HomeMy WebLinkAboutMWMC Agenda Packet
THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE
www.mwmcpartners.org
MWMC MEETING AGENDA
Friday, February 11th, 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: 849 1468 7577; Passcode: 024254
7:30 – 7:35 I. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Farr, Commissioner Inge, Commissioner Keeler Commissioner
Meyer, Commissioner Pishioneri, Commissioner Ruffier, Commissioner Yeh
7:35 – 7:40 II. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. MWMC 01/14/22 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 February 10th, 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 – 8:05 IV. FY2020-21 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS…………Valerie Warner
Action Requested: Approve, by motion
8:05 – 8:45 V. FY2022-23 REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM CAPITAL BUDGET & 5-YEAR PLAN…
……………………………………………Troy McAllister, Michelle Miranda & Greg Watkins
Action Requested: Informational and Discussion
8:45 – 9:00 VI. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, & WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
9:00 – 9:30 VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION – NPDES PERMIT ……………………..………...……Brian Millington
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission will hold an executive session at
9:00 a.m. The session is for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel about
information or records exempt from public disclosure because they are subject to
attorney-client privilege. The executive session is being held pursuant to ORS
192.660(2)(f). Note: Memos presented in Executive Session are confidential.
9:30 VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MWMC MEETING MINUTES
Friday, January 14, 2022, at 7:30 a.m.
The MWMC Meeting was held remotely via computer, phone, and in-person.
Meeting was video recorded.
Commissioner Yeh opened the meeting at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken by Josi Rodriguez.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present Remotely: Pat Farr, Bill Inge, Doug Keeler, Walt Meyer, Peter Ruffier, Jennifer Yeh
Commissioner Absent: Joe Pishioneri
Staff Present Remotely: Lou Allocco, Katherine Bishop, Dave Breitenstein, Jon Diller, Carrie Holmes, Shawn
Krueger, Barry Mays, Troy McAllister, James McClendon, April Miller, Todd Miller, Michelle Miranda,
Brooke Mossefin, Bryan Robinson, Josi Rodriguez, Loralyn Spiro, Matt Stouder, Mark Van Eeckhout,
Valerie Warner, Greg Watkins
Guests Present Remotely: Josh Johnson (Senior Engineer at Brown and Caldwell)
Legal Counsel Present Remotely: Brian Millington (Thorp, Purdy, Jewett, Urness, & Wilkinson, PC)
CONSENT CALENDAR
a. MWMC 12/10/21 Minutes
MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER RUFFIER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MEYER
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 6/0, WITH
COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI EXCUSED
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
FY 2022-23 BUDGET KICK OFF: KEY OUTCOMES & PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Matt Stouder - Executive Officer, Dave Breitenstein - Wastewater Division Director, Katherine Bishop -
Environmental Services Program Manager, Loralyn Spiro - Lead Communications Coordinator, and Greg
Watkins - Maintenance Manager, presented key dates for the FY2022-23 budget development and
adoption process, including an overview of updated key outcomes and performance indicators that staff
and the Commission developed over the past year.
AGENDA ITEM IIa
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 2 of 17
MWMC FY2022-23 Budget and Rate Decision Schedule
January 14 - Budget Kick-Off: Key Outcomes and Performance Measures
February 11 - Draft Capital Program
March 11 - FY 2022-23 Presentation and Discussion
o Operating Budget, Revenues and Reserves, Rate Scenarios
April 8 - Budget and User Rate Public Hearings and Options to Adopt
Budget and Rate Highlights for FY2021-22
Ms. Bishop said the budget and rate highlights consisted of a 3.5% rate change, close to target revenues,
below budget expenditures, maintaining reserve balances, and a permit renewal that staff is actively
engaged in. System development charges (SDC) during the first year did remain level in terms of an
inflationary adjustment and were trued up in the current fiscal year, resulting in a combined increase of
$34.77 for a single family residential. Through November, staff are close to year-to-date targets for
revenue and are successfully maintaining reserves at the appropriate levels. The permit renewal process
will bring more work to the financial side for certain tasks. This includes the development of a facilities
masterplan, an update of the SDC methodology, an update to SDC charges, communication to the
Home Builder’s Association, stakeholders, and other interested parties to seek support for the items.
