Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMWMC Agenda Packet THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE www.mwmcpartners.org MWMC MEETING AGENDA Friday, January 14th, 2022 7:30 AM – 9:30 AM (PDT) Due to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Oregon Executive Order 20-16, the MWMC Meeting will be held remotely via computer or phone. To join the meeting by phone dial: 877.853.5247; Access Code: 848 6988 5160; Passcode: 354264 I. 7:35 – 7:40 II. CONSENT CALENDAR a. MWMC 12/10/22 Minutes Action Requested: By motion, approve the Consent Calendar 7:40 – 7:45 III. PUBLIC COMMENT: Public comment can be submitted by email to jbrennan@springfield-or.gov or by phone 541-726-3694 by 5 PM January 13th, 2022 or made at the meeting. All public comments need to include your full name, address, if you are representing yourself or an organization (name of organization), and topic. 7:45 – 8:15 IV. FY 2022-23 BUDGET KICK OFF: KEY OUTCOMES & PERFORMANCE INDICATORS………………. ……………………………………………………Matt Stouder, Dave Breitenstein, Katherine Bishop Action Requested: Informational and Discussion 8:15 – 8:35 V. REGULATORY UPDATE – NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL STATUS……………………………………… ……………………………………………………..…………………Todd Miller and Bryan Robinson Action Requested: Informational and Discussion 8:35 – 9:00 VI. AERATION IMPROVEMENTS UPDATE – P80100………………...………………………Barry Mays Action Requested: Informational and Discussion 9:00 – 9:20 VII. FOLLOW-UP TO FY20 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT……….…………James McClendon Action Requested: Informational and Discussion 9:20 – 9:30 VIII. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, & WASTEWATER DIRECTOR 9:30 IX. ADJOURNMENT ROLL CALL: Commissioner Farr, Commissioner Inge, Commissioner Keeler, Commissioner Meyer, Commissioner Pishioneri, Commissioner Ruffier, Commissioner Yeh 7:30 – 7:35 MWMC MEETING MINUTES Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 7:30 a.m. The MWMC Meeting was held remotely via computer and phone. Meeting was video recorded. Commissioner Yeh opened the meeting at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken by Josi Brennan. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Remotely: Pat Farr, Bill Inge, Doug Keeler, Walt Meyer, Joe Pishioneri, Peter Ruffier, Jennifer Yeh Staff Present Remotely: Lou Allocco, Katherine Bishop, Josi Brennan, Shawn Krueger, Troy McAllister, James McClendon, April Miller, Todd Miller, Michelle Miranda, Brooke Mossefin, Bryan Robinson, Loralyn Spiro, Matt Stouder, Mark Van Eeckhout, Valerie Warner, and Greg Watkins Guest Present Remotely: Ron Cutter (Brown & Brown Northwest Insurance) Legal Counsel Present Remotely: Brian Millington (Thorp, Purdy, Jewett, Urness, & Wilkinson, PC) CONSENT CALENDAR a. MWMC 11/12/21 Minutes MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MEYER TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 7/0. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET 2 Valerie Warner, Staff Accountant for the City of Springfield presented Supplemental Budget 2 (SB2). Supplemental Budget 1 (SB1) was approved by the Commission earlier this year and adjusted the beginning cash, reserves, and carryover expenses based on the final results of FY2020-21. Additional information on FY2020-21 became available late in the year, after the SB1 materials were prepared for the Commission, and now three adjustments need to be made to the MWMC budget for FY2021-22. This action also adjusts the required loan reserve for the remaining State Revolving Loan. AGENDA ITEM IIa December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 2 of 14 Adjustments Requested  Increase beginning cash by $19,111 – This item was posted to the Springfield books late in the year end closing process and was therefore not included when preparing the SB1 in September. This adjustment will increase the beginning cash and operating reserve.  Reduce SRF loan reserve - Each time a State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan is paid off the required reserve is reduced, and currently the required reserve is $50,000. The SRF is occasionally reset by Oregon, and that information was missed. This reserve was budgeted for FY2021-22 at $186,616. The downward adjustment of the SRF reserve in the amount of $136,616 will be offset by an increase to the operating reserve.  Increase Major Rehab Capital carryover by $536,700 – This item is related to Capital costs budgeted for the MWMC. When staff adjusted for carry over projects in September, the Screw Pump Project was not included. This item will increase the Major Rehab budget and decrease the Capital Reserve. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Meyer asked how much of that is carry over and how much is increase in the amount needed to finish the work? Ms. Warner said it is all carry over. Commissioner Inge asked if there is a mechanism to put in place to help mitigate any future information being missed or eliminate the possibility it could be missed. Ms. Warner said the MWMC budget satisfies the State of Oregon budget law by having our budget run through the City of Springfield budget. Every time a budget resolution is adopted it is run through the City of Springfield process with the City’s Council. The MWMC is backed into the City of Springfield’s timing, and this year Springfield took the budget resolution to their Council early. How the dates fell around the MWMC September meeting, it did not provide time to wait until the books closed at the City of Springfield. The $19,000 was part of a larger chunk of COVID-19 grant money that came to the City of Springfield and was put in a holding account, and other accountants were waiting to allocate it. The second item was a knowledge gap by staff, because the State Revolving Loan Reserve requirement changes periodically. Commissioner Inge said he understands the complicated process for the budget and his inquiry is certainly not a criticism of the work being done. Is there a mechanism or a possibility to have some kind of mechanism to check the boxes along the way? Ms. Warner said she would talk to the budget officer at the City of Springfield and make sure there is more timing before Springfield puts out their SB1. That can be checked on if the timing is that close in the future. Commissioner Ruffier asked what the ending balance of the operating reserve will be with the addition of the $136,000. Ms. Warner said she did not prepare for that question but will get him that information. Mr. Stouder said that information can be emailed after the meeting. Commissioner Ruffier asked when that information is sent out, can you include a reminder of what the target balance is for the operating reserve? Ms. Warner said yes, she can do that. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MEYER AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 21-10. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 7/0. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 3 of 14 LIABILITY INSURANCE RENEWAL FOR 2022 Katherine Bishop, Environmental Services Program Manager for the City of Springfield and Ron Cutter, Senior Vice President for Brown & Brown Northwest Insurance presented the Liability Insurance Renewal for 2022. Liability Insurance Coverage for the calendar year  Public Entity Liability (Casualty) o General Liability o Administrative Liability o Public Officials’ Liability o Hired Automobile Physical Damage o Umbrella Excess Liability o Coverage: up to $5 million per occurrence limit Liability Insurance Premium  Public Entity Liability (Casualty) o Special Districts Insurance Services (SDIS) o 2022 calendar year policy o Initial Rate: at $33,472, up $1,676 or 5.3%  SDIS Best Practices Program (credit $3,781) o Net Premium: 2022 insurance cost at $29,691  Special Districts Association of OR (SDAO) $1,267 o 2022 Combined Premium and Membership $30,958 Ms. Bishop said in 2015 the MWMC moved to Special Districts Insurance Services from City County Insurance Services. The MWMC has not filed a claim against this liability insurance, since moving to the Special Districts Association. The policy for the calendar year of 2022 would have been $33,472 (up 5.3% compared to the prior year), however, staff participated in the SDIS Best Practices Credit Program, resulting in a net premium $29,691. Ms. Bishop requested the Commission by motion, to authorize and direct the MWMC Executive Officer to enter into an agreement with Special District Insurance Services (SDIS) for liability (casualty) insurance coverage, plus associated SDAO membership renewal for the period of January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2022 Ron Cutter said Special Districts gives a longevity credit every other year. If the loss ratio is less than 65%, in which MWMC has not had a claim, the organization will receive money back. In January 2022, a longevity credit of $2,053 (6.9% of the premiums) will be given to the MWMC. In terms of the insurance market as a whole it is very turbulent with property type losses like fires, flooding, and catastrophe type losses. It is a very difficult right now if an organization has exposure to police and fire, and fortunately MWMC has none of that. As a pool, Special Districts is somewhat insulated from the ups and downs of the traditional insurance market, however there is still some of that. If the MWMC had jail or police exposure there would likely be a significant increase in premiums. Special Districts is a great organization, and it is recommended to continue the relationship with them and renew MWMC’s policy for 2022. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 4 of 14 DISCUSSION: Commissioner Inge asked about the Public Officials Liability Insurance. That is a $5 million coverage, correct? Mr. Cutter said, correct. Commissioner Inge asked if that is a total of $5 million or is it $5 million per public official? Mr. Cutter said it is a per occurrence limit of $5 million. Commissioner Inge asked if someone sued the entire Commission, that $5 million would go towards that, and would not be more than the $5 million, correct? Mr. Cutter said, correct. Commissioner Inge asked if that is sufficient. Mr. Cutter said Special Districts will go up to $10 million but the premium would increase from $30,000 to probably around $34,000. We have always felt the exposure for MWMC is pretty limited, and a $5 million limit is a robust limit. Commissioner Inge said he is not suggesting we go higher but wanted to inquire on the details. Commissioner Inge said with not having any claims against this policy, is there an opportunity for us to have a higher deductible and thereby self-insure more? The MWMC could then put additional funds into a reserve to cover a potential loss. Mr. Cutter said yes, but from a practical standpoint the risk/reward is just not there. If MWMC decided to be aggressive and take a $50,000 or $100,000 deductible/retention per occurrence, with the amount of your premiums, there is not a significant amount of savings. However, we could certainly look into those options. Commissioner Inge said he does not want to change the policy this year but asked if Ms. Bishop could send out insurance information to the Commissioners when the policy renews next year. Mr. Millington responded to Commissioner Inge’s question on why limits are set. This has to do with tort claim limitations under the law that somewhat limit the liability. If you would like more information, we can do an analysis of those limitations that would protect you and other officials from extremely high damage awards from State law type claims. Commissioner Ruffier said State claims were mentioned, but what about under Federal law, such as the Clean Water Act? Is the Commission subject to liability for claims under failure to comply with the Clean Water Act, which might carry higher penalties? Mr. Millington said technically, yes. Those claims are not going to be capped by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, if it is a federally based claim. There is the potential for a claim under the Clean Water Act and other constitutional type claims to come about. Mr. Millington has not recently looked into the types of penalties applied to public officials for flagrant violation of the Clean water act, but noticed a recent decision against a private company with a $2.5 million damage award that made National news. We are probably okay with those limits, but Commissioner Ruffier is correct in that Oregon Tort Claims Act would not cap a damage award for Clean Water Act violation. Commissioner Ruffier said he thought the risk was fairly low. The Commission operates with due diligence and in good intentions, so there are no concerns with that regard. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FARR TO AUTHORIZE AND DIRECT THE MWMC EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SPECIAL DISTRICT INSURANCE SERVICES (SDIS) FOR LIABILITY (CASUALTY) INSURANCE COVERAGE, PLUS ASSOCIATED SDAO MEMBESHIP RENEWAL FOR THE PERIOD OFJANUARY 1, 2022, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2022. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 7/0. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 5 of 14 KEY OUTCOME 3 – INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIP Matt Stouder, Executive Officer for the MWMC presented Key Outcome 3, Intergovernmental Partnership. Mr. Stouder said every year in January staff performs a budget kickoff with the Commission to discuss key outcomes and performance indicators. At the January 8, 2021 meeting, the Commission requested that staff evaluate various Performance Indicators associated with the five Key Outcomes in the MWMC’s Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Budget, to potentially include new and/or revised indicators that better align with each outcome. Throughout the year Key Outcomes 1, 2 & 4 were presented to the Commission and Key Outcome 5 will be discussed at the January 2022 meeting. Key Outcome 3 deals with Achieving and Maintaining a Successful Intergovernmental Partnership and is the foundation of MWMC’s strategic plan. Measuring how staff achieves and maintains a successful intergovernmental partnership is one of the more challenging outcomes to measure. Mr. Stouder displayed new proposed indicators, existing indicators, and existing indicators proposed for deletion. New Proposed Indicators FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target NPDES Permit Renewal Prepared plans and associated work with permit application Submit required information; Review applicant draft; Permit issued Permit implementation Implement and adopt revised local limits and an updated MWMC pretreatment model ordinance Conducted system sampling, revise limits and update model ordinance to reflect current CFRs Preliminary Approval from DEQ; Initiate public notice Adopt local ordinances in Eugene and Springfield; Begin implementation Partnership Assessment Tool --- Scope assessment tool options; present concepts/options for Commission consideration Begin implementation and data collection  NPDES Permit Renewal – this is also an indicator in Key Outcome 1 and deals with water quality and protecting the health and safety of the Willamette River. This indicator requires a successful intergovernmental partnership between staff with Springfield and Eugene to work towards getting a new permit. Staff expects this permit to be issued in the first quarter of 2022.  Implement and adopt revised local limits and an updated MWMC pretreatment model ordinance – is a replacement to an existing indicator and staff felt the proposed indicator was a better choice at this point in time. This measure requires staff to work closely with 3 governing bodies, DEQ, and the Eugene and Springfield City Councils.  Partnership Assessment Tool – is delivered by the communications team. The main tools include a survey for internal use using Survey Monkey, assessment forms to identify key staff and the Commission, and one-on-one interviews by a consultant to identify key management staff and the Commission. If the Commission is interested in pursuing this indicator, staff would complete more research and present that information to the Commission before the end of the fiscal year in July 2022. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 6 of 14 Existing Indicators FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target Interagency coordination regarding Capacity Management Operations and Maintenance (CMOM) Program CMOM Program update presented to the Commission Quarterly meetings between Eugene and Springfield; Annual update to the Commission Quarterly meetings between Eugene and Springfield; Annual update to the Commission Community presentations regarding MWMC partnership, services and outcomes delivered jointly 2 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area 4 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area 4 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area  Interagency coordination regarding Capacity Management Operations and Maintenance (CMOM) Program - staff feels this indicator is a good measure. The interagency coordination requires staff (operating and engineering) to work closely together and present to the Commission Annually.  Community presentations regarding MWMC partnership, services and outcomes delivered jointly – this indicator requires joint coordination with the Eugene and Springfield staff. Existing Indicators, proposed for deletion FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target Industrial Pretreatment Programs are consistent with the MWMC pretreatment model ordinance Consistent across service area Consistent across service area Consistent across service area MWMC Capital projects consistent with CIP budget and schedule 90% of initiated projects within budget and 100% (11 of 11 projects) on schedule 100% of initiated projects within budget and 100% (9 of 9 projects) on schedule 100% of initiated projects within budget and 75% on schedule  MWMC Capital projects consistent with CIP budget and schedule - the Capitol program staff is great about keeping the projects within budget and on schedule, and this measure is already being accomplished consistently. Mr. Stouder requested feedback from the Commission to implement any adjustments into the budget kickoff discussion at the January 2022 MWMC meeting. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Keeler asked about the language on the second new bullet for the pretreatment model ordinance. Do we need a little more context in that initial statement, such as having it end in, “within the industrial pretreatment program?” Commissioner Keeler said regarding the partnership assessment tool, the Commission by design is made up of representatives from the three jurisdictions and our elected officials. Given that, in my assessment, things work very well. While it may be beneficial to do this exercise, what if it just confirms we are already doing well with the mechanisms already in place. It is good to be careful with staff time. Commissioner Ruffier responded to Commissioner Keeler’s question, and said the concept of a partnership assessment tool is a good thing. Out of all the outcome measurements, that one is most directly related to the outcome we are looking for in achieving and maintaining a successful intergovernmental partnership. Everything does seem to go well, and people seem to be satisfied with December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 7 of 14 the services provided, but it would be helpful to get confirmation of that. If we did a survey of our intergovernmental partners, we may find there is a lack of knowledge about what we do. That would give us further basis for putting effort into our educational Program. Commissioner Ruffier said with respect to these outcomes, they are more action oriented and not really objective oriented. The permit renewal and local limits are implementation measures. While we might claim we are doing implementation, whether we are doing it well or achieving the objectives of the program remains unanswered, if we move forward in this way. It would be ideal to give more thought into what our objectives are. On permit renewal, possibly using something to show intergovernmental partnership, and state we have no challenges to the permit and no lawsuits filed under the permit. We do not have control over all that, but certainly have input and influence on the process. If we get lawsuits, it can highlight how additional work is needed in our partnership elements. Concerning the local limits in pretreatment model, it struck out consistently across the service area and contains a lot of implications. We may lose if we just look at implementing the ordinance. There is risk that the two communities will implement pretreatment rules and regulations inconsistently and could lead to an advantage from one community or the other over, attracting businesses, or the way a business is regulated. There needs to be more explanation about what we want to achieve such as equitable regulation of our industrial partners and their discharge of wastewater. Concerning the CMOM program and looking at our objectives, we can have quarterly meetings and the meetings could be nonproductive. It is ideal to see something more along the lines of effective control of SSO’s and I/I reduction. At the last meeting CMOM gave a presentation and staff discussed gains made with our maintenance efforts and how much I/I was reduced. That is a real partnership issue because efforts need to occur across the service area to really achieve reductions in I/I. While there are resource imbalances and somewhat different approaches taken, the outcome of reducing I/I and having effective coordination of our CMOM program is important. Mr. Stouder commented on the MWMC pretreatment model ordinance and said the intent is in line with comments made by Commissioner Ruffier. Staff is looking at the actual, estimate actual, and targets to revise it again this year. The intent is to complete sampling, get approval from DEQ with the public notice, begin implementation of the new model ordinances, and be consistent across the surface area. As staff completes this process each year, we can describe how that consistency will look with future indicators. Commissioner Farr said he is in support of all five-bullet points. The competence of MWMC staff becomes clearer and clearer to me. This may not be clear to our jurisdictions or the people we serve, but we have done a good job on community presentations regarding MWMC. On Tuesday this week we talked about our Board assignments for next year and while MWMC is enjoyable to me, nobody else wanted it. All five of us should have wanted it if we are doing a good job demonstrating what it is, we do, because who would not want to do this work. We need to continue to be aggressive and let people know how great the staff is, how state of the art and forward thinking our plan is, and the work we do regarding Lane County. The work being done on bullet point four should be applauded. Commissioner Meyer said related to bullet point five, the measurement tool, there are three independent governing bodies we answer to and each of them have their own challenges. Commissioner Farr mentioned the landfill, tiny homes issue, and the homeless issues. The three Members on our Commission representing those governing bodies should be the key ones reaching out to their governing bodies to find out how we are doing, are we meeting the needs, and how to be December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 8 of 14 sensitive to issues important to them. It is really about how we are doing for the three different governing bodies, making sure we are doing our job well, and creating good partnerships. Commissioner Ruffier said he agreed with Commissioner Meyer on that last point. Commissioner Farr reminded me there is a lot going on right now with negotiations over Goshen and the Short Mountain extension that are the epitome of intergovernmental partnership. They are not captured in these outcomes but could be measured under the partnership assessment tool. We are going to face more future challenges with either requests for taking waste from extraterritorial sources or the efficiency of combining waste treatment for smaller communities. Having something that reflects our positive work with the other communities and with our partnership to achieve common goals, would be a good idea. Commissioner Inge said one thing to remember is, out of sight out of mind. The fact we do not have 15- 30 sanitary sewer overflows every year, is great. No matter how much we try to be better known, people will not notice as long as we continue to do a great job. People really only care about things working well. The staff do a phenomenal job and the fact we are not well known is not a big concern. Commissioner Yeh liked the idea of the assessment tool and understands how people might think Commissioner Farr, Commissioner Pishioneri and herself could go and get information, but it is not realistic. We could talk to colleagues, but beyond that, it is not reasonable with our time schedules. That process also might not get us the best information because we want people to be honest and say exactly how they feel about our relationship. Relationship building is important because it is like stocking up credits for when something goes bad. If you do not already have a good relationship when things are good, when things go bad, you do not have trust to fall back on. Hiring a consultant is good because staff already have enough to do. Commissioner Farr said there are many things we assess, beyond what goes down the pipe. For instance, we have a policy that helps smaller houses and helps to increase our housing supply. As we hear about housing through strategic planning, it is the number one issue for virtually everybody in our jurisdictions. Every time we do a survey it supersedes public safety because it is public safety, every time it supersedes health and human services, because it is health and human services. Anything done as a Commission should highlight, we were a part of it. The jurisdiction under Commissioner Yeh has given $20 million to provide housing to people, which makes it easier for the rest of us to send our kids to school and access the services we need. Commissioner Ruffier said these outcomes are in support of the four pillars of our strategic plan and one of those is ensuring organizational capacity to effectively support strategic priorities. We should think about an outcome for that, that is more explicitly measurable than just our budget process. Past conversations talk about limitations on staff and resources to accomplish projects, yet the only place we discuss that is during the budget process, where we are responding to proposals from staff. Those proposals can be influenced by city politics for both cities with regard to the amount of staff that can be requested and the increases in resources that can be requested. Perhaps if the Commission took a more explicit view such as, is the organizational capacity to support our strategic initiatives sufficient? Then we can give Mr. Stouder and Mr. Breitenstein backing with regards to their request for additional staffing. Mr. Stouder said we have enough direction now to move forward and bring the information to the Commission in January. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 9 of 14 WPCF RENAMING – HISTORY AND NEXT STEPS Loralyn Spiro, Lead Communications Coordinator and April Miller, Communications Coordinator for the City of Springfield provided a follow up on the renaming exploratory work discussed at the October meeting. Ms. Miller said earlier this year, the Commission asked staff to provide an outline for exploratory work for a possible renaming of the Water Pollution Control Facility. This came after considering the 2019/2020 market research results that indicated Community awareness of the MWMC by name is low, at an average of 17.5%. After considering results from the market research and information provided by the communications team, the Commission requested that staff explore renaming the Water Pollution Control Facility, also known as the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. This exploratory work is part of a longer-term strategy to increase awareness and name recognition of the MWMC, and the mission within the Community. The communications team conducted a staff survey, focus group, and social media polling of the Community, then presented those results during the October meeting. The recommendation from the exploratory work was a new name for the Water Pollution Control Facility, “Eugene Springfield Wastewater - Treatment Facility.” The word “facility” was selected based on survey results and consistency with other MWMC locations and infrastructure. Staff also recommended the deliberation of an overall name change to, “Eugene-Springfield Wastewater.” That name would allow seamless future rebranding and renaming possibilities for other facilities and programs such as:  Eugene-Springfield Wastewater – Biocycle Farm  Eugene-Springfield Wastewater – Renewable Natural Gas  Eugene-Springfield Wastewater – Biosolids Management Facility  Eugene-Springfield Wastewater – Recycled Water Feedback from the Commission in October on both renaming of the Water Pollution Control Facility and overall name of the Commission to “Eugene-Springfield Wastewater” was mixed. Ms. Spiro said with mixed responses from the Commission, staff reflected on history of the Public Information Program and the steps that led to the recommendations provided at the October meeting. Over the past eight years, the Commission and staff have been strategically building out the Public Information Program to support Key Outcome 5. Key Milestones  April 2013 – MWMC’s logo was discussed as part of a larger conversation on a public information update; subcommittee was formed to further discuss with Commissioners Keeler and Loud on the subcommittee.  