. He has spent a lot of his own money on cleaning up the waterways and he is getting old and tired. He would appreciate any help the MWMC could provide. He would like it entered into the record that he is making this request to be community stewards. He is not asking the MWMC to roust anybody. He understands the economic plights and challenges the illegal campers have but he feels that economic capacity should not be an excuse to pollute our waterways. He said that EWEB patrols waterways twice a week just above their intake valve. Commissioner Meyer asked if we could legally go in to ask people to leave, if so, what our capacity is to do that. Mr. Brown responded he is on a committee set up by DSL (Division of State Lands) to deal with illegal camping in the riparian areas and waterways between beltline and I-5 in the City of Eugene. There is an emergency ordinance to deal with it. There are laws that state you cannot litter within a 100 yards of a waterway and you cannot camp in undesignated areas. He said you could ask them to move or to clean-up their mess - there are many things you can do. The one thing he hopes the Commission does not do is ignore it. It will not go away. Commissioner Inge said right before the flooding we got in there and had the camps removed. Mr. Breitenstein said it was a week before the flooding event; we had the help of the Lane County Sherriff’s crew to remove a large encampment that was just upstream of the Beltline Bridge. A ton of debris, garbage, and waste was removed. Since then, staff has been vigilant on daily observations. Also, there is a Security Guard on contract who helps us to instruct people to leave. When they don’t leave, we call the police. We have stepped-up our efforts since the flooding and we are not going to back down from that. Now we are trying to get more information to understand how the enforcement of the recent temporary rule by the State on banning camping along the river works. When we have a problem, whom do we call? He just saw a tent out on the island and (in the river) and asked staff to find out whom to report it. What he has found out is that it should be the State Police. The logistics of that is what staff is trying to understand right now. Mr. Brown responded that the City of Eugene funded two full-time officers for Park patrol. Commissioner Farr said that the county and the cities are working together to find alternate places for people to legally camp. However, even when there are legal places to camp, people will choose to camp illegally. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR DECOMMISSION LAGOON P80093 Walt Meyer disclosed that he is an employee of West Yost, which is a subcontractor to Brown and Caldwell who has the contract for design. He stated that he has checked and there is no conflict of interest but he wanted to disclose the fact that he is an employee of West Yost. Barry Mays, Project Manager, requested the Commission to approve Resolution 19-10, delegating authority to award the Decommissioning Lagoon Project P80093 contract to Wildish Construction Co., the lowest responsive bidder. Mr. Mays went over the background of the lagoon. The temporary lagoon was built in 1979 during the large construction expansion. The lagoon has outlived its life; it is full and needs to be decommissioned. It is part of the Capital Improvement Program to decommission the lagoon but two projects had to be June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 9 completed first: The Repair/Replace Biosolids Force Main Project P80067 and the Increased Digestion Capacity Project P80084. Completion of these projects allows residual solids from digester cleaning operations to be pumped to the lagoons at the Biosolids Management Facility (BMF) for processing. Mr. Mays stated we went out for bid around April 10 and received three bids on May 14. Wildish was considerably lower than the other two bids. Staff, West Yost, and K.C. Huffman, MWMC attorney, reviewed the bids and Wildish was in compliance and the apparent low bidder. Commissioner Inge asked about why it says the “apparent” low bidder. Mr. Mays replied that we have to go through a process of verifying that the bidder has done everything correctly per the state statutes. Kristen Denmark, MWMC attorney, added that it is the statutory language. As Mr. Mays said, when you open the bid, the apparent lowest bidder then goes through the responsibility determination. Commissioner Inge said, so at this point they are the lowest bidder. Ms. Denmark replied yes. Commissioner Farr asked if we are required to accept the low bid. Ms. Denmark replied yes, for an invitation to bid, as long as they meet all the requirements. Sometimes there is a really low bid because they have forgotten something and you can kick it out. However, if they have met all the requirements and meet the responsibility determination, then you are required to accept their bid. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER INGE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 19-10. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5/0. SMALL HOMES SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (SDCs) Matt Stouder, MWMC General Manager, went over the background of the Small Homes SDC project. He explained in 2017 the MWMC was approached by a couple of different developments with requests to waive the SDCs for various development types, including, Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs), small homes, and tiny homes. The Commission had a series of meetings to discuss the following: policy issues, how to be equitable across the service area, intergovernmental concerns, rationale for considering such a request, and if there we would be any financial considerations that needed to be taken into account. The Commission determined that they wanted to focus on small homes only because those requests were originating from the governing bodies (Eugene and Springfield). Also in 2017, the Commission, in consultation with Galardi Consulting, determined that the impact from a small home (800 square feet or smaller) was consistent with a multi-family. There are less people per household and less waste coming out to be treated. A new rate category was developed for small houses; that rate is roughly about 14% less than the rate for a typical residential home. In 2018, the Commission established a program for small homes that would allow the MWMC to offset the SDCs for applicants that meet certain criteria and eligibility requirements for small homes. The Commission would mimic the actions of the local jurisdictions in how they were imposing fees. If they waived the SDCs on an 800 square foot home or smaller, then the MWMC would pay for their SDCs out of a fund set up for this program. The program was setup to sunset at the end of June 2019 unless further action was taken. The Commission indicated that they may be interested in taking further action. To date four houses have taken advantage of the program and two more are pending. Out of the $100,000 fund, approximately $93,000 is left. The thinking is that the program is still in the beginning stages. Springfield has extended their ADU program for three more years and Eugene is still moving forward with certain development types. The funds have been rolled forward in the budget and June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 9 Resolution 19-11 would extend the program for a year. Staff would bring back to the Commission periodic checks on the program. Mr. Stouder asked the Commission to approve Resolution 19-11. Commissioner Pishioneri stated that he appreciates the Commission’s support of the program. He concurs with what Mr. Stouder was saying about it taking a while for things to kick in and for the builders and developers to participate. He strongly supports this program. He supports rolling the funds forward and continuing the program for another year or even two. Commissioner Farr said that this is a good program. The state legislature made it mandatory that all jurisdictions/municipalities allow secondary dwelling units on residential property. That includes the counties and the cities and it does not specify any particular size of city. Springfield is a bit more aggressive. Eugene does allow small additional dwelling units but some of their codes are making it slow for them to move forward. The County is moving forward with this too. Commissioner Farr stated that there is a lot of public housing paid for by public money predominantly by Homes for Good, formerly HACSA (Housing and Community Services Agency). They pay SDCs using public money. Eugene does pay the SDCs for the units that Homes for Good builds. Currently Homes for Good is building a 51-unit facility across the street from Autzen Stadium, adjacent to LCBH (Lane County Behavioral Health). Commissioner Farr is a board member on Homes for Good and the board asked him to ask MWMC for payment of SDCs. He would like to have a discussion in the future with the Commission regarding paying SDCs for public housing. The reason it is important is that the money that is put together by Homes for Good comes from a variety of sources including the federal and local government sources. The money that they are unable to generate to build the property is borrowed. The less they need to borrow, the less the rent will be. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KEELER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 19-11. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5/0. PROPERTY INSURANCE RENEWAL Katherine Bishop, ESD Program Manager, went over the premium trend from FY10-11 thru FY 18-19. Last year earthquake coverage was changed from $100M to $75M. Previously, the underground pipes were looked at and coverage was brought down to assessed value. The underground tanks were removed so the pollution coverage was not needed for them. The insured value has increased over time with new construction. The increased insured values includes the new Water Quality Laboratory, the expansion of the Maintenance Facility, and plans that are in the future are on the list having to do with course of construction and builder’s risks. Ron Cutter, Brown & Brown Northwest Agent of Record, said the rate lock from last year did MWMC very well. The market right now has increases of 15-20% in rates. The increases are driven by several things, one being the significant losses in the United States from 2016 through 2018. The largest insurance claim year on record was 2017 with 2016 and 2018 right behind it. This is largely due to hurricanes, flooding, and wild fires. For ten years, the property market was flat, then the last three years there were very significant losses, and construction costs have been going up dramatically. When you put all that all together, you get some significant increases in insurance rates. The MWMC was insulated from that because of the rate lock. Next year will not be as good. Therefore, from a budget standpoint, he advises to look at some June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 9 increases for next year. Typically, these trends are for six months, but this could be a couple of years where we are in a hardening or rate increase trend. It really boils down to what kind of year this will be in regards to hurricanes, storms, wild fires, and flooding. Ms. Bishop said that next year they are looking at going out for pricing from multiple carriers to see what is out there. That process would need to start much earlier, probably in the early part of the next calendar year. Commissioner Pishioneri said he appreciates the thoroughness of the work Ms. Bishop is doing, and is happy to hear that she is going to aggressively go out and look for different bids. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MEYER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI TO AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS TO SECURE PROPERTY INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2019 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2020. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5/0. Commissioner Keeler signed off at 8:10 a.m. RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS (RNG) MARKET DYNAMICS Josh Newman, Managing Civil Engineer, went over three important project milestones; the Interconnection Agreement, the Equipment Purchase Agreement, and the Offtake Agreement. The Interconnection agreement was signed on May 20. The equipment was finally secured and we are very close to executing an agreement. Mr. Newman and Kristen Denmark, MWMC legal counsel, have now turned their attention to the Offtake Agreement with Trillium. The RNG project will allow the MWMC to produce pipeline quality gas and inject it into NW Natural’s pipeline. It is the only pathway that fully utilizes the biogas and optimizes return on investment and environmental benefits. It also provides flexibility on utilization in the future. There are three revenue components of RNG. They are the following: the physical gas (NW Natural purchases it from MWMC directly), the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) credit, and Oregon’s Clean Fuel Standard (CFS) and California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credit programs. The federal and state programs are where the offtaker comes into play. The offtaker will register the RNG facility with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and with California and Oregon programs. They will then place the RNG in various fleets with whom they have contracts and provide the required annual reporting for those programs. For their services, they take a commission. In the last six months, Trillium is seeing a lot of RNG projects being developed in the farm belt around dairy digesters. Because the dairy digesters have very low carbon intensity (compared to MWMC’s), that makes the value of their gas higher. Trillium wants to make room for these dairies and is now offering a 70/30 split as opposed to the 80/20 split that they offered us in 2017. Our gas will probably hit the market in early 2021 instead of 2020 because the project has been delayed. Regarding the California’s LCFS and Oregon’s CFS programs, there is a competition for the market. More projects have come on line and some with low carbon intensity RNG. Trillium now cannot guarantee our placement in either of these programs. They have fueling stations all over the country and can place the fuel anywhere but only Oregon and California have the state credit programs at this time. The state programs offer a credit for using fossil compressed natural gas (CNG) and now the fleets (the end users) June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 9 are starting to demand more out of the credits. Therefore, the off-takers are offering a smaller portion, incremental credit basis, to the RNG producer where they take the credit basis for RNG and subtract the CNG credit which is passed on to the end-user. Trillium’s split for these incremental state credits is 50/50. Commissioner Pishioneri referred to a slide that showed the revenues that would be coming from the federal and state programs. He said the value of the credits from the state represented a smaller portion of the total value than the federal credit. He did not see any comparisons, data, or the percentages that each one represents. Mr. Newman responded that the model is pretty conservative with respect to the value of the state program credits. Mr. Newman stated he estimated over the long-term that the state credit accounts for about a fifth of the total 10-year net present value according to the model. Recently, the value of the state credits has increased and the value of the federal credits has decreased. Whether or not this is a trend or representative of the long-term is unclear at this time. Mr. Newman showed a financial risk graph as of January 2019 and then a revised fiscal projection per the new Trillium contract terms. The question is can we get the MWMC’s RNG placed into the state credit programs. Mr. Stouder said if we cannot get into the state programs and have to rely on the federal program, we come back