Work Plan and Budget for FY2022-23
Mr. Stouder presented a high-level summary driven by the Key Outcomes. Staff revised the material so
that performance indicators associated with the outcomes align closer to Key Outcomes 1-4 and made
indicators associated with the outcomes tie closer to the mission, vision, and value statement on Key
Outcome 5.
Major Issues and Challenges Ahead, FY2022-23
Budget and work programs will be driven by:
Regulatory/Permit requirements
o Permit renewal, Temperature / Monitoring / PFAS / Toxics
Capital program requirements
o Facilities Plan Update, Active / Planned capital improvements, Resiliency Plan implementation
Aging infrastructure / asset management
The MWMC is expecting the applicant review draft in the near future, and the permit in the first quarter
of this year. That information contains items to review in regard to temperature and new monitoring
requirements. The RNG, Administration Building Improvements, and Class A Disinfection are wrapping
up, the Aeration Basin Project and Resiliency Plan Implementation are beginning, and the Capital
program is successfully moving forward
Mr. Breitenstein explained the infrastructure of the MWMC facility is 40-years old and there are a large
number of equipment assets. Ongoing renewal of assets through equipment replacement and major
rehab are important to achieving this outcome of maximizing reliability and useful life of assets. An
example is the replacement of electrical transformers throughout the plant, which are 40 years old and
have a lifespan of 20-25 years.
Mr. Breitenstein and Mr. Stouder presented Key Outcome 1; Ms. Bishop presented Key Outcome 2
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 3 of 17
Key Outcomes Status and Work Plan
1. Environmental Standards
Performance of permit requirements - Staff plans to meet and exceed environmental standards.
In the past year ,12 billion gallons were treated with a goal to continue a high removal of
suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand. The permit requires the removal of 85%, and
staff intend to achieve more than 95%.
Biosolids Management – staff have high standards for biosolids quality and run a Class B
program. MWMC’s target for quality is half of the EPA allowable pollutants for exceptional quality
in terms of metals analysis. The team has been at 20% of that target.
Environmental Management System – has been ISO certified for more than 20 years now, and
each year staff sets annual objectives. The main objectives this year is to complete the
replacement of the laboratory information management system software. Next year staff will look
into improving the habitat for pollinators.
Climate Action Planning and Partnerships – the Urban Water Partnership is intended to support
one of the indicators and pillars in the strategic plan (foster an environment of partnerships). The
FY2019-20 GHG inventory is complete, with a current target of exploring development of a
climate action statement or policy.
Resource Recovery – staff intend to have the full-scale production online at the RNG facility and
Class A Disinfectant Facility in FY2022-23.
2. Financial Management
Achieving clean financial audits – audited financial statements will be presented at the February
11th MWMC meeting.
Maintaining a favorable bond rating – MWMC has maintained an AA uninsured bond rating,
which demonstrates strong credit worthiness.
Ensuring rates and rate changes are planned, moderate and incremental – staff will present to the
Commission at the March 11th MWMC on the rate component.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier said on the environmental standards, some targets are more action
oriented and do not include drivers for improvement or change. Under NPDES permit renewal, the
target is, “begin implementation” which is a low bar and implementation can be interpreted as anything.
Under Urban Waters and Wildlife Partnership, “identify MWMC opportunities” is vague and would
benefit from more clarification. The fiscal financial management piece on reserves funded at target
levels, the target is “yes”. While that implies funding reserves are at target levels, it does not address over
funding target levels. We should be aware of not growing our reserves too far beyond target levels,
without deliberate thought on how to use the additional money. Applying that money to rate offsets or
innovative projects is a possibility.
Mr. Stouder responded to the Outcome 1 piece. Included in the table, is what the Commission settled
on after discussion earlier in the year. The Urban Waters Wildlife Partnership will be evolving over time,
and it is appropriate to identify the opportunities for us in that. Once that happens, we can get more
specific. Partners are signing on with MOUs, and by June we might have more details on the
opportunities for MWMC. Throughout the year staff can update the Commission on what the targets
would look like.
Commissioner Meyer asked about resource recovery. Have we tested our dried biosolids to see how
close we are to making Class A product through a testing program, because of its destabilization of the
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 4 of 17
viruses in the lagoon and in the drying process? Mr. Breitenstein said yes, we occasionally have but not
under any regulatory requirement. Staff have completed testing and the majority of the time, the tests
met the Class A criteria for pathogen destruction. Mr. Stouder said the test takes a long time to get
results back for, and by the time staff gets the results, we have basically lost the season. Mr. Breitenstein
said that is correct, once the biosolids are dry they are ready to apply. We do not have the time to wait,
obtain the results, and deliver solids out to the fields in a timely manner, which is necessary for the
farmers schedule to achieve replanting for the coming year.