April 2013 - Sub-Committee meeting – During the meeting, it was suggested that the topic of updating MWMC’s logo be considered in the context of branding.  June 2013 – Staff presented an overview of what a branding/logo change effort would require. The subject of strategic planning was brought up by the Commission, and it was noted that it had been several years since the MWMC held such a session.  July 2013 – Added .5 FTE to the program for a total of 1.0 FTE.  November 2013 - Work Session – Discussed the next steps to take in shaping the MWMC’s identity with customers, policymakers, and the community. Subcommittee reconvened to help draft proposal with staff. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 10 of 14  January 2014 – Staff presented the subcommittee’s proposal and recommendation for shaping MWMC’s identity for the future including conducting market research to the Commission.  November 2014 through March 2015 – Staff conducted market research and then presented the results, recommendations, and next steps to the Commission over several meetings.  May 2015 – Staff sent the Commission the newly updated MWMC Communications Plan based on the results of the market research.  September 2015 – Recommended the Commission hold a strategic planning session to discuss the creation of Mission, Vision and Values Statements for the MWMC. The Commission supported the recommendation.  December 2015 – Commission participated in a facilitated Strategic Planning Session.  September 2016 – Staff presented final Mission, Vision and Values Statements; Commission approved.  September 2017 – Staff presented an updated MWMC Communications Plan including the newly created social media and branding appendices.  July 2019 – MWMC’s Phase 2 Strategic Communication Planning discussed with the Commission and subsequently launched.  July 2019 – 1.0 FTE was added to the program for a total of 2.0 FTE.  February 2020 Goal Setting Work Session – Commission participated in a facilitated strategic planning work session to develop the MWMC’s Strategic Plan.  April 2020 Strategic Planning Work Session – Commission participated in a second facilitated strategic planning work session on the MWMC’s Strategic Plan.  May 2020 – Commission adopted MWMC’s Strategic Plan and Strategic Pillars. Three main areas emerged during the development of the strategic plan and strategic pillars, which included public awareness and understanding. Direction by the Commission specified the strategic plan should be a high-level policy document with strategic pillars that are short, direct, easy to remember, and tie back to the MWMC mission and value statements. Staff Recommendation  Table the renaming of the Water Pollution Control Facility until such time that an overall name change for the MWMC is determined/not determined  Discuss, deliberate, and provide further direction with respect to an overall name change for the MWMC to Eugene-Springfield Wastewater Ms. Miller said additional considerations for the recommendation, “Eugene-Springfield Wastewater” meets most of the elements from the MWMC communications plan and public outreach efforts. The name is simple, easy to remember and understand, states in plain language the who, what, and where, quickly identifies the area served and services provided, reduces confusion for community members, and is shorter and easier to implement for printing and branding purposes. The next steps for the renaming exploratory work are to capture the Commissions discussion and direction, provide follow up to all staff on the decision made by the Commission, and then act upon that direction as necessary. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Inge said one of the outcomes is to quickly identify the area and services being provided. Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County is the intergovernmental partnership, not just Eugene and Springfield. As a Lane County representative, having Lane County left off the name is a bit December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 11 of 14 hurtful but as time goes on the Lane County aspect of the Regional Wastewater Facility is going to be more significant. In regard to changing the name to get more recognition, we have been discussing this for eight years now. Is this just more important to us than it is anybody else? What our constituents consider important is the work we do, that there are no overflows, and that no major issues occur. We have built trust with our constituents. If an issue arises, we can go to them and say sorry we had an accident or problem, and this is what we have done to fix it going forward. We have that credibility now, and maybe it is time to stop chasing the name change and accept we are always going to be unknown. Commissioner Ruffier acknowledged the work by staff and thanked them for being diligent in response to a very challenging question from the Commission. There may be frustration with our inability to bring this to closure, but since it is an item close to people's feelings about the Commission and wastewater services, it will take time. When it is ready, it will be ready. At this point it would be good to follow the staff recommendation and put it on hold, then revisit it at some point in the future. Commissioner Pishioneri said Commissioner Inge summed it up nicely. Everybody here thinks highly of the facility and we all take a lot of pride in it. There is a reason why people do not know what MWMC means, because they do not care about it unless there is a problem. As long as we do a good job and continue to do the job, the citizens do not care what we call ourselves. Ms. Spiro and the communications team do a remarkable job on trying to pick up what people are putting down. It seems to be more important to us than anybody else and we have spent a lot of time and money on it, so wherever it lands is fine with me. Staff need to be freed up for other tasks. Commissioner Farr said he supports the staff recommendation. Does anyone remember what HACSA is or was? It is an acronym nobody knew and so we had to change it, because we continually asked the public for support of HACSA. We do not always ask people to support MWMC, so it is not as significant to have it as a household name. Homes for Good is a lot more understandable than HACSA. The name currently contains everything we do. The work MWMC does is exciting and when we talk about publicizing it, people should be as excited as I am. That may be an uphill battle, because it simply does not seem to be as exciting to other people, as it is to me. Mr. Stouder said he supports staff recommendation. It has been a long journey, but we have made some good progress. We now have a Mission, Vision and Values statement, a Strategic Plan, and two rounds of market research that engaged awareness in the Community. This is an appropriate time to pause, and as we move forward, continually assess and take a look at where we are headed. The awareness of who we are and what do is low when looking at the market research. The trust amongst people with respect to us, is therefore very low because of that. Pending major changes on where we are heading on the current permit, staff should be able to navigate these challenges without issue. The regulatory arena is constantly changing however, and there may come a time where staff is required to ask community members to change their behaviors and provide additional money to the MWMC in the form of increased rates. At this time, there will be comments from the public wondering who we are. If the MWMC has to ask people to use different personal care products at home for example because of a new regulatory requirement, having that trust and understanding of who we are and what we do will be good. Commissioner Yeh said she is comfortable with the staff recommendation. We have a responsibility to be transparent with the Community and ensure they know what we are doing, why we are doing it, and December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 12 of 14 why they should care. Our team does the best with the resources they have, and in the future if this change helps communication with the community, I’m on board. Like Commissioner Inge said, how do we let people know we service more than Eugene and Springfield, but not Florence, OR. If we complete an assessment and talk to our partners, we can ask if the name is confusing or if it make sense to them. Commissioner Meyer said he supports the staff recommendation and likes the name, “Clean Water Partnership.” Commissioner