to an average scenario. What the graph shows is if the federal program goes away, then the project does not produce a profit. There are a lot of things changing nationally (i.e. big agriculture versus big oil) and there is a lot at stake. Mr. Newman added that the renewable fuel standard (RFS) it is written into the Clean Air Act (federal code). Commissioner Inge stated that in looking at the two graphs they both list 9 opportunities for a loss and six opportunities for a gain, the thing that changes is the gains are smaller and the losses are greater. Commissioner Meyer asked if you were to use the current value of RINs (Renewable Identification Numbers) is that the “RIN High” (on the chart). Mr. Newman replied it is the “RIN Low”. The RIN is low right now and has to do with the small refinery waiver credits. Last year as the previous EPA administrator left, he granted excessive numbers of waivers to small refineries. By comparison, under the previous administration EPA issued maybe seven waivers in one year. In 2018, EPA granted 50. That takes the demand out of the market. Currently, we are waiting on the EPA to make a decision on what they are going to do next and refiners are holding off on purchasing RINs, which is driving the price down. So today’s price is not a good price to be going by. Mr. Stouder said this project is unique in that all of the other MWMC projects are all red bars because they are water quality demanded projects and are required for permit reasons. This one has the potential of the blue bar (revenue), which makes it unique. Mr. Newman added that many of the producers that are receiving RINs are actually privately developed projects. They are financed on debt and have regular debt payments to make. The refiners are holding back on purchasing RINs so some producers are being forced to sell RINS at a very low price right now in order to avoid default. Eventually, the EPA has to disclose what they are going to do, hopefully within the next month. Commissioner Inge said he is not so concerned with the RIN low because he knows there will be ups and downs. What he is more interested in is the relationship with Trillium and the split. Is the split going to be a contractual obligation on their part or is it something where they have the opportunity in a year or June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 9 two to change the split. Mr. Newman replied that the split would lock in for probably five years, which is standard. Commissioner Inge stated he was not sure if Trillium is the best option for us. Mr. Newman replied he had jumped ahead to the recommendation. As a business, Trillium is influenced by the changing market place and since the basis of their previously proposed contract terms is now two-years old, they are unable to continue to offer those terms now. Trillium representative, Charles Love, is now saying that he thinks there are companies out there that can give us a better deal. Commissioner Meyer asked how many proposals we received when we went out the first time. Mr. Newman replied three; there was a fourth one but that was really Trillium’s second proposal as part of a team. Now we are more aware of whom the players are, back then we didn’t know who the players were. We have a letter of intent with Trillium but it is non-binding. Mr. Stouder added that the reason we went out was because we had no idea what to expect and wanted to see if it was even worth pursuing the project and staff recognized that it would take time and we would have to go back and refine it. Ms. Denmark stated that we have learned a lot since then and know of at least five to seven companies to contact for an RFP. We have a template from another local government to use for the RFP that would open up competition. She stated because there is a lag time of six months from when you first start flowing the gas until the EPA‘s registration goes through, she and Mr. Newman are looking at market prices in 2021. They feel going out for proposals is a better choice and they will have better competitive bids. They are planning to start on an RFP now and go out for proposals later this year, which will be getting prices for January 2021. Ms. Denmark also mentioned that with the Carbon Cap and Invest legislation, in Oregon particularly, that might bring some great opportunities. Mr. Newman has been talking to NW Natural about them purchasing directly from us as an off-taker. That would help provide a solid floor price on our RNG for the long-term perhaps two years after the legislation passes. Mr. Newman is also getting interest from local fleets. Mr. Stouder said it does not look like the trend is going down. There will be more opportunities in the future than less. Commissioner Farr quoted Mr. Newman as saying, “Reasonable financial returns, as well as significant environmental benefits”. So whatever we are doing as far as the financial return, we also have the significant environmental benefits that we are generating by utilizing the gas. It is not quantifiable in terms of financial returns, but it is a good distinct benefit. Commissioner Pishioneri said he appreciates the work. When he saw the change in the Trillium numbers, it raised a flag with him right away. They may be nice people but they are a business. He thinks we have a responsibility to go out for a new offtaker RFP. We had a huge learning curve. It is an amazing project that was born out of this group. He definitely supports the new offtaker RFP and to increase our efforts to continually identify other opportunities. Mr. Newman said the Oregon credit for the fuel program has gained in value. The gap between Oregon and California is starting to close, even though California’s has grown too. He thinks opportunities in Oregon are attractive and generate local dollars that will circulate locally in the economy and it is something that staff can pursue as they establish relationships with possible buyers locally. June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 9 Commissioner Farr said he thinks what Commissioner Pishioneri said speaks for the entire Commission; he stated it well. Commissioner Farr asked for any further comments from the Commission. Commissioner Inge supports it as well even if there is a net cost; he thinks it makes sense to do it. Commissioner Inge asked for more information on carbon intensity. Mr. Newman said carbon intensity is how the state program calculates the credit, but it doesn’t come into the calculation on the federal side. On the state side, every facility that generates a clean fuel that gets into the program has to calculate their carbon intensity using the California GREET model. Carbon intensity is the amount of CO2 emission per unit of energy that the fuel delivers. Pig and cow waste is emitting a greenhouse gas. So when it is out in the stalls it is emitting fugitive methane emission to the atmosphere, which is a powerful greenhouse gas. By capturing that and converting it to a renewable fuel, they are not only creating the benefit of a cellulosic fuel replacing a fossil fuel, but are also removing the generation of fugitive emissions. This results in ultralow carbon intensities for dairy and hog farm RNG. The lower the carbon intensity score, the better. The credit you get is calculated by taking the state’s fossil fuel standard and subtracting your carbon intensity, the difference is what you get as credit. That gets translated into metric tons of carbon per million BTUs of energy. Ms. Denmark explained that the carbon intensity relates to Trillium’s split difference for the dairies and us. The dairies would get 90/10 and we are 70/30. We have to give up more of our percent of the revenue to equate to the dairies portion because theirs is more valuable. Mr. Newman said that we are also competing with the landfill gas. The majority of the RNG being produced in the US is by landfills and we have better quality gas than them so we have an advantage there. If more states offer the low carbon fuel credit, then that opens up more opportunities. Washington State came close this year to producing a clean fuel standard. We think they will have one within the next few years. Commissioner Inge asked why there is no basis to update the model. He thinks it makes sense to look at more options. If there are 42 options instead of 15, he thinks we should see it. Mr. Newman responded that the model we are using is the one that Blue Source and Kennedy Jenks developed. All the moving parts to that are in the spreadsheet. Then there are the 15 scenarios that we are running. We could be looking at more scenarios. Commissioner Inge said it is not his desire to create a bunch of work for someone but getting an ROA (return on assets) calculation out there based on all the dynamics would help him. Mr. Stouder confirmed that the commission is in favor of going out for a new offtaker RFP. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, AND WASTEWATER DIRECTOR Commission: Commissioner Meyer joined on Wednesday the EPA Public Hearing for Aluminum Toxicity; nothing to report though. Pat Farr spoke about the leachate being trucked up from Short Mountain to Glenwood. It takes about 20 truckloads a day and sometimes they have to truck 24/7 and contract out to haul it. It was around 1996 when Eugene decided to block the pipeline from Short Mountain to Glenwood. Since then, it has caused about 24 million gallons of leachate per year to be trucked up I-5. A few weeks ago, one of the tankers rolled over at about two miles per hour on its side and did not rupture. June 14, 2019 MWMC Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9 However, imagine what would happen if it rolled over at 60 miles per hour on the freeway. So as we talk about MWMC, Glenwood, and Goshen, we will be looking at a pipeline from Short Mountain to haul the 24 million gallons of leachate to Glenwood rather than exposing the public by hauling by truck up I-5. General Manager: Goshen: Lane County has formally reached out to discuss policy issues with the MWMC. A meeting is scheduled for Friday, June 21. Mr. Breitenstein, Mr. Stouder, along with a couple of other staff will meet with Lane County to discuss logistics, policies, the physical connection, board approval, and the IGA. He will provide an update when there is something to report. Sponsorship to the Lane County Fair: This year the sponsorship will include a booth so there will be an opportunity to network with people that MWMC serves. Volunteers will be needed to sit at the booth, which includes free admission into the fair. Wastewater Director: Mr. Breitenstein thanked Commissioner Farr for the beautiful handcrafted pen he made out of the wood from the Poplar project. Permit Season: We have moved from winter to the summer permit season. The plant treated over 7 billion gallons during the winter season, removing more than 96% of the pollutants. Along those lines for plant performance, ACWA confirmed that we are receiving the Platinum Peak Performance Award. This will be twelve-consecutive years that we went without an effluent limit violation. The award will be officially announced next month at ACWA’s Summer Conference in Minneapolis. Staffing: Michelle Miranda is doing a 12-month assignment as Operations Manager with oversight of plant operations, the biosolids program, and the environmental services sections. Greg Watkins went back to his main job, as Project Manager. Todd Anderson, Maintenance Manager will be retiring on June 30; he has been with Eugene for 30 years. He has been a great leader in Eugene’s Maintenance section. Commissioner Farr said that the MWMC made their presentation at the Board of County Commissioners two weeks ago and Mr. Breitenstein received a round of applause. Mr. Breitenstein replied that the applause was for the Peak Performance Award for 12 years, not for him personally. ADJOURNMENT Vice-President Farr adjourned the meeting at 8:57 a.m. Minutes submitted by Kevin Kraaz M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 3, 2019 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Barry Mays, Design and Construction Coordinator SUBJECT: Final Report – Increased Digestion Capacity, MWMC Project P80084 Project Location: Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) 410 River Ave. Eugene, OR 97404 MWMC Design Consultant: Brown and Caldwell 6500 SW Macadam Ave., Suite 200 Portland, OR 97239 MWMC Project Manager: Barry Mays City of Springfield 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 General Contractor: Slayden Constructors, Inc. PO Box 247 Stayton, OR 97383 Major Subcontractors: Camp Creek Electric P.O. Box 41900 Eugene, OR 97404 Notice to Proceed: March 13, 2017 Substantial Completion: March 13, 2019 Final Completion: June 21, 2019 Memo: Final Report – Increased Digestion Capacity, MWMC Project P80084 July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 4 FINAL REPORT SUMMARY PROJECT OVERVIEW: The primary objective of this project was to focus on four distinct areas: the construction of a fourth digester, upgraded gas collection system, upgraded heating system by installing a new boiler, and a digester cleaning pump station. The scope of work included the following: 1. Addition of a fourth digester and associated draft tube mixers, pumping improvements, and appurtenances 2. Boiler suitable for heating four digesters and building heating, draft tube heat exchangers for the new digester, and demolition of existing boiler and associated equipment, piping and electrical systems 3. Removal and replacement of digester gas piping 4. Replacement of existing Motor Control Center, Cogeneration Switchboard, and additional electrical distribution system changes 5. Addition of two waste gas flares and demolition of existing flare 6. Removal and replacement of portions of the existing digester heating system piping and equipment 7. Digester cleaning pump station including demolition of existing pumps and piping 8. Associated electrical, instrumentation, and controls The MWMC went out to bid on December 16, 2016 and received seven bids on January 24, 2017. Below is a bid tabulation of the seven bids received. ITEM Engineer’s Estimate Slayden Constructors Steller J McClure & Sons, Inc. R&G Excavating Stettler Supply Co. Pacific Excavating Inc. Wildish Construction Co. Total Base Bid $11,670,000 $10,367,018 $10,643,018 $11,439,000 11,092,018 $13,346,098 $12,739,018 $14,129,018 Alternate 1 – Brick Facade $200,000 $227,000 $201,000 $236,400 $198,000 $230,000 $195,000 $220,000 Total Base Bid $11,870,000 $10,594,018 $10,844,018 $11,675,400 $11,290,018 $13,576,098 $12,934,018 $14,349,018 On March 8, 2017 after approval of Resolution 17-02, the MWMC entered into a contract with Slayden Constructors, Inc. for the Increased Digestion Capacity Project P80084. PROJECT TASKS AND SCHEDULE: A summary of the major project tasks and associated finish dates is presented in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of Major Tasks and Associated Finish Dates Major Task Description Finish Date Notice to Proceed 3/13/17 Mobilization/Start of Construction 4/03/17 Milestone 1 – Digester Cleaning Pump 5/02/18 Milestone 2 – Cogen System Shutdown 3/13/19 Milestone 3 – Substantial Completion 3/13/19 Final Completion 6/21/19 Memo: Final Report – Increased Digestion Capacity, MWMC Project P80084 July 3, 2019 Page 3 of 4 APPLICABLE PERMITS: Construction Permit from City of Eugene (17-00292-01) CONTRACT COST SUMMARY: There were 38 construction change orders on this project. Thirty-five (35) additive change orders and three (3) deductive change orders. A summary of the contract costs are provided in Table 2. Table 2. Summary of Contract Costs Project P80084 Cost Original Contract Amount $10,594,018.00 Additive Change Orders $1,260,317.57 Deductive Change Orders ($42,738.51) Final Contract Amount $11,811,597.06 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERS AND/OR UNUSUAL INCIDENTS: 1. During the submittal process it was determined that the digester gas blower for the boiler was not adequately specified to meet the new boiler requirements, ANSI gas codes and the boiler building code classification. A new blower system was designed, built, and installed to meet boiler requirements. Additional design during construction, long lead-time to manufacture the gas blower and installation of the new blower system resulted in addition costs and schedule delays regarding commissioning the new boiler. 