Mr. Stouder continued with the presentation and discussed Outcome 3.
3. Intergovernmental Partnership
NPDES Permit Renewal – staff have received preliminary approval from DEQ, and the initiating of
public notice will happen soon.
Adopt Revised Local Limits – staff plan to adopt those ordinances with the councils of both cities
and Commission and will continue to keep that consistent across the service area, as requested
by the Commission.
Capacity Management O&M (CMOM) – this partnership assessment tool was discussed at the
previous meeting. Staff will start scoping it and bring that back to the Commission in the next
several months.
Community Presentations – initially was challenging from the COVID environment, but MWMC
has gained popularity in the last several months with rotaries and other city clubs/groups. A few
visits are scheduled next month at the MWMC and RNG project.
Partnership Assessment Tool
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier commented on the targets for permit implementation and the
interagency coordination of CMOM and said holding quarterly meetings does not set a high bar for any
kind of desired outcome. The targets identified in the community presentation piece in the public
education section were thought out and well done. It is ideal for staff to consider how they should
address permit development in the public process and whether or not outreach is wanted on our
proposed permit limits, and the potential implications for those. We need some kind of public education
campaign because there will be significant implications to rates in the future, and we do not want to
bypass that opportunity to engage the public in that conversation. Mr. Stouder said concerning the last
comment, staff have been talking internally about that topic but have not moved forward because there
is nothing currently tangible. Once the permit is finalized, we will be doing outreach with the public,
local elected officials, and internal staff.
Commissioner Meyer said he appreciated the presentations from Springfield and Eugene on their
collection system, as it relates to CMOM. We are on a replacement schedule of 400-500 years for an asset
that has a useful life of 60-100 years. Leaders of the two cities and MWMC need to discuss I/I issues, high
flow problems with the wastewater plant, and getting sustainable assets in the collection systems. Mr.
Stouder said we can look into the joint meeting. Conversations have been made on the Springfield side
about adding staff in Operations to address more proactive maintenance in our local wastewater system.
Commissioner Ruffier said he would like to support Commissioner Meyers comments in that regard. If
and when you receive news about the potential for federal infrastructure funding that could be applied
to the CMOM program, please update the Commission. Mr. Stouder we will look into that and report
back to the Commission. Commissioner Keeler said it might be worthwhile to add that to our task
tracking spreadsheet.
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 5 of 17
Mr. Watkins continued with the presentation and discussed Outcome 4; Ms. Spiro presented Outcome 5.
4. Reliability/useful life of assets
Maintenance benchmarks - when staff reviewed this item, they agreed to continue monitoring
the industry standard maintenance benchmarks around preventive maintenance, corrective
maintenance, and emergency maintenance.
Asset Management and plan update – staff decided to keep the asset management piece, but
rather than every year, it was moved to every other year. That change did specify an area of
improvement to focus on.
Resiliency Plan implementation - each year staff plan to do a portion of the implementation and
list items to focus on for that coming year. This list consists of a strategic multiyear project to
focus on, with a goal to keep the Commission's regional assets as reliable as possible.
5. Public Awareness
Communication Plan - for FY2022-23 staff will update the 2021 plan as needed or as trends
present new opportunities. Within the MWMC communications plan there are several strategies
and tactics to implement the plans overall goals and objectives.
Social Media & Website – staff continue to implement strategies with a goal to grow followers
and increase visits to the website. Website analytics have been added back with the help of LCOG
(Lane Council of Governments) web team.
e-Newsletter – this continues to be published monthly and implemented strategies on how to
grow the numbers of subscribers.
Pollution Prevention campaigns & Sponsorships – staff continue to implement at least two
campaigns and four sponsorships a year. When new sponsorship opportunities or campaigns
come along, they will be added in.
Tours – the ability to reach targeted numbers and estimates have been affected by COVID, but
staff continue to provide tours as requested and promote tour opportunities, especially within
the sponsorship opportunities.
Clean Water University – due to COVID the class is currently being held virtually, yet in the Fall
2022 staff plan to hold it at the treatment plant and will continue to offer a virtual option. There
are eight schools participating this year with several months left, so there is opportunity for more
schools to join.