Keeler said this has been a long haul. As a Commissioner who has been personally more involved in the name change, it has been frustrating at times. Eight years is a long time, but we are trying to solve a problem. That is why it never goes away and never will, until we figure out exactly how to address this issue. We talk a lot about what a good story we have to tell, but if we do not have an identity associated with that story, it will not be internalized or understood by the community. Our goals and successes will increase as we are able to solve this problem. My favorite slide in the presentation is the additional considerations because those five bullet points about simple, easy, and reducing confusion hit the mark. When we decide to pick this up again, we will want to keep that front and center. Satisfying everyone with the new branding and identity will likely not happen, but we only have one chance to do it right. It is good to get these discussions and chartering documents out of the way, but to do it again because we picked the wrong name is not an option. Commissioner Inge said he really appreciated the work the communications team put into this process. We need to continue that effort and also educate people on what we do. What we call ourselves is going to be less significant to the majority of people. When discussing a problem, as it relates to our name, the public only care if the problem is serious like a sanitary sewer overflow. Even with the surveys and education over the last eight years, we still do not come to the forefront of people's minds. It is a good problem to not be known, because we already do many great things. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioner Pishioneri requested the Commission to look at the 7:30am MWMC meeting start time, because a later start time is convenient for most people. Although convenient for a few Commissioners, many staff are here earlier than their normal shift hours. Commissioner Inge said we discussed this a few years ago and had the same conversation about the start time. The majority still wanted it to be at 7:30am. Commissioner Inge’s preference is to continue with 7:30am. Commissioner Pishioneri said he did recall that conversation, but it occurred pre-COVID. What changed is, people are not currently working in their offices like they did before. Commissioner Farr said let's not consider a later meeting time, let's consider an earlier meeting time. It is ideal to be done by 8:00am and get on with my regular day's work. Commissioner Farr asked Mr. Stouder about ARPA money. Different jurisdictions are distributing it right now, and it ties to the American Recovery Plan Federal money. This large amount of money is being spent right now, and also distributed in May. The City of Eugene and Lane County are spending money on housing, and Lane County is putting $17 million into the jail on technology for inmates. Are you getting any ARPA money? Is there any American Recovery Act money coming to MWMC? Do we need to find ways to help you recover revenues lost or expenses that increased, from COVID-19? You do not have to answer that right now, but it is something to think about. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 13 of 14 Commissioner Farr discussed MWMC’s effort to provide housing and reduce the cost of low-income housing, called tiny housing. With past discussions on simplifying the process for people applying for money often left on the table, we do have projects coming up specific to housing in Springfield and Eugene. Just a heads up to think about that too. Commissioner Ruffier followed up on Commissioner Farr’s discussion and said in regard to funding of the infrastructure bill recently passed, there is money designated for wastewater treatment programs. We could certainly use that to accelerate our CMOM program. A note or memo to the Commission at some point regarding the potential availability of those funds for some of our program areas, would be ideal. Mr. Stouder said the team can look into that. Mr. Miller mentioned there is no direct ARPA infrastructure funding paths that he knows of. There is money in that package for the SRF that we have used in the past. BUSINESS FROM GENERAL MANAGER Mr. Stouder said staff met with DEQ two weeks ago and received clarity on permit timing and issues related to what is included in the permit. After subsequent emails with DEQ, staff expects the applicant review draft around the first week of January. Staff might have a permit update for the Commission at the January MWMC meeting, and may have just received the applicant review draft by that time. Staff will not have time to get that information into packet, but information on the permit process can be discussed. By the February meeting, public comment might be taking place if DEQ holds to their schedule. There have been several successful injections into the RNG pipeline. This project is in the startup phase and is expected to inject full time by next month. This success is contributed to the leadership of Mr. Van Eeckhout and assistance from the Eugene staff. s The Commission will receive a series of MWMC Zoom meeting invites from Ms. Brennan. Staff hope to get back in person, but that will not happen by the January meeting. Discussions with the Springfield City Manager will disclose if and when the meetings can occur in person. Regardless if the meetings are virtual or in-person, there will always be a virtual invite component because of the new state requirement. Staff signed on to the Urban Waters and Wildlife Partnership adoption agreement. This furthers the MWMC’s path for clean water and partner collaboration with respect to the strategic plan listed in Key Outcome 1. There are also opportunities for enhancing wetlands and preserving habitat for pollinators. The communications team put together NACWA nominations for the environmental achievement awards. The MWMC won three awards for the partnership video produced by the communications team, the CMOM video submitted by the City of Springfield, and an individual award to Mr. Miller for his environmental achievements. December 10th, 2022 MWMC Minutes Page 14 of 14 BUSINESS FROM WASTEWATER DIRECTOR Mr. Watkins filled in for Mr. Breitenstein and said Mr. Breitenstein plans to stay on the Eugene crew as a temporary employee though March, while Eugene moves through the hiring process. Trail Smith has accepted the position for the Pretreatment Supervisor. In regard to minimizing sanitary sewer overflows, staff have completed installation of a permanent generator at a Eugene pump station. This station has experienced many power outages and is difficult to access during winter storms, down trees, and icy roads. The new generator is fueled by natural gas, so there are no concerns of sending fuel trucks to refuel. Mark Van Eeckhout thanked the City of Eugene Operations department for their help in the RNG startup, and said it is exciting to finally be injecting gas. Commissioner Farr requested a tour of the plant to see the meter reading. Commissioner Yeh adjourned the meeting at 9:10am ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 6, 2022 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Matt Stouder, Executive Officer Dave Breitenstein, Wastewater Division Director Katherine Bishop, Environmental Services Program Manager SUBJECT: FY 2022-23 Budget Kick Off: Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators ACTION REQUESTED: Provide comments and input to staff regarding the purpose statement, key outcomes, and performance indicators ISSUE At the January 14, 2022 meeting, staff will provide a presentation to include key dates for the FY 2022-23 budget development and adoption process, including an overview of updated key outcomes and performance indicators that staff and the Commission have developed over the past year. The Commission will be requested to confirm or modify the purpose statement, key outcomes and performance indicators, and provide staff with input on the indicators and measures that should be reported in the FY 2022-23 Budget. DISCUSSION Each year, Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) staff begins the annual budget process for the RWP by reviewing the work plan performance and projections. Staff also reports performance relative to the Commission’s key outcomes and performance indicators that are included in the current FY 2021-22 Budget. The January 14 meeting provides an opportunity for an annual review of the MWMC purpose statement. The proposed FY 2022-23 key outcomes and indicators include existing and new indicators that are incorporated in the proposed Budget, with revisions and adjusted performance indicators to be discussed at the meeting. Additionally, components of the MWMC Strategic Plan have been incorporated. ACTION REQUESTED Provide input to staff regarding the purpose statement, key outcomes, and performance indicators. ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators AGENDA ITEM IV Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview Page 1 of 9 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM OVERVIEW The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was formed by Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County through an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) in 1977 to provide wastewater collection and treatment services for the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The seven-member Commission is composed of members appointed by the City Councils of Eugene (3 representatives), Springfield (2 representatives) and the Lane County Board of Commissioners (2 representatives). Since its inception, the Commission, in accordance with the IGA, has been responsible for oversight of the Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) including: construction, maintenance, and operation of the regional sewerage facilities; adoption of financing plans; adoption of budgets, user fees and connection fees; adoption of minimum standards for industrial pretreatment and local sewage collection systems; and recommendations for the expansion of regional facilities to meet future community growth. Staffing and services have been provided in various ways over the 45 years of MWMC’s existence. Since 1983, the Commission has contracted with the Cities of Springfield and Eugene for all staffing and services necessary to maintain and support the RWP. Lane County’s partnership has involved participation on the Commission and support for customers that are served by the MWMC in the Santa Clara unincorporated area. Regional Wastewater Program Purpose and Key Outcomes The purpose of the RWP is to protect public health and safety and the environment by providing high quality wastewater management services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The MWMC and the regional partners are committed to providing these services in a manner that will achieve, sustain, and promote balance between community, environmental, and economic needs while meeting customer service expectations. Since the mid-1990s, the Commission and RWP staff have worked together to identify key outcome areas within which to focus annual work plan and budget priorities. The FY 22-23 RWP work plans and budget reflect a focus on the following key outcomes or goals. In carrying out the daily activities of managing the regional wastewater system, we will strive to achieve and maintain: 1. Achieve and Maintain high environmental standards; 2. Fiscal management that is effective and efficient; 3. A successful intergovernmental partnership; 4. Maximum reliability and useful life of regional assets and infrastructure; 5. Public awareness and understanding of MWMC, the regional wastewater system, and MWMC’s objectives of maintaining water quality and a sustainable environment. The Commission believes that these outcomes, if achieved in the long term, will demonstrate success of the RWP in carrying out its purpose. In order to help determine whether we are successful, indicators of performance and targets have been identified for each key outcome. Tracking performance relative to identified targets over time assists in managing the RWP to achieve desired results. The following indicators and performance targets provide an important framework for the development of the FY 22-23 RWP Operating Budget, Capital Improvements Program, and associated work plans. Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Outcome 1: Achieve and maintain high environmental standards. Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  Average removal efficiency of carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) (permit limit 85%) 97% 97% 95%  High quality biosolids (pollutant concentrations less than 50% of EPA exceptional quality criteria) Arsenic 21% Cadmium 12% Copper 29% Lead 8% Mercury 5% Nickel 5% Selenium 12% Zinc 29% Arsenic 25% Cadmium 15% Copper 30% Lead 10% Mercury 10% Nickel 10% Selenium 15% Zinc 30% Arsenic <50% Cadmium <50% Copper <50% Lead <50% Mercury <50% Nickel <50% Selenium <50% Zinc <50%  ISO14001 Environmental Management System – Continual Improvement of Environmental Performance All objectives met and no major nonconformaties All objectives met and no major nonconformaties Reduce waste gas flaring; Produce gas for use as renewable fuel; Install new laboratory information management system  NPDES Permit Renewal --- Complete toxics monitoring; Coordinate renewal process with DEQ Prepare updates to plans (Groundwater, Biosolids, Recycled Water, WQ Trading, etc.); Begin implementation of new permit requirements  Climate Action Planning --- Complete FY 2019-20 GHG Inventory Explore development of a Climate Action Statement/Policy Page 2 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Outcome 1: Achieve and maintain high environmental standards (continued) Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  Urban Waters & Wildlife Partnership --- Explore Partnership Identify MWMC opportunities  Resource Recovery --- Construct RNG system; Begin design of UV Disinfection for Recycled Water Full scale RNG production; Construction of Class A Disinfection Facilities Outcome 2: Achieve and maintain fiscal management that is effective and efficient. Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  Annual budget and rates align with the MWMC Financial Plan Policies met Policies met Policies met  Annual audited financial statements Clean audit Clean audit Clean audit  Uninsured bond rating AA AA AA  Reserves funded at target levels Yes Yes Yes  Maintain Sound Financial Practices per the MWMC Financial Plan Yes Yes Yes  Ensure rates and rate changes are planned, moderate and incremental to avoid rate hikes 0% 3.5% ≤ 4.0%  Debt-to-Equity Ratio (Total debt divided by total equity) 0.11 ≤ 0.30 0.30 Page 3 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Outcome 3: Achieve and maintain a successful intergovernmental partnership. Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  NPDES Permit Renewal Prepared plans and associated work with permit application Submit required information; Review applicant draft; Permit issued Permit implementation  Implement and adopt revised local limits and an updated MWMC pretreatment model ordinance within the pretreatment program Conducted system sampling; revised limits and updated model ordinance to reflect current CFRs Preliminary approval from DEQ; Initiate public notice Adopt local ordinances in Eugene and Springfield; consistent across the service area  Partnership Assessment Tool --- Scope assessment tool options; present concepts/options for Commission consideration Begin implementation and data collection  Interagency coordination regarding Capacity Management Operations and Maintenance (CMOM) Program CMOM Program updated and presented to the Commission Quarterly meetings between Eugene and Springfield; Annual update to the Commission Quarterly meetings between Eugene and Springfield; Annual update to the Commission  Community presentations regarding MWMC partnership, services and outcomes delivered jointly 2 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area 4 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area 4 community presentations delivered by staff to groups in the service area Page 4 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Outcome 4: Maximize reliability and useful life of regional assets and infrastructure. Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  Preventive maintenance completed on time (best practices benchmark is 90%) 92% 94% 90%  Preventive maintenance to corrective maintenance ratio (benchmark 4:1-6:1) 5.6:1 5:1 5:1  Emergency maintenance required (best practices benchmark is less than 2% of labor hours) 2% 1% < 2%  Asset management (AM) processes and practices review and development Annual update to AM plan completed --- Bi-Annual update to AM plan; Improve methodology to determine asset remaining life  MWMC Resiliency Plan Presented final plan to the Commission Plan implementation Continue plan implementation Pump Station to conveyance pipe transition kits  Strategic Projects Complete buried pipe condition assessment Develop assessment plan Begin assessment of highest priority pipes Page 5 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Outcome 5: Achieve and maintain public awareness and understanding of MWMC, the regional wastewater system, and MWMC’s objectives of maintaining water quality and a sustainable environment. Indicators: Performance: FY 20-21 Actual FY 21-22 Estimated Actual FY 22-23 Target  Communications Plan Implemented 2021 Communications Plan Continue implementation of 2021 Plan Update plan as needed based on market trends  Promote MWMC social media channels and website Grew Facebook followers to 639, Twitter to 174 and Instagram to 246; no website analytics available Implement strategies to grow Facebook followers to 1,000, Twitter to 250 and Instagram to 650; no website analytic targets set Implement strategies to grow Facebook followers to 1,200, Twitter to 300 and Instagram to 850 and website visitors to 5,000 with 14,000 pageviews and a bounce rate of 70%  Create and distribute MWMC e-newsletters Distributed monthly and increased distribution to 237 subscribers; no analytic targets set Distribute monthly and increase distribution to 550 subscribers; no analytic targets set Distribute monthly and increase distribution to 700 subscribers with an open rate of 38% and a click-through rate of 10%  Pollution prevention campaigns 2 campaigns, 3 sponsorships; reaching ≤ 40% of residents in the service area due to COVID-19 2 campaigns, 4 sponsorships; reaching 40% of residents in the service area 2 campaigns, 4 sponsorships; reaching 40% of residents in the service area  Provide tours of the MWMC Facilities Due to COVID-19, only one tour provided; recorded and shared via 4J Library Due to COVID-19, limited number of tours provided Provide tours for greater than 1,000 people  Clean Water University Reached ≤ 25% of 5th Graders in the service area due to COVID-19 Reach 25% of 5th Graders in the service area Reach > 25% of 5th Graders in the service area Page 6 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP Roles and Responsibilities In order to effectively oversee and manage the RWP, the partner agencies provide all staffing and services