2. During design the geological engineer stated in the geological report that the foundation of digester 4 needed to be bearing on undisturbed soil (bar run) at the approximate elevation of 381 feet. This was not reflected in the final design. The final design instructed the contractor to excavate to approximate elevation of 384 feet. This required an additional 3 feet of excavation of unstable sandy soil and an import of 3 feet of structural fill. This resulted in additional costs and project delays. 3. Part of the project scope was to install communication to the Yokogawa system (distributed control system or DCS). The installation, programing and transitioning to the upgraded Yokogawa communication system was far more complex than anticipated. At times, Yokogawa representatives could not figure out how to resolve some of the technical issues encountered. This required a large burden of responsibility on electrical and operational staff and many hours of time that was not anticipated. This resulted in additional costs, project delays, and extra hours of Eugene staff time. A recommendation for future projects is to have a better understanding during the design and additional planning for communication technology changes. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Construction as-built documents are archived within the MWMC P80084 project records (electronic format: Constructware system). Operations and maintenance manuals have been submitted to the City of Eugene staff. Memo: Final Report – Increased Digestion Capacity, MWMC Project P80084 July 3, 2019 Page 4 of 4 FINAL CONCLUSIONS: The MWMC Project P80084 was a successful project even though some problems were encountered. Many factors contributed to the overall project success. A couple of such factors are listed below: 1. The digester project required numerous system shutdowns for testing and commissioning of new equipment including upgrading parts of the Yokogawa communication system. The dedication and positive attitude of plant staff to work through the shutdowns with the contractor helped make the project successful. 2. The experience, qualification, and excellent customer service of Slayden’s staff and project manager. ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 3, 2019 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Josh Newman, Managing Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Stormwater Master Plan Consultant Services Agreement ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution 19-12 ISSUE Staff requests Commission approval of Resolution 19-12 (Attachment 1), authorizing the MWMC Executive Officer to execute a contract with Jacobs Engineering Group (formerly CH2M Hill) for stormwater planning in support of the MWMC’s Comprehensive Facilities Plan project P80101. BACKGROUND Capital projects implemented at the Water Pollution Control Facility WPCF must comply with Oregon 1200-Z permit and City of Eugene local stormwater code. Accordingly, the Peak Flow Facilities project (P80053) added three (3) stormwater treatment swales to accommodate the requirements for onsite treatment of runoff from impervious surfaces that would be added in conjunction with capital projects identified in the 2004 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) list. Recent analysis has indicated that the existing swales are already nearing capacity. In addition, projects that were not listed in the original 2004 CIP project list are not accounted for in the sizing of the existing treatment swales that were installed in 2010. It is common for industrial facilities of the size of the WPCF to address stormwater requirements through a comprehensive stormwater master plan. As such, staff determined that this approach would be more effective than addressing stormwater requirements on a project by project basis. Accordingly, staff included a budget line item for the development of a stormwater master plan for the WPCF in the FY 18- 19 budget rolling forward a small amount of funding programmed for the Comprehensive Facilities Plan project (P80101) Memo: Stormwater Master Plan Consultant Services Agreement July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 2 DISCUSSION On June 6, 2019, staff issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the Comprehensive Facilities Planning - Stormwater Master Plan. The scope of work described in the RFP is provided in Attachment 2. On June 20, 2019, staff received one (1) proposal from Jacobs Engineering Group (hereafter Jacobs). On June 25, 2019 a proposal review team representing Springfield and Eugene staff evaluated the Jacobs proposal using evaluation criteria and weighting that was described in the RFP. The aggregated criteria scores and evaluation results are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 – Aggregated Proposal Scoring Results for the Jacobs Proposal Evaluation Criteria Aggregated Weighted Points (100 points possible) Company experience on similar projects 31.5 Consultant team technical experience and project org chart 26.4 Demonstrated project understanding 17.2 Proposal document readability 13.2 Total 88 (rounded) As required by Oregon rules, selection of engineering consultants must be done on the basis of qualifications only and not fees. As Table 1 indicates, the Jacobs proposal received healthy scores on all qualifications criteria. Staff was provided fees for the services in a separate envelope, which was opened following the proposal evaluation and determination of qualifications. The fees for Jacobs’ services total $98,656. On June 25, 2019 staff notified the proposers (only Jacobs in this case) of their intent to award the Comprehensive Facilities Planning - Stormwater Master Plan consultant services agreement to Jacobs. ACTION REQUESTED Staff requests approval of Resolution 19-12 authorizing the Executive Officer or designee to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group for an additional Not-to-Exceed (NTE) amount of $98,656 and to delegate performance of project management functions including, but not limited to, issuance of notices to proceed and contract amendments not to exceed a cumulative total of 15% of the initial Agreement amount. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 19-12 2. RFP Scope of Services METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION 19-12 ) IN THE MATTER OF CONTRACT AWARD ) OF ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES ) MWMC PROJECT P80101 – COMPREHENSIVE ) FACILITIES PLANNING – STORMWATER MASTER ) PLAN (P80101) WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) approved the Regional Wastewater Program Budget that includes $130,000 for Project P80101 – Comprehensive Facilities Plan – Stormwater Master Plan; WHEREAS, the MWMC has followed the procedures for Formal Selection set forth in MWMC’s Procurement Rule 137-048-0220; WHEREAS, the MWMC advertised an RFP for the Comprehensive Facilities Plan – Stormwater Master Plan Engineering Services contract on June 6, 2019; WHEREAS, the MWMC received one (1) proposal for technical services from a qualified respondent on June 20, 2019; WHEREAS, an interagency evaluation committee from Springfield Environmental Services Division and Eugene Wastewater Division (Evaluation Team) evaluated the proposal pursuant to the criteria in the RFP and applicable law and determined that Jacobs Engineering Group scored favorably across all criteria; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION THAT: Matt Stouder, as the duly authorized Executive Officer of the MWMC, is hereby authorized to: (1) enter into an agreement for engineering services for a Comprehensive Facilities Plan – Stormwater Master Plan for Project P80101 with Jacobs Engineering Group for an authorized amount not-to-exceed (NTE) value of $98,656 as allowed under MWMC’s Procurement Rule 137-048-0220(d); and (2) delegate performance of project management functions including, but not limited to, issuance of notices to ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-12 Page 2 of 2 proceed, contract amendments not to exceed a cumulative Agreement total of 15% of the initial contract amount, and management of the contract to ensure deliverables and services meet the contract requirements. ADOPTED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OF THE SPRINGFIELD/EUGENE METROPOLITAN AREA ON THE 12th DAY OF JULY 2019. _________________________________________________ PRESIDENT: Doug Keeler ATTEST: _______________________________________ Secretary: Kevin Kraaz Approved as to form: _______________________________ MWMC Legal Counsel: K.C. Huffman/ Brian Millington Stormwater Master Plan Scope of Services (as described in the RFP) ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 of 3 A. Project Management Consultant’s designated PM: Consultant shall designate one (1) person to be the Consultant PM who shall function as the main contact person for the Consultant. The Consultant PM will be responsible for coordinating the consultant’s project team and controlling project resources and the overall consultant budget. The Consultant PM must be empowered with all necessary authority to be able to make decisions related to the project on behalf of the consultant team in a timely manner. The Consultant PM shall prepare and update project schedules, monitor project performance related to schedule, control expenses/budget, quality control, and provide monthly reports to the MWMC PM. The Consultant PM shall inform and gain approval in writing from the MWMC PM prior to doing any work that might be outside the scope of the contract and fees. The Consultant PM shall attend MWMC meetings in Springfield/Eugene to discuss the project with Commissioners, as required/needed. The Consultant PM cannot be changed without prior written approval by the MWMC’s Project Manager. B. Project Administration—The Consultant PM shall direct, coordinate and monitor the activities of the project with respect to budget, schedule, and contractual obligations. The Consultant PM will work closely with MWMC staff and—to the degree necessary—City of Eugene building permit center staff to ensure the success of the Master Plan. Project administration shall further include the following activities: a. Finalized work breakdown structure (WBS): Develop a detailed WBS for approval by MWMC Project Manager b. Project schedule: Develop critical path method project schedule using Microsoft Project 2010 scheduling software for approval by MWMC Project Manager c. Informal project communication: i. Regular communication (phone, in person, as well as correspondence and messages using Constructware™) with the MWMC Project Manager as necessary ii. Updates and additions of detail to project schedules as information is available and as needed and uploaded into the MWMC Constructware™ tool d. Formal progress updates: i. Consultant shall provide a minimum of biweekly conference calls and/or meetings between the Consultant PM and the MWMC PM and other personnel as necessary to review project progress, discuss project challenges and findings, and review early study results. The Consultant PM shall ensure that MWMC personnel and Consultant team members maintain a shared understanding regarding study direction, objectives, and deliverables. ii. Monthly detailed consultant invoices and Pay Applications in coordination with the MWMC Project Manager (for ultimate use by the MWMC project manager to forecast project-related expenses and cash flow.) The monthly consultant pay application shall include a cover memo that summarizes work performed by the consultant team during the pay period for which the invoice was issued and anticipated activities to be performed in the upcoming pay period corresponding to the next monthly invoice. iii. As needed, invoices shall be accompanied by updated schedules in Microsoft Project 2010 submitted through Constructware™. Stormwater Master Plan Scope of Services (as described in the RFP) ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 of 3 e. Kick-off meeting: Schedule, prepare and facilitate a project KO meeting with MWMC staff to establish planning criteria and parameters, important project elements, anticipated scope of work, roles, responsibilities and lines of communication of the project team members. The Consultant shall provide all necessary meeting materials and take meeting notes. f. Technical review meetings with MWMC staff as necessary to review consultant deliverables including technical memoranda and design submittals C. Review prior WPCF SW related documents and technical data and identify information needs remaining to complete the project. a. Prior documents include: i. Baseline SW Assessment (Jacobs, 2019) ii. CUP support documents (Cameron McCarthy and BHE Group) iii. MWMC Peak Flow Management Project As-built drawings iv. FY 19-20 10-year CIP plan v. 2014 MWMC Facilities Update vi. 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan vii. The MWMC’s 1200Z Permit b. Deliverables: i. Memorandum summarizing findings and identifying information gaps to be filled in order to complete the Stormwater Master Plan D. Interview key MWMC staff to determine SW related Eugene land use code and 1200Z permit issues and requirements (assume four (4), one hour interviews) E. SW System condition assessment: a. Provide CCTV service for SW sewer at the WPCF b. Perform treatment swale filtration rate study c. Deliverables: i. CCTV inspection video footage and report with conclusions regarding the condition of the piping, manholes and other system elements as appropriate ii. Treatment swale soil infiltration rate assessment with findings documented in a technical memorandum F. Stormwater Master Plan Using the understanding developed regarding the baseline SW flow, existing and planned impervious surface area, permit requirements, and current water quality bioswale treatment capacity; develop a plan that Considers the 10-year CIP planned projects, and future SW conveyance, treatment and discharge needs Identifies the anticipated additional impervious area and associated SW flows under design storm conditions. Provides the MWMC with conceptual design for needed future SW improvements with enough detail to provide planning level cost estimates Identifies the sequence and phasing of those improvements in coordination with the timing of the planned CIP project schedule, and Provides planning level cost estimates for those phased improvements Stormwater Master Plan Scope of Services (as described in the RFP) ATTACHMENT 2 Page 3 of 3 G. Optional Tasks The consultant team should identify and propose any optional tasks or subtasks to make this a successful project and for planning future improvements. Prospective consultants should clearly explain the benefits of any optional tasks or subtasks proposed herein. Costs for optional tasks should be clearly separated from the fee required to complete the Defined Services Tasks (See attachment A). Costs for optional tasks should be discussed in relation to the overall project budget, impacts, and methods for balancing these. Any task/subtask not identified in this RFP but required for the successful completion of the project must be included in the base scope of work with related costs and identified in the proposal. THORP PURDY JEWETT URNESS WILKINSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW & Memo To: MWMC Cc: Matt Stouder From: K.C. Huffman, Shawn Walker Date: June 28, 2019 Client: MWMC (434-166) Re: Proposed Procurement Rules As a local contracting agency, MWMC has the authority to adopt its own rules or modify the Model Rules to specify procedures for public contracting under the Public Contracting Code. At the March 8, 2019 meeting, the Commission passed Resolution 19-04 updating the Commission Procurement Rules in conformance with the Model Rules. The Commission also directed legal counsel to draft language for three possible new / revised rules: (1) Sale, Transfer, and Disposal of Personal Property; (2) Contracts for Price Regulated Items; and (3) Contracts for Personal Services. Legal counsel and MWMC have identified these rules as rules that would benefit MWMC based on recent contracts / procurements and based on interaction with procurement rules of other local contracting agencies. 1. Sale, Transfer, and Disposal of Personal Property A. Proposal: Adopt Commission Rule 137-047-0285R(6) regarding the sale, transfer, or disposal of personal property B. Background / Legal Authority The vast majority of the Public Contracting Code, the AG’s Model Rules, and the Commission Rules pertain to procurement – the acquiring of goods or services. The Code, the Model Rules, and the Commission Rules are generally silent regarding the sale, transfer, or disposal of goods or personal property. The Public Contracting Code gives local contracting agencies the authority to adopt rules regarding the disposition of personal property. Because the Model Rules do not address disposition of personal property, no rule will apply by default if a contracting agency does not adopt its own rules. If no rules are adopted, MWMC likely has no authority to dispose of surplus property except through the bidding processes provided by statute. Thus, it is advisable to adopt rules addressing disposition of personal property. Developing and adopting rules that specify procedures for such circumstances would likely be beneficial. It is common practice for local contracting agencies to adopt rules regarding disposition of personal property. MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 9 C. Proposed Language Commission Rule 137-047-0285R (6) Sale, Transfer, and Disposal of Personal Property. (this entire section is new) (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property, as described in this Rule. (b) Application. This rule constitutes the Commission’s procedures for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property. This rule and these procedures do not apply to the disposition of Real Property. Pursuant to ORS 279A.065(6), the Commission has prescribed that the Commission will use these rules of procedure for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property. (c) Definitions. For purposes of these procedures regarding the sale, transfer and disposal of Personal Property, the following terms have the meanings set forth herein. Any term not defined herein shall have the definition set forth under the Oregon Public Contacting Code or the Commission Rules. (1) Personal Property. “Personal Property” means property other than Real Property. It may be tangible if it has a physical existence, or intangible, if it does not have a physical existence. (2) Real Property. “Real Property” is land and anything permanently affixed to the land, such as buildings, fences, and those things attached to the buildings that, if removed, would deface the structure or integrity of the building, such as plumbing, heating fixtures, etc. (d) Approval. Any disposition of Personal Property must be approved in advance by [name or department]. (e) Methods. The individual or department seeking to dispose, transfer, or sell Personal Property must make the following findings: (a) the method of disposal complies with the requirements of the Oregon Public Contracting Code; and (b) the method of disposal is in the best interest of the Commission. Factors to consider in determining the method of disposal include, but are not limited to: (a) costs of sale, (b) administrative costs, (c) processing fees, (d) disposal fees, and (e) public benefits to the Commission. The following methods may be used to dispose, transfer, or sell Personal Property: (1) Transfer to Other Government Entities. The Commission may sell or transfer Personal Property to another government entity, unless specifically prohibited by a particular State grant which funded the procurement of that property, and providing the property is used for public purpose or benefit and not for resale to a private purchaser. For any such transfer, the parties must enter into a written MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 3 of 9 agreement to effect such transfer. The transfer must be approved in advance by [name or department] and is subject to the delegated authority threshold established by the Commission. (2) Sale. The Commission may sell Personal Property by auction, bids, liquidation sale, fixed price sale, trade-in, or other competitive process. Proceeds from the sale must be used for public purpose or benefit. (3) Disposal as Waste or Other Means. The Commission may dispose of Personal Property which has a value of less than $500, or for which the costs of sale are likely to exceed sale proceeds. Such property may be disposed of by recycling, donation, or designation as waste. Individuals or departments making such a disposal shall make a record of the estimated value of the item and the manner of disposal. Disposal of Personal Property to employees of the City of Eugene, the City of Springfield, and Lane County under this subsection is strictly prohibited. 2. Contracts for Price Regulated Items A. Proposal: Revise Commission Rule 137-047-0285R(3) regarding contracts for price regulated items. B. Background / Legal Authority: Commission Rule 137-047-0285R is the Commission Adopted Rule Regarding Special Procurements. This rule sets forth circumstances that warrant a “special procurement” or deviation from the normal procurement procedure. Subsection (3) of that rule is titled “Contracts for Price Regulated Items.” This rule grants approval of a special procurement for price-regulated supplies or services. These items include situations where the rate or price is established by federal, state, or local regulatory authority. The most common use of this rule is contracts with utilities. Where this rule applies, the Executive Officer or General Manager may directly contract without competitive bidding. The City of Portland has a substantially similar rule, but with a critical difference at the end of the section – an option that the special procurement rule can apply when the service can be provided only by a utility. This provides the option to use the rule when contracting with a utility for something that can only be provided by the specific utility, but the service/item is not price- regulated. Recently in matters regarding the Interconnection Contract with NW Natural, this special procurement rule came up. Although the contract is with a utility, NW Natural, because the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the Receipt Point Facilities is not price- regulated, MWMC’s rule did not apply and MWMC was to treat it as a sole-source contract. However, because of the additional clause in Portland’s rule, Portland was able to apply its rule to its Interconnection Agreement saving time and resources. MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 4 of 9 The proposed addition to this rule mirrors the City of Portland’s rule and is set forth below. C. Proposed Language: Commission Rule 137-047-0285R (3) Contracts for Price Regulated Items. (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for price regulated items, as described in this Rule. The Executive Officer or General Manager may, regardless of dollar value and without competitive bidding, contract for the direct purchase of supplies and services where the rate or price for the supplies and services being purchased is established by federal, state, or local regulatory authority or when the services can be provided only by a specific utility. (b) Process and Criteria. The Executive Officer or General Manager must use competitive methods wherever possible to achieve best value and must document in the procurement file the reasons why a competitive process was deemed to be impractical. The resulting contract must be in writing and the procurement file must document the use of this special procurement rule by number to identify the sourcing method. 3. Contracts for Personal Services A. Proposal: Revise Commission Rule 137-047-0000 regarding code application to contracts for personal services; Adopt Commission Rule 137-047-0285R(5) regarding the procurement for Personal Services Contracts. B. Background / Legal Authority: Among the procurement rules that MWMC has adopted and that diverge from the AG’s Model Rules, MWMC has expanded the definition of “Personal Services Contracts.” This was done with the intent to exempt these types of contracts from the formal procurement process applicable to services. However, although MWMC has developed its definition related to personal services contracts, another MWMC procurement rule prohibits MWMC exempting such personal services contracts that have been customized for MWMC. MWMC’s rules modified OAR 137-047-0000 – Application (see Commission Rule 137-047-0000). The Commission Rule states, “Pursuant to ORS 279B.050(4), the Commission elects to award contracts for personal services under the procedures of ORS 279B.050 to 279B.085.” Therefore, all “Personal Services Contracts” as defined MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 5 of 9 by MWMC’s expanded definition, must be awarded based on the procedures of ORS 279B.050 to 279B.085. This would require either competitive sealed bidding, competitive sealed proposals, a small procurement, an intermediate procurement, an emergency procurement, or a special procurement. MWMC’s modification to OAR 137-047-0000 in its procurement rules requires that “Personal Services Contracts” be treated the same as contracts for goods and services. Therefore, although MWMC has developed an expanded definition of personal services contracts, MWMC may not take advantage of the personal services exemption because MWMC also has a rule that states that the standard rules for services should be used to procure contracts for personal services. The Commission should revise Commission Rule 137-047-0000 to strike the last sentence. This would allow MWMC to utilize its expanded definition of personal services contracts and exempt such contracts from the procurement rules. That sentence was previously added as a Commission Rule (see previous Resolutions regarding the adoption of procurement rules – Item no. 2.(4)). The Commission may easily fix this issue by not renewing that resolution. If the Commission elects to exempt such personal services contracts from formal procurement under ORS 279B.050 to 279B.085, the Commission should adopt its own procurement rules regarding personal services contracts. Such rules are common and the vast majority of contracting agencies have adopted their own rules regarding the procurement of personal services contracts. C. Proposed Language: Commission Rule 137-047-0000 Application These division 47 rules implement ORS Chapter 279B, Public Procurements and apply to the Procurement of Goods and Services. State Contracting Agencies shall also procure Personal Services, except for Architectural, Engineering, Land Surveying, and Related Services, in the same manner other Services are procured under these division 47 rules. Local Contracting Agencies, pursuant to 279B.050(4), may also adopt these division 47 rules to govern the Procurement of Personal Services Contracts or elect to award Personal Services Contracts under procedures set forth in 279B.055 through 279B.085. Pursuant to ORS 279B.050(4), the Commission elects to award contracts for personal services as defined in 137-046-0110(24) under the procedures of ORS 279B.050 to 279B.085. Commission Rule 137-047-0285R (5) Personal Services Contracts. (this entire section is new) (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for Personal Services Contracts, as described in this Rule. MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 6 of 9 (b) Application. These procedures constitute the Commission’s procedures for the screening and selection of Personal Services Contracts. Pursuant to ORS 279A.065(6), the Commission has prescribed that the Commission will use these rules of procedure for the procurement of Personal Services Contracts. For qualifying contracts, the Commission may follow the selection procedures established by ORS 279C.110 for contracts for architectural, engineering, land surveying or related services if the Commission determines that selection procedure would be in the Commission’s best interest under the circumstances. (c) Definitions. For purposes of these Personal Services Contract procedures, the following terms have the meanings set forth herein. Any term not defined herein shall have the definition set forth under the Oregon Public Contacting Code. (1) Proposal. An offer to provide personal services whether formal or informal as designated below. (2) Personal Services. “Personal Services” has the meaning set forth in Commission Rule 137-046-0110(23). (3) Personal Services Contract. “Personal Services Contract” has the meaning set forth in Commission Rule 137-046-0110(24). (d) Sufficient Quality and Fair and Reasonable Price. Regardless of the specific method of selection used, the individual in charge of selecting a contractor for Personal Services on behalf of the Commission shall ensure that the quality of the service offered by the contractor is sufficient for the Commission’s particular needs under the circumstances, and that the cost to the Commission for the services is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. (e) Method of Procurement. Based on the estimated total cost of a Personal Services Contract, the following methods of procuring a Personal Services Contract may be used: (1) Direct Negotiations – Personal Services Contract of $10,000 or Less. A Personal Services contractor may be selected without soliciting informal proposals from more than one qualified proposer if the total cost of the Personal Services Contract is estimated to be $10,000 or less, the quality of service offered by the Personal Services contractor is sufficient for the Commission’s particular needs under the circumstances, the cost to the Commission is fair and reasonable under the circumstances, the award does not reflect favoritism, and the award is in all other respects in the Commission’s best interests. (2) Informal Solicitation – Personal Services Contracts Over $10,000 But Not Over $150,000. If the total cost of a Personal Services Contract is estimated to be more than $10,000 but not more than $150,000, informal proposals may be solicited. Informal proposals shall be solicited from a sufficient number of MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 7 of 9 qualified prospective proposers to ensure no fewer than three qualified proposers submit proposals. If fewer than three qualified proposers submit proposals, the efforts made to solicit proposals shall be documented in the Commission’s files. (3) Requests for Proposals – Personal Services Contracts Over $150,000. When a nonexempt Personal Services Contract is estimated to exceed $150,000, formal sealed proposals shall be solicited by a formal Request for Proposals, and a contract may be awarded based upon competitive negotiation using any method permitted for solicitation of proposals under the Public Contracting Code and its corresponding administrative rules as determined in the Commission’s best interests. The Request for Proposals for a Personal Services Contract shall include at least the following elements: i. A description of the criteria upon which proposals will be evaluated; ii. The contractual terms and conditions required by the Commission; iii. A description of the work; iv. The requirements that must be satisfied by written proposals; and v. A protest procedure. (f) Proposal Evaluation. Proposals shall be evaluated based upon evaluation criteria described in the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation, whichever is used. The evaluation criteria shall be presumed to have equal importance unless the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation indicates otherwise. The evaluation criteria may be changed only by written addendum to the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation. (g) Solicitation