to the MWMC. The following sections describe the roles and responsibilities of each of the partner agencies, and how intergovernmental coordination occurs on behalf of the Commission. City of Eugene The City of Eugene supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, provision of operation and maintenance services, and active participation on interagency project teams and committees. Three of the seven MWMC members represent Eugene – two citizens and one City Councilor. Pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), the Eugene Wastewater Division operates and maintains the Regional Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF), the Biosolids Management Facility (BMF) and associated residuals and reclaimed water activities, along with regional wastewater pumping stations and transmission sewers. In support of the RWP, the Division also provides technical services for wastewater treatment; management of equipment replacement and infrastructure rehabilitation; biosolids treatment and recycling; industrial source control (in conjunction with Springfield staff); and regional laboratory services for wastewater and water quality analyses. These services are provided under contract with the MWMC through the regional funding of 79.36 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees. City of Springfield The City of Springfield supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, provision of MWMC administration services, and active coordination of and participation on interagency project teams and committees. Two MWMC members represent Springfield – one citizen and one City Councilor. Pursuant to the IGA, the Springfield Development and Public Works Department, provides staff to serve as the MWMC Executive Officer / General Manager, respectively. The Environmental Services Division and Finance Department staff provide ongoing staff support to the Commission and administration of the RWP in the following areas: legal and risk management services; financial management and accounting; coordination and management of public policy; regulatory and permit compliance issues; coordination between the Commission and the governing bodies; long-range capital project planning, design, and construction management; coordination of public information, education, and citizen involvement programs; and coordination and development of regional budgets, rate proposals, and revenue projections. Springfield staff also provides local implementation of the Industrial Pretreatment Program, as well as billing coordination and customer service. These services are provided under contract with the MWMC through the regional funding of 16.85 FTE of Development and Public Works Department staff and .88 FTE of Finance Department staff, and .03 FTE of City Manager’s Office for a total 17.76 FTE as reflected in the FY 22-23 Budget. Lane County Lane County supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, including two MWMC members that represent Lane County – one citizen and one County Commissioner. Lane County’s partnership initailly included providing support to manage the proceeds and repayment of the RWP general obligation bonds to finance the local share of the RWP facilities construction. These bonds were paid in full in 2002. The County, while not presently providing sewerage, has the authority under its charter to do so. The Urban Growth Boundary includes the two Cities (urban lands) and certain unincorporated areas surrounding the Cities which lies Page 7 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP entirely within the County. Federal funding policy requires sewage treatment and disposal within the Urban Growth Boundary to be provided on a unified, metropolitan basis. Interagency Coordination The effectiveness of the MWMC and the RWP depends on extensive coordination, especially between Springfield and Eugene staff, who provide ongoing program support. This coordination occurs in several ways. The Springfield MWMC Executive Officer / MWMC General Manager, together with the Eugene Wastewater Division Director coordinate regularly to ensure adequate communication and consistent implementation of policies and practices as appropriate. The Eugene and Springfield Industrial Pretreatment Program supervisors and staff meet regularly to ensure consistent implementation of the Model Industrial Pretreatment Ordinance. In addition, interagency project teams provide input on and coordination of ongoing MWMC administration issues and ad hoc project needs. Exhibit 1 on the following page reflects the interagency coordination structure supporting the RWP. Special project teams are typically formed to manage large projects such as design and construction of new facilities. These interagency staff teams are formulated to provide appropriate expertise, operational knowledge, project management, and intergovernmental representation. Relationship to Eugene and Springfield Local Sewer Programs The RWP addresses only part of the overall wastewater collection and treatment facilities that serve the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The Cities of Eugene and Springfield both maintain sewer programs that provide for construction and maintenance of local collection systems and pump stations, which discharge to the regional system. Sewer user fees collected by the two Cities include both local and RWP rate components. Page 8 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP EXHIBIT 1 Page 9 of 9 Attachment 1 - Draft RWP Overview, Key Outcomes and Performance Indicators ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 6, 2022 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Todd Miller, Environmental Services Supervisor Bryan Robinson, Environmental Management Analyst SUBJECT: Regulatory Update – NPDES Permit Renewal Status ACTION REQUESTED: Informational and Discussion ISSUE Regional wastewater program staff is currently working with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to renew the MWMC’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The DEQ’s permit renewal schedule for the MWMC has been extended over the past six months. Recently, the DEQ has confirmed its intention to issue the new MWMC NPDES permit in early 2022. At the January 14, 2022 MWMC meeting, staff will provide an update related to permit issuance, including anticipated permit conditions and anticipated timelines associated with the new permit. BACKGROUND The MWMC’s existing, but expired, NPDES permit is on administrative extension and this permit renewal incorporates nearly 20 years of new data and regulatory updates. Staff presented the Commission with regular updates in 2020 and 2021 as progress was made towards permit renewal. Previous updates covered NPDES permitting structure and the DEQ’s permitting program, discussions on the anticipated new permit conditions that offer new challenges for the MWMC, (including thermal load mitigation requirements, the mercury minimization plan, and toxics monitoring), and updating the MWMC biosolids, groundwater, and recycled water plans. DISCUSSION At the time of the last Commission update on July 9, 2021, staff anticipated receiving the new MWMC NPDES prior to the end of 2021. However, due to reorganization of DEQ staff working on the MWMC permit, DEQ extended the process into 2022. Regional wastewater program staff remains in routine communication with the DEQ permit renewal team and took part in virtual meetings with the DEQ permit renewal team this past November and December. AGENDA ITEM V Memo: Regulatory Update – NPDES Permit Renewal Status January 6, 2022 Page 2 of 2 Key milestones completed in the MWMC’s permit renewal process include:  MWMC submitted updates to the 2006 NPDES permit application  MWMC submitted an update of the 2006 Biosolids Management Plan  MWMC submitted an update of the 2007 Recycled Water Use Plan (Class D)  MWMC and DEQ review of the 2021 toxics Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) gap analysis  DEQ completed an onsite regulatory inspection of the wastewater treatment plant  MWMC submitted a proposed Water Quality Trading Plan  DEQ presentation of thermal load limits and proposed compliance schedule and MWMC counter- response to achievable compliance schedule  MWMC submitted and received preliminary approval of both a Local Limits Evaluation and revised Model Sewer Use/Pretreatment Ordinance Pending further information from DEQ, staff anticipates the MWMC’s draft NPDES permit (“Applicant Review Draft”) will be issued in late January or February 2022. At the January 14, 2022 Commission meeting, staff will present further details and discussion on the NPDES permit renewal process and pending compliance requirements. ACTION REQUESTED This item is informational. No action is requested; Commission feedback is welcome. ATTACHMENTS None ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 6, 2022 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Barry Mays, Design and Construction Coordinator SUBJECT: Aeration Improvements Update - P80100 ACTION REQUESTED: Informational and Discussion ISSUE This memo provides an update regarding alternatives and recommendations from studying the MWMC’s existing aeration systems (pictured below), which are part of the secondary treatment process. BACKGROUND As set forth in the 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan, aeration basin improvements were planned to be completed in two phases. The first phase of work was construction in 2009, which upgraded the four easterly basins (out of the eight existing basins). The construction included new step feed equipment and piping, installation of new anoxic zones, new