of Proposals. Although not exclusive as methods, the Commission may solicit proposals by public advertisement, or may solicit without advertisement directly to a pool or limited number of members of a pool of prospective proposers as described below, provided that the pool, or segment of the pool solicited, has at least three members, and the method of selecting the limited number of proposers solicited is either random or qualifications based. (h) Prospective Proposer Pool. A pool of prospective proposers may be established for a particular type of Personal Services Contract by soliciting statements of qualification from individuals or firms that may be qualified to perform those particular personal services. Statements of qualification must be solicited from all such individuals or firms known to the Commission within the area from which the Commission normally would solicit proposals for the particular type of contract by advertising as provided under the Public Contracting Code and its corresponding administrative rules for the advertisement of Requests for Proposals. The solicitation must state the evaluation criteria that will be used in determining MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 8 of 9 which prospective proposers will be admitted to the pool, and may describe how proposals for particular contracts will be solicited and evaluated from limited numbers of pool members. After a pool is established, a prospective proposer who is not a member of the initial pool may apply for admission to the pool by submitting a statement of qualification, and shall be added to the pool if the Commission determines the prospective proposer is qualified based upon the evaluation criteria established in the original solicitation. the Commission may remove a prospective proposer from the pool upon determining that the prospective proposer is no longer qualified based upon the evaluation criteria established in the original solicitation. Removal of a prospective proposer from a pool is not subject to review in the same manner as the disqualification of a bidder. (i) Exemptions (1) Sole Source. If only one firm is qualified and available to perform a Personal Services Contract, a contract may be awarded to that firm without competition. (2) Unique or Specialized Knowledge or Expertise. A Personal Services Contract may be awarded without competition if the contractor has unique or specialized knowledge or expertise required by the Commission, and the individual approving the contract on behalf of the Commission has determined that soliciting informal or formal proposals from others would not be in the Commission’s best interests. (3) Emergency. A Personal Services Contract may be awarded without competition if prompt execution of a contract is necessary in an emergency. (j) Cancellation/Rejection of Proposals. Any solicitation for personal services may be canceled, or any or all informal or formal proposals may be rejected in whole or in part, when the cancellation or rejection is in the best interest the Commission as determined by the Commission. The reasons for the cancellation or rejection must be made part of the solicitation file. the Commission is not liable to any proposer for any loss or expense caused by or resulting from the cancellation of a solicitation or award, or rejection of an informal or formal proposal. (k) Protests. (1) Purpose. An Affected Person may protest the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. Before seeking judicial review of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement, an Affected Person must file a Written protest with the Commission and exhaust all administrative remedies. (2) Delivery. An Affected Person must deliver a Written protest to the Commission within seven (7) Days after the first date of public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement by the Contract Review Board, unless a different protest period is provided in the public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. MWMC Proposed Procurement Rules July 3, 2019 Page 9 of 9 (3) Content of Protest. The Written protest must include: (a) a detailed statement of the legal and factual grounds for the protest; (b) a description of the resulting harm to the Affected Person; and (c) the relief requested. (4) Contract Review Authority Response. The Commission shall not consider an Affected Person’s protest of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement submitted after the timeline established for submitting such protest under this rule or such different time period as may be provided in the public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. The Contract Review Board shall issue a Written disposition of the protest in a timely manner. If the Contract Review Board upholds the protest, in whole or in part, it may in its sole discretion implement the sustained protest in the approval of the Personal Services Contract procurement, or revoke the approval of the Personal Services Contract procurement. (5) Judicial Review. An Affected Person may seek judicial review of the Commission’s decision relating to a protest of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 1 of 7 METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 19-13 ( IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING ( NEW PUBLIC CONTRACTING ( RULES TO THE 2018 MWMC RULES WHEREAS, the Oregon Attorney General published a Model Public Contract Rules Manual containing Model Rules of procedure which were effective on January 17, 2001 (Manual); WHEREAS, in 2001, the Commission, acting in its capacity as local contract review board, adopted the Manual (with some exceptions) as its own rules of procedure; WHEREAS, the Oregon Attorney General made revisions to the Manual and Model Rules (Model Rules), in 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 following changes to the public contracting code by the Oregon Legislature; WHEREAS, the Commission, acting in its capacity as local contract review board, made corresponding changes to its own rules of procedure in Resolutions 01-02, 03-01, 06-22; 08-18; 10-15; 12-01; 14-05 (as amended by 14-05-A); 16-09; and 19-04. WHEREAS, the Commission desires to conduct procurement activities in substantial conformity with the Attorney General’s Revised Model Rules; WHEREAS, the Commission also desires to achieve operational and administrative efficiencies; WHEREAS, the Commission was informed by MWMC Legal Counsel of opportunities to create additional MWMC Rules to obtain the MWMC’s desired operational and administrative efficiencies; WHEREAS, the Commission desires to follow MWMC Legal Counsel’s recommendations with respect to new MWMC Rules regarding public contracting in the areas of (1) Sale, Transfer, and Disposal of Personal Property; (2) Contracts for Price Regulated Items; and (3) Contracts for Personal Services; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW AUTHORITY THAT: ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 2 of 7 1. The Commission adopts the following new MWMC Rules to its recently approved “2018 Commission Rules,” (see MWMC Resolution 19-04). (i) Commission Rule 137-047-0285R(6) Sale, Transfer, and Disposal of Personal Property. (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property, as described in this Rule. (b) Application. This rule constitutes the Commission’s procedures for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property. This rule and these procedures do not apply to the disposition of Real Property. Pursuant to ORS 279A.065(6), the Commission has prescribed that the Commission will use these rules of procedure for the sale, transfer, and disposal of Personal Property. (c) Definitions. For purposes of these procedures regarding the sale, transfer and disposal of Personal Property, the following terms have the meanings set forth herein. Any term not defined herein shall have the definition set forth under the Oregon Public Contacting Code or the Commission Rules. (1) Personal Property. “Personal Property” means property other than Real Property. It may be tangible if it has a physical existence, or intangible, if it does not have a physical existence. (2) Real Property. “Real Property” is land and anything permanently affixed to the land, such as buildings, fences, and those things attached to the buildings that, if removed, would deface the structure or integrity of the building, such as plumbing, heating fixtures, etc. (d) Approval. Any disposition of Personal Property must be approved in advance by the MWMC Executive Officer, or his or her authorized designee. (e) Methods. The individual or department seeking to dispose, transfer, or sell Personal Property must make the following findings: (a) the method of disposal complies with the requirements of the Oregon Public Contracting Code; and (b) the method of disposal is in the best interest of the Commission. Factors to consider in determining the method of disposal include, but are not limited to: (a) costs of sale, (b) administrative costs, (c) processing fees, (d) disposal fees, and (e) public benefits to the Commission. The following methods may be used to dispose, transfer, or sell Personal Property: (1) Transfer to Other Government Entities. The Commission may sell or transfer Personal Property to another government entity, unless specifically prohibited by a particular State grant which funded the procurement of that property, and providing the property is used for ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 3 of 7 public purpose or benefit and not for resale to a private purchaser. For any such transfer, the parties must enter into a written agreement to effect such transfer. The transfer must be approved in advance by MWMC Executive Officer, or his or her authorized designee and is subject to the delegated authority threshold established by the Commission. (2) Sale. The Commission may sell Personal Property by auction, bids, liquidation sale, fixed price sale, trade-in, or other competitive process. Proceeds from the sale must be used for public purpose or benefit. (3) Disposal as Waste or Other Means. The Commission may dispose of Personal Property which has a value of less than $500, or for which the costs of sale are likely to exceed sale proceeds. Such property may be disposed of by recycling, donation, or designation as waste. Individuals or departments making such a disposal shall make a record of the estimated value of the item and the manner of disposal. Disposal of Personal Property to employees of the City of Eugene, the City of Springfield, and Lane County under this subsection is strictly prohibited. (ii) Commission Rule 137-047-0285R(3) Contracts for Price Regulated Items. (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for price regulated items, as described in this Rule. The Executive Officer or General Manager may, regardless of dollar value and without competitive bidding, contract for the direct purchase of supplies and services where the rate or price for the supplies and services being purchased is established by federal, state, or local regulatory authority or when the services can be provided only by a specific utility. (b) Process and Criteria. The Executive Officer or General Manager must use competitive methods wherever possible to achieve best value and must document in the procurement file the reasons why a competitive process was deemed to be impractical. The resulting contract must be in writing and the procurement file must document the use of this special procurement rule by number to identify the sourcing method. (iii) Commission Rule 137-047-0000 Application These division 47 rules implement ORS Chapter 279B, Public Procurements and apply to the Procurement of Goods and Services. State Contracting Agencies shall also procure Personal Services, except for Architectural, Engineering, Land Surveying and Related Services, in the same manner other Services are procured under these division 47 rules. Local Contracting Agencies, pursuant to 279B.050(4), ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 4 of 7 may also adopt these division 47 rules to govern the Procurement of Personal Services Contracts or elect to award Personal Services Contracts under procedures set forth in 279B.055 through 279B.085. Pursuant to ORS 279B.050(4), the Commission elects to award contracts for personal services as defined in 137- 046-0110(24) under the procedures of ORS 279B.050 to 279B.085. Commission Rule 137-047-0285R (5) Personal Services Contracts. (a) Authorization. The Commission grants approval of a special procurement for Personal Services Contracts, as described in this Rule. (b) Application. These procedures constitute the Commission’s procedures for the screening and selection of Personal Services Contracts. Pursuant to ORS 279A.065(6), the Commission has prescribed that the Commission will use these rules of procedure for the procurement of Personal Services Contracts. For qualifying contracts, the Commission may follow the selection procedures established by ORS 279C.110 for contracts for architectural, engineering, land surveying or related services if the Commission determines that selection procedure would be in the Commission’s best interest under the circumstances. (c) Definitions. For purposes of these Personal Services Contract procedures, the following terms have the meanings set forth herein. Any term not defined herein shall have the definition set forth under the Oregon Public Contacting Code. (1) Proposal. An offer to provide personal services whether formal or informal as designated below. (2) Personal Services. “Personal Services” has the meaning set forth in Commission Rule 137-046-0110(23). (3) Personal Services Contract. “Personal Services Contract” has the meaning set forth in Commission Rule 137-046-0110(24). (d) Sufficient Quality and Fair and Reasonable Price. Regardless of the specific method of selection used, the individual in charge of selecting a contractor for Personal Services on behalf of the Commission shall ensure that the quality of the service offered by the contractor is sufficient for the Commission’s particular needs under the circumstances, and that the cost to the Commission for the services is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. (e) Method of Procurement. Based on the estimated total cost of a Personal Services Contract, the following methods of procuring a Personal Services Contract may be used: (1) Direct Negotiations – Personal Services Contract of $10,000 or Less. A Personal Services contractor may be selected without soliciting informal proposals from more than one qualified proposer if the total cost of the Personal Services ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 5 of 7 Contract is estimated to be $10,000 or less, the quality of service offered by the Personal Services contractor is sufficient for the Commission’s particular needs under the circumstances, the cost to the Commission is fair and reasonable under the circumstances, the award does not reflect favoritism, and the award is in all other respects in the Commission’s best interests. (2) Informal Solicitation – Personal Services Contracts Over $10,000 But Not Over $150,000. If the total cost of a Personal Services Contract is estimated to be more than $10,000 but not more than $150,000, informal proposals may be solicited. Informal proposals shall be solicited from a sufficient number of qualified prospective proposers to ensure no fewer than three qualified proposers submit proposals. If fewer than three qualified proposers submit proposals, the efforts made to solicit proposals shall be documented in the Commission’s files. (3) Requests for Proposals – Personal Services Contracts Over $150,000. When a nonexempt Personal Services Contract is estimated to exceed $150,000, formal sealed proposals shall be solicited by a formal Request for Proposals, and a contract may be awarded based upon competitive negotiation using any method permitted for solicitation of proposals under the Public Contracting Code and its corresponding administrative rules as determined in the