fine bubble diffusers, new effluent flow control gates and system control upgrades. The 2009 improvements provided better hydraulics and more operational flexibility. The second phase began with the execution of a consultant contract on April 14, 2020 with Brown and Caldwell for the evaluation of the existing aeration systems and to provide consultant recommendations to maintain or improve the systems. It is anticipated that after optimizing and improving the current system, there will be a final phase of the Aeration Basins Improvements to upgrade the westerly four aeration basins. This will be necessary to meet future dissolved oxygen demands associated with requirements anticipated in the 2022 NPDES permit renewal, as well as community growth. Brown and Caldwell have provided the project team with technical memos such as: Process Blower Alternatives Evaluation (September 9, 2021), and Rehabilitation and Modernization of Existing Systems (June 30, 2021). Some of the consultant technical memos discuss the existing conditions of the secondary aeration system and propose several alternatives to maintain and/or improve the related systems. The key components of the current aeration system include one energy efficient high-speed blower, and five conventional blowers (1983 – three operational, two decommissioned). This equipment is currently functioning, however there is ancillary equipment required to maintain functionality that needs work and recommended areas for improvement in the blowers and treatment process. AGENDA ITEM VI Memo: Aeration Improvements Update - P80100 January 6, 2022 Page 2 of 3 Some of the near-term work needed (condition-based rehab) includes replacing aging piping (air and W2), replacing the communications technology, replacement of channel mixing air piping with pulsed air mixing, and addition of HVAC equipment to the blower room. Other recommendations include substation upgrades to replace aging equipment at Transformer Unit 3 (TU-3), conversion of the TU-4 to a double ended feed, and 480V substation to feed a proposed new feed turbo blower to replace the aging centrifugal blowers for efficiency. Also, it is anticipated that growth in loading will require adding additional treatment process, but these upgrades could be deferred into the future. As discussed at the MWMC February 12, 2021 meeting, the Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) has utilized the aeration system in a manner that has been very energy efficient in comparison to others within the wastewater industry. However, with the aging of equipment beyond the normal life expectancy, some equipment needs to be replaced or upgraded in the upcoming years as discussed in the alternatives below. DISCUSSION Brown and Caldwell recommendations and business case evaluations have been presented to the project team in technical memos. Details of the MWMC alternatives including consultant cost estimating will be presented at the January 14, 2022 meeting, along with a discussion on budget planning. All alternatives listed below include the buildout of a third aeration train (six of eight existing basins) in the next 12-15 years (system startup by 2032 or later). The following alternatives for consideration include:  Alternative 1  Complete condition-based rehab projects per technical memo dated June 30, 2021 “Rehabilitation and Modernization of Existing Systems” recommends the repair or replacement of the following: Various air and W2 water piping replacement, replacement of outdated communication systems and corresponding actuators, replacement of course air mixing system with a pulsed air system and replacement of HVAC system in blower room in the 2022 – 2024 timeframe.  Additional recommendations include: Replacement of substation TU-3 and TU-4, installation of a second turbo blower and various electrical systems upgrades in the 2022 – 2024 timeframe.  Plan for the upgrade of two additional aeration basins to comprise a third treatment process in the 2032 – 2035 timeframe  Alternative 2  Complete condition-based rehab projects as noted in Alternative 1 in the 2022-2024 timeframe  Continue to operate with the existing turbo and centrifugal blowers (no new turbo blower delayed until 2035). This would require motor replacement and rebuild of existing blowers to extend its life. Construction to be completed in the 2022 – 2024 timeframe.  Plan for the upgrade of two additional aeration basins to comprise a third treatment process, including replacement of substation TU-3 and TU-4, installation of a second turbo blower and various electrical systems upgrades by 2035. Memo: Aeration Improvements Update - P80100 January 6, 2022 Page 3 of 3  Alternative 3  Complete condition-based rehab projects as noted in Alternative 1 in the 2022-2024 timeframe.  Complete substation upgrades and the upgrade to turbo blowers before 2030. By 2035, upgrade to a third treatment process. Additional details and cost estimating will be presented at the January 14, 2022 meeting. ACTION REQUESTED Informational and Discussion ATTACHMENTS None ______________________________________________________________________________ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 6, 2022 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: James McClendon, Eugene WW Finance and Administrative Manager SUBJECT: Follow-up to FY20 GHG Emissions Inventory Report ACTION REQUESTED: Information and Discussion ISSUE At the MWMC meeting on September 10, 2021, the Commission expressed interest in staff returning at a future meeting for further conversation on what opportunities may provide the most impact for further reductions to Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions arising from the Regional Wastewater Program. In order to facilitate an effective conversation on future opportunities that may exist for GHG reduction, staff plans to present the Commission with an overview of efforts that have been made to date to reduce GHG emissions. BACKGROUND The FY20 GHG Emissions Inventory Report was presented to the Commission at the September 2021 meeting as a continuation of the effort to track GHG emissions from Capital and O&M activity at MWMC facilities. Including the FY20 report, there have been six (6) GHG emissions inventories conducted since 2010, providing a dataset of GHG emissions over roughly the past ten years. The first presentation of a GHG emissions inventory to the Commission occurred in 2012, at which time both the 2010 and 2012 inventory reports were presented. Since that time, emissions reports have been presented to the Commission every other year (biennially) specific to data gathered from the prior fiscal year. For instance, the FY20 emissions report was presented in September 2021. DISCUSSION Significant progress has been made in the effort to reduce GHG emissions at MWMC facilities over the years due to a combination of efforts. Total electricity consumption, for example, has been reduced by nearly 20% due to many contributing activities, including the following: - Replaced multi-stage centrifugal blower with one turbo blower - Replaced coarse aeration basin diffusers with fine bubble diffusers (newer technology) AGENDA ITEM VII Memo: Follow-up to FY20 GHG Emissions Inventory Report January 6, 2022 Page 2 of 2 - Replaced/installed high-efficiency motors wherever possible - Replaced/installed variable frequency drives (VFDs) wherever suitable - Replaced gas compressor mixing system with mechanical mixers on the digesters - Increased air-compressor efficiency through control/management optimization - Installed passive grit collection system - Optimized the odorous air control system The net result of these actions is that annual electricity usage of 19.5 MWh in FY2010 has been reduced to roughly 15.6 MWh in FY2020. In each reporting year, the treatment plant and pump stations consume the most electricity, and results show they are consuming less electricity now than in the past. The majority of biogenic (natural) emissions occur at the treatment plant and biosolids facility, with the BMF producing the most biogenic emissions through the sludge lagoons, biosolids drying process, and applied biosolids on fields. The most potent biogenic emissions are nitrous oxide (N2o) and methane (CH4) in addition to carbon dioxide (CO2). Other progress in the GHG emissions reduction effort have included activities to reduce solid waste, conserve natural resources, and reduce hazardous materials exposure. Some of those activities contributing to emissions reduction are listed here: - Implemented the use of recycled water at biosolids facility and biocycle farm - Implemented the use of bio-diesel in fleet vehicles - Implemented paper saving techniques and migrated to electronic records wherever possible - Implemented a ‘zero waste’ policy for organizational events and meetings - Implemented a recycling, composting, and solid waste reduction program - Replaced incandescent/halogen lighting with LED lighting, both indoors and outdoors - Replaced two pesticides with less toxic products - Installed mowing strips, hand weeding, and burning/scraping to reduce pesticide use - Slightly reduced the consumption of process chemicals due to collection system rehabilitations that have reduced inflow and infiltration (I&I) Reducing GHG emissions is important work that requires concerted long-term effort. While progress has been made to reduce emissions at MWMC facilities over the years, further progress will present considerable challenges which will be highlighted for commission discussion during the presentation. ACTION REQUESTED This memo is provided for information and discussion. ATTACHMENTS None.