Commission’s best interests. The Request for Proposals for a Personal Services Contract shall include at least the following elements: i. A description of the criteria upon which proposals will be evaluated; ii. The contractual terms and conditions required by the Commission; iii. A description of the work; iv. The requirements that must be satisfied by written proposals; and v. A protest procedure. (f) Proposal Evaluation. Proposals shall be evaluated based upon evaluation criteria described in the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation, whichever is used. The evaluation criteria shall be presumed to have equal importance unless the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation indicates otherwise. The evaluation criteria may be changed only by written addendum to the Request for Proposals or informal solicitation. (g) Solicitation of Proposals. Although not exclusive as methods, the Commission may solicit proposals by public advertisement, or may solicit without advertisement directly to a pool or limited number of members of a pool of prospective proposers as described below, provided that the pool, or segment of the pool solicited, has at least three members, and the method of selecting the limited number of proposers solicited is either random or qualifications based. (h) Prospective Proposer Pool. A pool of prospective proposers may be established for a particular type of Personal Services Contract by soliciting statements of ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 6 of 7 qualification from individuals or firms that may be qualified to perform those particular personal services. Statements of qualification must be solicited from all such individuals or firms known to the Commission within the area from which the Commission normally would solicit proposals for the particular type of contract by advertising as provided under the Public Contracting Code and its corresponding administrative rules for the advertisement of Requests for Proposals. The solicitation must state the evaluation criteria that will be used in determining which prospective proposers will be admitted to the pool, and may describe how proposals for particular contracts will be solicited and evaluated from limited numbers of pool members. After a pool is established, a prospective proposer who is not a member of the initial pool may apply for admission to the pool by submitting a statement of qualification, and shall be added to the pool if the Commission determines the prospective proposer is qualified based upon the evaluation criteria established in the original solicitation. The Commission may remove a prospective proposer from the pool upon determining that the prospective proposer is no longer qualified based upon the evaluation criteria established in the original solicitation. Removal of a prospective proposer from a pool is not subject to review in the same manner as the disqualification of a bidder. (i) Exemptions (1) Sole Source. If only one firm is qualified and available to perform a Personal Services Contract, a contract may be awarded to that firm without competition. (2) Unique or Specialized Knowledge or Expertise. A Personal Services Contract may be awarded without competition if the contractor has unique or specialized knowledge or expertise required by the Commission, and the individual approving the contract on behalf of the Commission has determined that soliciting informal or formal proposals from others would not be in the Commission’s best interests. (3) Emergency. A Personal Services Contract may be awarded without competition if prompt execution of a contract is necessary in an emergency. (j) Cancellation/Rejection of Proposals. Any solicitation for personal services may be canceled, or any or all informal or formal proposals may be rejected in whole or in part, when the cancellation or rejection is in the best interest the Commission as determined by the Commission. The reasons for the cancellation or rejection must be made part of the solicitation file. The Commission is not liable to any proposer for any loss or expense caused by or resulting from the cancellation of a solicitation or award, or rejection of an informal or formal proposal. (k) Protests. (1) Purpose. An Affected Person may protest the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. Before seeking judicial review of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement, an Affected Person must file a written protest with the Commission and exhaust all administrative remedies. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution 19-13 Page 7 of 7 (2) Delivery. An Affected Person must deliver a written protest to the Commission within seven (7) Days after the first date of public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement by the Contract Review Board, unless a different protest period is provided in the public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. (3) Content of Protest. The written protest must include: (a) a detailed statement of the legal and factual grounds for the protest; (b) a description of the resulting harm to the Affected Person; and (c) the relief requested. (4) Contract Review Authority Response. The Commission shall not consider an Affected Person’s protest of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement submitted after the timeline established for submitting such protest under this rule or such different time period as may be provided in the public notice of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement. The Contract Review Board shall issue a written disposition of the protest in a timely manner. If the Contract Review Board upholds the protest, in whole or in part, it may in its sole discretion implement the sustained protest in the approval of the Personal Services Contract procurement, or revoke the approval of the Personal Services Contract procurement. (5) Judicial Review. An Affected Person may seek judicial review of the Commission’s decision relating to a protest of the approval of a Personal Services Contract procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400. ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS LOCAL PUBLIC CONTRACT REVIEW AUTHORITY ON THE 12th DAY OF JULY 2019. __________________________________________________ PRESIDENT: Doug Keeler 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: July 3, 2019 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Laura Keir, Communications Coordinator Josh Newman, Managing Civil Engineer SUBJECT: RNG Communications ACTION REQUESTED: Informational Only ISSUE Staff has been working for several months on how the Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) project will be communicated to both internal and external stakeholders. A communications plan has been developed for the project, along with other communications materials. This agenda item introduces these items to the Commission, so they can be prepared in the event they are speaking with community members about this project. DISCUSSION The following communications materials have been created for the RNG project, and will be discussed with the Commission at the July 12th, 2019 Meeting. 1. Communications Plan – Includes goals, objectives, core messages, project spokespersons, audiences, and a matrix of project communications tactics. 2. Protocol for Responding to Media & Community Members – Describes how to handle questions/requests about the project, plus project talking points. 3. Project Profile – Handout sheet that provides a high level summary of the project and its benefits, to introduce people to the project. Additionally, there is a project webpage that is a central online resource about the project, to refer people to for more information: http://www.mwmcpartners.org/ rng/ Memo: RNG Communications July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 2 ACTION REQUESTED This memo is being presented for informational purposes. No actions or decisions are being requested from the Commission at this time. ATTACHMENTS 1. RNG Project Communications Plan 2. RNG Project Profile ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 of 4 Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Project Communications Plan Introduction The MWMC is embarking on an exciting project to purify biogas– a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process–to produce renewable natural gas (RNG). Producing RNG will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, fully utilize a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process, and provide a new revenue source for the MWMC that will benefit ratepayers. The MWMC will be partnering with an off-taker that will buy the RNG for use as vehicle fuel, and with NW Natural for connecting to their natural gas system. The MWMC’s goal is to start producing RNG in late 2020. This communications plan supports the RNG project by guiding the creation and implementation of objectives, key messages, audiences, and delivery methods for consistent, timely and accurate information provided to the community. This plan will be adaptive to the needs of the project as it moves forward. Individual tactics identified in this plan will be developed using this plan as a guide and will contain more in-depth messaging and details. This plan will be updated as additional information becomes available. Goal Increase community awareness and support for the MWMC’s RNG project, including its environmental and financial benefits. Objectives 1. Provide consistent, transparent, and relevant information to the Eugene-Springfield community regarding the RNG project, including safety information for neighbors of the treatment plant. 2. Build community support for the MWMC’s RNG project. 3. Improve community awareness of the MWMC’s resource recovery efforts using RNG as a primary example, to elevate the MWMC as a local leader in protecting the environment. 4. Coordinate with partners – including NW Natural and the off-taker – so that project messaging is compatible. Core Messages 1. Project Overview: The MWMC is embarking on an exciting project to turn biogas–a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process–into renewable natural gas (RNG). Producing RNG is a win for the community and the environment. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 4 2. Environmental Benefits: The MWMC is committed to protecting the environment and recovering resources from the wastewater treatment process. There are many environmental benefits of producing RNG: a. Using RNG replaces fossil fuels with a clean vehicle fuel to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The MWMC expects an annual reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of as much as 7,500 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents. That’s equal to removing 1,600 passenger vehicles from the road. b. Methane is a natural byproduct of the wastewater treatment process. Producing RNG will allow all of the gas to be beneficially used. c. RNG is a clean vehicle fuel that can offset dirtier fossil fuels like diesel, resulting in air quality benefits. d. Utilizing RNG rather than fossil fuels will help the City of Eugene meet their climate change goals. With RNG, we close the loop on waste and provide meaningful emissions reduction that supports Eugene’s Community Climate Action Plan. 3. Financial Benefits: Selling RNG will provide the MWMC with an additional revenue source, helping to offset future costs for MWMC ratepayers. Construction will be paid for with the MWMC’s existing capital reserves. 4. Project Timeline: In order to produce RNG, biogas purification facilities and a pipeline to connect to NW Natural’s utility grid need to be built. Construction is expected to begin in late 2019 with a target completion by summer of 2020, subject to change. 5. Safety: The MWMC is committed to the safety of the community, its neighbors, and employees. The MWMC has preventative measures in place to ensure safety with Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) at the wastewater treatment plant, including maintenance practices, staff training, and equipment requirements. Biogas, which is similar to RNG, has been safely handled at the wastewater treatment plant in Eugene since it began operating in the 1950s. NW Natural has one of the tightest and most modern pipeline systems in the nation. NW Natural works closely with regulators to ensure its system is safe and reliable, in order to meet or exceed all state and federal regulations. More information about NW Natural’s Pipeline Integrity Management Program is available at nwnatural.com. 6. Project partners: The MWMC is partnering with an off-taker that will buy the RNG for use as a vehicle fuel. NW Natural is a key partner by connecting RNG from the wastewater treatment plant to its natural gas pipeline system. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 3 of 4 RNG Project Spokespersons Name Project Role Point Person For: Contact Info Laura Keir RNG Communications Lead All media requests Backup main spokesperson Outreach & communications 541.726.3684 lkeir@springfield-or.gov OR mwmcpartners@springfield-or.gov Loralyn Spiro RNG Communications Support Backup for media requests 541.726.2233 lspiro@springfield-or.gov OR mwmcpartners@springfield-or.gov Josh Newman RNG Project Manager Main project spokesperson GHG emissions How RNG is produced Other project specific questions 541.744.4154 jnewman@springfield-or.gov Sharon Olson RNG Project Liaison Backup project spokesperson Liaison to Eugene 541.682.8625 SOlson@eugene-or.gov Mark Van Eeckhout RNG Project Construction Manager Project construction & engineering 541.736.7126 mvaneeckhout@springfield-or.gov Audiences Ratepayers Stakeholders/Partners Broader Community Residents of Eugene- Springfield area Private business/ industry Property owners/ managers NW Natural Off-Taker Regional Wastewater staff Eugene City Council/ Springfield City Council/ Lane County Board of Commissioners Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) Congressional delegation and staff Local, state, and national regulators Environmental interest groups Eugene neighborhood associations (River Road Community Organization, etc.) Business leaders Media Opinion leaders Community organizations Industry associations- Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies (ACWA), etc. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 4 of 4 RNG Communications Planning Matrix Audiences Key Message Content Key Staff Delivery Methods Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Core messages; safety Josh Newman Meeting with staff (COE & COS) Timeline Laura Keir Email Talking points Mark Van Eeckhout Media protocol Commissioners Core messages Josh Newman Presentation (MWMC only) Elected leaders Talking points Laura Keir Memo Timeline Matt Stouder Interest groups Core messages Josh Newman One-on-one meetings Project champions Timeline Laura Keir RNG page on MWMC website Talking points Project profile one-pager FAQs Stakeholders/partners Core messages Josh Newman Meetings/calls Timeline Laura Keir Email updates Talking points Mark Van Eeckhout Project profile one-pager Media protocol FAQs Neighbors Core messages Laura Keir Open house Interest groups Construction impacts Josh Newman News release Media Timeline Mark Van Eeckhout Neighborhood newsletters General public Social media MWMC E-newsletter Interest groups Core messages Josh Newman Table at community events Lane County Fair Run to Stay Warm Home Show Lane County Fair Run to Stay Warm General public Timeline Laura Keir Get Outdoors Day Interest groups Core messages Josh Newman Presentations Neighborhood groups Timeline Matt Stouder Business leaders Dave Breitenstein Government leaders Neighbors Core messages Laura Keir Signage by treatment plantGeneral public/visitors Josh Newman Construction Timeline Legend:Design Bidding Construction RNG Production Internal staff 2019 2020 RNG PROJECT PROFILE | SUMMER 2019 What is the RNG project? The MWMC is embarking on an exciting project to purify biogas – a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process – in order to produce renewable natural gas (RNG). Producing RNG is a win for the community and the environment. The project will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, fully utilize a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process, and provide a new revenue source that will benefi t ratepayers. The MWMC’s goal is to start producing RNG in late 2020. The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) is a partnership between the Cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County. The MWMC protects our community’s health and the environment by providing high-quality wastewater services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. Environmental Benefits Using RNG replaces fossil fuels with a clean vehicle fuel. This project is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the wastewater treatment process by as much as 7,500 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents annually. www.mwmcpartners.org/rng 541.726.3694 RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS (RNG) PROJECT PROFILE CO2 Image to left shows what the built project will look like when completed. ATTACHMENT 3 Page 1 of 2 Financial Benefits Selling RNG will provide the MWMC with an additional revenue source, off setting future costs for Eugene-Springfi eld ratepayers. The project will be paid for with the MWMC’s existing capital reserves. What is Renewable Natural Gas (RNG)? RNG is biogas (a methane byproduct of the wastewater treatment process) that has been purified, so that the remaining gas is around 98% methane and can be used interchangeably with conventional fossil fuel natural gas. RNG can be compressed and injected into natural gas pipelines for distribution, or it can be liquefied or compressed and transported by truck. RNG is a resource that can be used and created in perpetuity from renewable sources. How We Make RNG Solids from the wastewater treatment process are processed on-site at the treatment plant in anaerobic digesters, generating biogas (primarily methane and carbon dioxide) as a byproduct. RNG is produced by removing the carbon dioxide and impurities from the biogas, leaving pure methane which is essentially the same as natural gas. Biogas, which is similar to RNG, has been safely handled at the wastewater treatment plant in Eugene since it began operating in the 1950s. The MWMC has preventative measures in place to ensure safety with RNG at the wastewater treatment plant, including maintenance practices, staff training, and equipment requirements. NW Natural has one of the tightest and most modern pipeline systems in the nation. Learn more about NW Natural’s Pipeline Integrity Management Program at nwnatural.com. RNG PROJECT PROFILE | SUMMER 2019 www.mwmcpartners.org/rng 541.726.3694 REVE N U E HOW IS RNG MADE?DID YOU KNOW? ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 of 2 ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 3, 2019 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Loralyn Spiro, Communications Coordinator Laura Keir, Communications Coordinator SUBJECT: Strategic Communications Planning – Phase 2 ACTION REQUESTED: Informational and Discussion ISSUE Staff is preparing to kick off Phase 2 of the MWMC’s Strategic Communications Planning effort. The intended result of the Phase 2 effort is to identify short and long-term communication strategies and tactics that will further build awareness of the MWMC and improve communications around the importance of clean water. This planning effort will coincide with the next update of the MWMC Communications Plan and the 2019 Community Survey. BACKGROUND Phase 1 of the MWMC’s Strategic Communications Planning focused on two key efforts. The first was the implementation of a community survey in 2014 that captured qualitative and quantitative data, creating a baseline about the community’s awareness of the MWMC. From the results, the 2015 MWMC Communications Plan was created. The Plan, which was updated in 2018 (Attachment 1), outlined measurable objectives, strategies, and tactics to achieve the overall goal of increasing the community’s awareness of the MWMC. The second effort of the Phase 1 work was the creation of Mission, Vision, and Values Statements (the Statements) for the MWMC. This was achieved through facilitated discussions and targeted surveys of elected officials, industrial users, and staff. The Statements communicate the MWMC’s purpose, help to engage staff in the day-to-day communication efforts, and provide direction for the Commission’s overall planning efforts. The Statements are shown below: Mission: To protect our community’s health and the environment by providing high-quality wastewater services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area in partnership with Eugene, Springfield and Lane County. Memo: Strategic Communications Planning – Phase 2 July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 4 Vision: The MWMC will be recognized as a leader in protecting water quality through sustainable and fiscally responsible practices. Values Statement: The MWMC strives to provide high-quality services that achieve, sustain and promote balance between community, environmental and economic needs while meeting customer service expectations. Values: Clean Water Protecting Community Health Providing Excellent Customer Service Sustain Environmental Stewardship Collaboration with Partners Maintaining Fiscal Responsibility DISCUSSION The purpose of the Phase 2 work is to identify and implement new strategies and tactics that will further support the MWMC’s Statements and build out the MWMC’s Public Information Program for the short and long-term. The work will also help to eliminate current efforts that are not directly tied to achieving the overall goal of the MWMC Communications Plan. To identify new strategies and tactics, it is helpful to consider a couple of overarching questions: Why do we want community members to become more vested in our efforts? Potential reasons include: Create a better understanding among ratepayers of how their wastewater fees are used Maintain trust with community members Rely on the MWMC as the primary source of information about wastewater services and sustainability practices in the region Understand and participate in pollution prevention practices at home Advocate for the importance of clean water and how everyone can do their part How can the MWMC better communicate with our community members? The majority of people the MWMC engages with through presentations, conversations, or other forms of communication should be able to repeat back at least one story they have heard or read. The MWMC can build out our story and tell it in a more engaging manner so that our audiences remember and care about clean water. Facts and numbers help support the story, but are not the whole story. Customers need to be a part of the experience by sharing what they learn about. Potential ways to accomplish this include: Develop a character, goal, and challenge as part of our story – potentially a water droplet’s journey or what happens to “flushable” wipes when put in the toilet Capture customer testimonials and share them – e.g. community members telling their stories of what they learned from a tour of the WPCF Memo: Strategic Communications Planning – Phase 2 July 3, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Have staff share their stories about why they got into the wastewater industry Engage the community and implement stories for different learning levels – e.g. stories for school children, college aged students, adults, etc. Strategies: Based on the why and how questions above, potential new strategies to further support the MWMC’s Mission, Vision, and Values Statements will be identified and refined. One example of a potential new strategy may be: Increase awareness of the importance of having clean water now and in the future, and the steps it takes to clean water Tactics: To implement existing and newly identified strategies, the MWMC Communication Plan employs a variety of tactics. The list below is shown for consideration and discussion. As the Phase 2 efforts and 2019 Community Survey are completed, some tactics may fall off the list, and additional tactics will likely surface. Short-term – 1-3 years Revisit inserting information into billings with EWEB and SUB, as well as the MWMC information that is included directly on customer bills Create a suite of images, illustrations, infographics, handouts, and maps that help tell the MWMC’s story and engage community members in our story; can be used in presentations, social media posts, website, etc. Create an animated video showing the “day in the life” of a water drop to engage with kids between 2-7 years old Create a video that focuses on the importance of clean water and how the community is connected to water while touching on the MWMC’s successes, strong partnership, and overarching purpose Create sharable content (i.e. a blog) Create t-shirts with “We Clean Water” tagline Focused engagement with media outlets to share the MWMC’s story, including media opportunities to tour the MWMC’s facilities Expand opportunities for the community to tour the MWMC’s facilities (i.e. weekend tours) Explore a small pilot project for batch beer using recycled water working with a local brewery Explore a small pilot project for bio-fertilizer that can be distributed to community members Implement measurement tools for the MWMC’s website/social media to further our success of reaching community members Long-term – 4 to 8 years Explore a customer appreciation program Explore a video game with rights Explore an educational book series with rights Explore a learning center where students can learn about the importance of clean water, the steps associated with “cleaning” water (and the science behind it), and the practices the MWMC Memo: Strategic Communications Planning – Phase 2 July 3, 2019 Page 4 of 4 employs to recover byproducts (resources) from the water; the center could potentially be a permanent home for Clean Water University and other educational events Sell advertising space on the MWMC’s blog to invest back into communication/marketing efforts With the recent allocation of FTE in the Public Information Program (2.0 FTE), current strategies and tactics can be fully realized, and efforts on Phase 2 of the Strategic Communications Planning can move forward. As the Phase 2 work progresses and plans are finalized, additional budget may be required, and will be discussed with the Commission as required. ACTION REQUESTED Commission input and discussion is requested. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2018 MWMC Communications Plan The 2018 MWMC Communications Plan 2018 Comm Plan Cover V1.ai 1 10/9/2017 1:52:34 PM ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 of 5 The MWMC Communications Plan 2018 I. Introduction For 40 years, the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) has quietly provided essential and sustainable wastewater treatment services for our growing community, while protecting the local environment. However, the 2015 survey efforts confirmed: there is a low level of awareness about the MWMC and its well-managed wastewater services amongst its customers. This Communications Plan includes goals, objectives, strategies, and tactics for increasing awareness of the MWMC and its role in the health of our community and environment, specifically the positive impact the MWMC has on the water quality of the Willamette River. Stated measureable objectives in this plan are tied directly to the FY15 Community Survey. Future community survey efforts will help determine the success of this plan’s implemented strategies and tactics. This plan will be adaptive to the needs of the MWMC and community it serves. It will be used to help shape Key Outcomes and will be updated periodically following community survey efforts. This plan was developed with the MWMC Communication Team’s guiding principles that information provided by the MWMC is accurate, effective, consistent, cost-efficient, engaging, and fun. II. Goal: Increase awareness of the MWMC and its role in the health and vitality of our community and environment. III. Objectives Increase community awareness so that more than 30 percent of those surveyed are able to identify the MWMC; up from 18 percent. Increase initial favorable response regarding the MWMC to 25 percent; up from 14 percent. Improve community opinion regarding the MWMC’s performance by 10 percent with overall performance of 50 percent or better on all metrics; up from an average of 45 percent. In sections VI and VII, this plan identifies strategies and tactics to reach these stated objectives that were developed based on the FY15 Community Survey findings. Strategies define how to achieve overall objectives by answering “what” will be done. The strategies outlined in this plan address stated objectives and additionally will help improve internal communications. The tactics identified are the specific activities that will be implemented to further strategies and overall objectives. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 5 IV. Core Messages Message 1: We clean water. Message 2: The MWMC is committed to clean water, community health, and the environment. Message 3: Everyone has a role in keeping our local waterways and the environment healthy. Every day actions make a difference. Message 4: The MWMC is a regional leader in effective and sustainable wastewater treatment practices. V. Audience The MWMC has an extensive audience. From those we serve, to those we collaborate with, the broader region depends on the work we provide for a healthy environment and growing community. The primary audience of this plan is the MWMC’s ratepayers; additional audiences are recognized as important to reach plan objectives. Audiences will be communicated with using the most-effective communication channels available and provided information that aligns with communications guiding principles. Ratepayers Stakeholders/Partners Broader Community - Residents of Eugene- Springfield - Private business/ industry - Property owners/ managers - Regional Wastewater Program staff - Eugene City Council/ Springfield City Council/ Lane County Board of Commissioners - Congressional delegation and staff - Local, state, and national regulators - Pollution Prevention Coalition - Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies (ACWA) - School districts - Local utilities including Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) and Springfield Utility Board (SUB) - Business leaders - Development community - Media - Opinion leaders - Environmental interest groups - Community organizations - Universities/ community colleges - Industry peers ATTACHMENT 1 Page 3 of 5 VI. Strategies 1. Increase community understanding of the connection between well-managed wastewater services and a healthy local environment. 2. Raise awareness of the MWMC as a leader in water resources management, specifically in wastewater treatment practices and expertise. 3. Increase community understanding of how their behavior and practices affect the health of local waterways and what they can do to help protect our environment. 4. Strengthen communications by evaluating the effectiveness of strategies/tactics implemented. VII. Tactics Tactic Description Key Staff Explore Branding Options Phase 2- Possible trademark of official tagline for MWMC – “We Clean Water”. An official tagline will help build awareness and quickly identify the purpose of MWMC to the community. General Manager, Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro Sponsorships 3-4 per year – Helps build awareness within the community and supports events or organizations with a direct connection to MWMC. Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro Social Media Continue to grow social media presence with Facebook, Twitter and YouTube using videos, photos, etc. See Appendix A. Communications Team Lead: Laura Keir Media Relations Quarterly meeting with City of Eugene staff to coordinate media relations. Communications Team, Eugene Public Works Public Affairs Annual Report Report out and highlight past year accomplishments, upcoming initiatives, and financials to partner agencies, community groups and others that have an interest in MWMC. Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro E-Newsletter E-news sent to roughly 150 staff and partners regarding MWMC news and updates (e.g. construction projects). Consider moving from quarterly to monthly release for more current content, and work on increasing subscribers. Communications Team Lead: Laura Keir Project Profiles Handouts that describe projects and cover frequently asked questions. MWMC Experts, Communications Team Professional Photography Staff working photos – Continue to build an archive of images that help tell MWMC’s “story”; for use in publications, social media posts and on website. Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro Speakers Bureau Identify staff to present to outside organizations, develop/update presentation and train staff, actively seek organizations to present to. MWMC Experts, Communications Team Lead: Laura Keir ATTACHMENT 1 Page 4 of 5 Tactic Description Key Staff Videos Capture video clips that visually tells MWMC’s “story” throughout year for use on social media channels. Explore additional opportunities to engage the community through videos. Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro Website Updates Regular resource and information updates on website as needed, plus improvements such as news room and other timely content. Communications Team, Administration Pollution Prevention Outreach Education/Marketing campaigns to inform community members of preferred practices that help reduce pollution in wastewater (e.g. drug take back boxes). Communications Team Water Industry Collaboration Work with industry partners (e.g. ACWA) to build overall public awareness of the wastewater industry. All Clean Water University 3 in-class sessions plus treatment plant tour and graduation with 5th graders. Consider changing format based on teacher survey to better accommodate schools’ schedules and reach more students. Communications Team, Environmental Technicians, Volunteers Facility Tours Meet or exceed 750 participants annually in facility tours, including students and community groups. Communications Team, Regional Wastewater Staff Recognition Opportunities Participate in industry-wide recognition opportunities as identified (e.g. Pacific Northwest Clean Water Association’s photo calendar contest). All Utility Bill Insert Develop informational brochure including rate changes, sent in July to roughly 33,000 SUB customers. Per agreement, the City of Springfield is allowed two SUB inserts per year; one is the local wastewater and stormwater rate brochure mentioned, and the other covers stormwater issues. Communications Team Lead: Laura Keir, Administration Promotional Giveaway Items Branded items to be given away at community events or meetings that help build awareness of the MWMC and will promote the website and social media sites. Communications Team Lead: Loralyn Spiro MWMC Handouts Update and/or develop informational handout materials (e.g. FAQs on biosolids, and general MWMC brochure) for use at community events and on website. Communications Team Lead: Laura Keir Public Information Updates & Analytics Update Commission annually with progress made on communication tactics. Communications Team ATTACHMENT 1 Page 5 of 5 ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 3, 2019 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Todd Miller, Environmental Management Analyst SUBJECT: Biocycle Farm Poplar Harvest Management Project Update ACTION REQUESTED: No action; this item is an informational update ISSUE The Poplar Harvest Management Project, MWMC Project No. P80083, administers the initial harvest and replanting cycle of the Biocycle Farm’s three management units. At the close of the project, after replanting of Management Unit 3 (MU-3), staff will recommend a long term operational strategy for the Biocycle Farm. As of July 2019, MU-1 and MU-2 have been harvested and replanted; MU-3 will be harvested and replanted in the 2020-2023 timeframe. Among the efforts to develop a harvest strategy for MU-3, a Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop was held at the Biocycle Farm on June 13, 2019. At the July 12, 2019 commission meeting, staff will present updates on the workshop and overall project status. BACKGROUND MU-1 was harvested in three stages from 2013-2015, and was replanted in 2016. Harvested trees ranged 9, 10, or 11 years old depending on year of harvest. MU-2 was harvested in 2017, except for a 5-acre portion previously harvested in 2015 for a test market pilot project, and was replanted in 2018. Harvested trees were 10 years old, except for 8-year old trees harvested for the pilot project. MU-3 was initially planted in 2009 and MU-3 trees will be at the maximum allowed agricultural rotation age of 12 years in 2021. Harvest contractors have been responsible for marketing the saleable poplar. The most valuable markets have been for higher-end wood chip uses and veneer for plywood. Optimum harvest revenues depended on market demand and the harvest yield per acre. Harvest yields increase with tree age and with better poplar varietals grown in successive plantings, as well as optimization of rates of biosolids and recycled water applied to plantings. Pilot projects to develop market relationships have been successful. The 2015 pilot project to produce veneer for plywood established product confidence from the buyer, resulting in the best material from Memo: Biocycle Farm Poplar Harvest Management Project Update July 3, 2019 Page 2 of 2 the MU-2 harvest going to higher-value veneer sales. More recently, the ceiling grille pilot project with Springfield-based 9Wood resulted in the demonstration of Biocycle Farm poplar in the Springfield City Hall’s Library Meeting Room and an ongoing positive relationship with 9Wood. Other poplar-use partnerships have emerged from the MWMC’s participation in the Advanced Hardwood Biofuels research program with Washington State University. From that, the MWMC partnered with OSU Extension – Forestry to host the Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop on June 13. DISCUSSION The June 13, 2019 Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop brought together a wide array of interests and partners related to the Biocycle Farm poplar. Participants included tree planters, growers, harvesters, millers, wood products manufacturers, and program staff. The topics covered growing, management, harvest considerations, and marketing of poplar using the three management unit’s current growth stages as discussion points. Each participant received an information packet (included as Attachment 1) presenting information about each unit and projections for future harvest yields. High points of the workshop were a lunchtime panel discussing past poplar market experiences and future opportunities, and a demonstration of tree felling and processing into saw logs and milled boards. The workshop was part of the MWMC’s strategy to build greater awareness about Biocycle Farm poplar, from initial planting on through to end-use, in advance of the MU-3 harvest. Video and photos from the workshop will be compiled into online resources available on the MWMC’s website for ongoing outreach with potential partners. Next steps include a potential interest survey to help guide the MU-3 harvest strategy. ACTION REQUESTED This information is provided for Commission information only. ATTACHMENTS 1. Participant Packet: June 13 Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop You’re Invited! Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop 10 am to 3 pm on Thursday, June 13, 2019 MWMC Biocycle Farm 29689 Awbrey Lane, Eugene, Oregon 97402 Workshop Partners: See and Learn: • Poplar growing practices • Poplar harvesting techniques • Poplar use and product potential Agenda: • Introduction to the MWMC’s Biocycle Farm • 3-year-old poplar maintenance • 1-year-old poplar establishment • Product displays and market discussion • 10-year-old poplar harvest preparation • Poplar processing demonstration Special Opportunities! • Poplar start cutting demo and giveaway • Hands-on planting demo • Saw log production demo and giveaway • Finished poplar product displays Offered by: Who Should Attend: Loggers, wood product processors, forestry services, landscaping services, arborists, stump removers, herbicide treatment applicators, agricultural operators, farmers, millers, wood chip and saw log buyers, biomass innovators, sustainability interests, growers, hardwood users and manufacturers, and anyone interested in the Biocycle Farm! Guest Speakers: • Todd Miller, City of Springfield/MWMC • Rick Stonex, GreenWood Resources • Jeff Parker, Northwest Youth Corps • Michael Roemen, 9Wood • Scott Leavengood, OSU & Oregon Wood Innovation Center • John Essner, Lane Forest Products Registration & more information at www.mwmcpartners.org/facilities/biocycle-farm ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 10:00 Welcome/Check In 10:20 Orientation: Video viewing: MWMC Sustainability – Biocycle Farm 10:30 Bus Loading to Tour Stop 1 10:45 Tour Stop 1: 3-Year-Old Poplar Maintenance Presenters - • Todd Miller (City of Springfield) – planting layout, fertilization, and irrigation• Rick Stonex (GreenWood Resources) – planting varietals, tree growth characteristics, pruning regimen Demonstration - pruning and cutting collection 11:15 Bus loading to Tour Stop 2 11:30 Tour Stop 2: 1-Year-Old Poplar Establishment Presenters - • Todd Miller (City of Springfield) – experimenting with poplar stand re-establishment approaches• Jeff Parker (Northwest Youth Corps) – applying youth corps service learning for poplar establishment• Rick Stonex (GreenWood Resources) – post-harvest field preparation• John Essner (Lane Forest Products) – stump removal and herbicide treatment challenges Demonstration - planting of poplar cuttings 11:55 Short walk from Tour Stop 2 to Lunch Tent 12:00 Networking Lunch 12:30 Post-Lunch Discussion Panel: Poplar Markets Panelists - • Todd Miller (City of Springfield) – current and envisioned poplar markets• Michael Roemen (9Wood): use of poplar for architectural panels• Scott Leavengood (OSU College of Forestry): opportunities for poplar wood products• Rick Stonex (GreenWood Resources): logistics of poplar markets Demonstration - poplar product displays 1:10 Short walk to Tour Stop 3 from Lunch Tent 1:15 Tour Stop 3: 10-Year-Old Poplar “Timber Cruise”Walk among the poplar stand to be harvested in 2020-2021 1:45 Bus Loading to Tour Stop 4 2:00 Tour Stop 4: Tree Processing Demonstration Demonstration - tree felling and processing by Lane Forest Products. 2:45 Bus Loading to return to cars 3:00 End workshop / log loading Schedule of Events – Poplar Harvesting Workshop MWMC Biocycle Farm Thursday, June 13, 2019 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 MEADOWVIEW ROAD PRIVATEROADLINKAWBREY LANE P R AIRIE R O A D BROWN LANEGREEN HILL ROADMU-3 (north) BiosolidsFacility MU - 2 ( n o r t h ) Non-AgArea Dry Application Only or Future Liquid Application Phase Archeo l o g i c a l Site MU-3 (south) MU - 2 ( s o u t h ) MU- 1 ( n o r t h ) MU - 1 ( s o u t h )*Check-in and orientation Additional parking and log loading area Lunch program* Site Entrance 29689 Awbrey Lane * * Poplar Tree Harvesting Workshop 0 1,500 3,000750 Feet There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission, or positional inaccuracy of this product. Facility Road Tour Stops MU-# Tour Route Waterways Tour Notes Site Boundary ManagementUnits (MU)* Workshop June 13, 2019 99 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 3 5077 8360 8019 6320 6018 1428 8360 6320 8019 5077 1428 6018 OP367 Stumps Uprooted; 1-Year Cover Crop OP367 Stumps Uprooted OP367 Stumps Drilled OP367 Stumps Uprooted; Site Mulched OP367 Stumps Drilled OP367 Stumps Uprooted; 2-Year Cover Crop Non-agricultural area MU-3 MU-2 Check-in Management Unit # 1 0 500 1,000250Feet There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission, or positional inaccuracy of this product. Facility Road Tour Stops Tour Route Waterways Test Plot Varietal Number6018 Site Area Hybrid PoplarVarietalOP367 99 Workshop June 13, 2019 areascale 1 acre ATTACHMENT 1 Page 4 OP367 Short 1428 Short 1428 Long OP367 Long self-sourced OP367 Short OP367 Short self-sourced 6320 Long 6320 Short OP367 LongMU-1 North MU-3 South MU-3 North 0 500 1,000250Feet There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission, or positional inaccuracy of this product. 99 areascale 1 acre Management Unit # 2 6320 1428 OP367 Hybird Poplar Varietal Site Area Facility Road Tour Stops Tour Route Waterways MU-2122 Acres Workshop June 13, 2019 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 5 195-529 49-177 184-411 15-29 OP367195-529 Archeological Site Biosolids FacilityBrown LnMU-2 (south)MU-2 (north)MU-1Check-in 0 500 1,000250Feet There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission, or positional inaccuracy of this product.areascale 1 acre 15-29 184-411 195-529 OP367 Facility Road Tour Stops Tour Route Waterways MU-3118 Acres Site Area Hybrid Poplar Varietal Management Unit # 3 Workshop June 13, 2019 Lunch 49-177 * ATTACHMENT 1 Page 6 Chart 2 Chart 1 Table 1 Projected Harvest Yields Future yields from the Biocycle Farm are based on the MWMC’s harvest outcomes and comparison to other poplar farms. Two key elements of harvest yield increase with tree age: Total marketable biomass Proportion of biomass marketable as saw logs Prior harvests at the Biocycle Farm were done on 9, 10, and 11-year old trees. The MWMC expects future yields to be better as the initial units harvested were impacted by growth setbacks and storm damage. Chart 1 indicates better growth observed in the second planting unit versus the first planting. Harvesting at years 11 and 12 will also enhance yields. The proportion of yield as larger-diameter saw logs for dimensional wood or veneer also greatly increases from years 10 to 12. Virtually all additional growth after year 7 directly corresponds to saw log yields. This relationship is shown in Chart 2. The approximate breakdown of harvest yields, based on Biocycle Farm data and projections, is presented in Table 1. Age BDT chips MBF logs Total BDT 7 17 10 27 8 16 13 29 9 18 18 35 10 16 22 38 11 17 29 46 12 17 33 50 For hybrid poplar, the expected yield in thousand board feet (MBF) is equivalent to weight in bone dry tons (BDT). Therefore total yield in BDT equals BDT chips + MBF logs. This assumes a wood density of 24 lbs. /ft3 at 8% moisture content. Industry ranges for poplar are 22-31 lbs. /ft3; a 1:1 ratio of MBF: BDT correlates with Biocycle Farm harvest yields from 10-year old MU-2 trees. ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 1 Page 7 Future Harvest Scenarios The MWMC currently manages 3 units of poplar grown on 10-12 year rotations for the purpose of biosolids application. Chart 3 presents three alternatives to optimize total yields and harvest intervals. The solid bars on the chart represent projected saw log yields (in MBF); the patterned bars represent the additional chip material production and the total projected harvest yield (in BDT).The current harvest trajectory, shown in blue at the top of the chart, would result in a periodic 12-year (high yield) poplar supply. Alternatively, the MWMC may harvest each of the current units as two separate halves, resulting in 6 units to increase the frequency of harvests grown to 11 or 12 years. This alternative is shown in the middle of Chart 3 in red. This alternative would result in less material per harvest, but more regular harvests (supply of poplar). A third alternative, shown in the bottom of Chart 3 in green, trends towards a regular 2-year harvest cycle of 11-year old trees. To achieve this, the 2025 harvest would be lower-yield 9-year old trees, followed by 10- and 11-year harvests thereafter. However, this options supplies poplar to market 2 years earlier than the other options and presents a consistent long-term poplar supply. Chart 3 ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 1 Page 8