FY2022-23 Budget Programs
Ms. Bishop said in the operating budget, in the current FY2020-22 a 3.5% rate change was adopted
(increasing a single-family residential home with 5000 gallons of wastewater treated by $0.95 per
month). Personnel services are based on contracts with the City of Eugene and City of Springfield, and
staff have little ability to change what comes out of the Human Resource departments. Materials and
services contain contractual services, operating and material expenses related to ongoing maintenance
of aging infrastructure, and maintenance of an expansion of infrastructure. Capital outlay involves new
items coming into the system, usually a vehicle, motorized vehicle, or equipment over $5,000.
FY2022-23 Budget and Rate Assumptions
For the upcoming fiscal year, the collection rate is good, year-to-date. A transfer of $9.8 million from the
Operating Fund to the Capital Fund was made, and based on project budgets and timing, staff program
Capital by phase: Design costs year one, followed by Construction in following year(s) within the five-
year plan. The equipment replacement reserve balance is approximately $13.9 million, and Ms. Warner
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 6 of 17
will be putting together the transfer amount for the new budget. The rate changes will remain
incremental and moderate.
MWMC FY2022-23 Budget and Rate Decision Schedule
January 14 - Budget Kick-Off: Key Outcomes and Performance Measures
February 11 - Draft Capital Program
March 11 - FY 2022-23 Presentation and Discussion
o Operating Budget, Revenues and Reserves, Rate Scenarios
April 8 - Budget and User Rate Public Hearings and Options to Adopt
MWMC Budget and CIP Ratification Schedule
May 2 – Springfield City Council
May 9 – Eugene City Council
May 10 – Lane County Board of Commissioners
June 10 – Final Ratification of FY2022-23 Budget, Rates and Capital Programs by the MWMC
Ms. Bishop requested from the Commission additional input regarding the purpose statement, key
outcomes, and performance indicators.
Mr. Stouder said there was a request from the Commission to look at key outcomes and put together
fact sheets. These one-page templates can be used on the website to communicate with the public what
the MWMC is doing to achieve the outcomes and why key outcomes are important to the Commission.
Mr. Stouder displayed the draft templates and clarified they are not finished yet.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Inge asked, with the current inflationary pressures, how significantly do you
feel it will impact the budget process? Is that going to change our need for a rate increase of 3.5% to
some other number? Ms. Bishop said during COVID we have not been spending our expenditure
budgets as greatly as usual. There have been times when contracts are put out with not a lot of interest
coming back. In the first year of COVID, we had a number of items planned but were not able to
necessarily move forward. Since then, some have moved forward. There was not a lot of travel and we
have not expended our expenditure budgets as much as we would have on a normal year. There will be
more information and discussion at the MWMC March meeting. Mr. Stouder said if COVID continues for
another couple of years it will be a challenge, but we are in a good position right now. The hiring process
is challenging, and we are seeing very few applications for the jobs posted.
Commissioner Inge asked are you having to make up for the lack of staff with overtime and things of
that nature, which will increase costs? Mr. Stouder said on the Springfield side, everyone is exempt, and
so it is extra time. Mr. Breitenstein said on the Eugene side, we have contracted work out and have
utilized temporary employees. There has not been a significant amount of overtime.
Commissioner Inge asked, if I’m hearing you correctly, we do not feel the inflationary pressure will be
significant enough to relook at what the rate increase will be for the next fiscal year? Ms. Bishop said we
forecasted in the five-year plan, 3.5% this year, and 3.5% next year. There will be at least three options for
the Commission to consider at the March 11th MWMC meeting. In terms of contracts and materials there
definitely is a greater cost. Commissioner Inge asked, the possibility of buying down some of the reserve
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 7 of 17
is always an option, correct? Ms. Bishop said yes, it is. Mr. Stouder said we are not contemplating a
larger increase at this point in time, but we will see if there are any changes between now and March.
Mr. Stouder acknowledged the communications team for their hard work on the one-page templates.
Once completed, the information will be posted to the website and sent to the Commission.
REGULATORY UPDATE – NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL STATUS
Todd Miller, Environmental Services Supervisor and Bryan Robinson, Environmental Management
Analyst, provided the Commission a brief update on the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System) permit renewal. The DEQ’s (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality) 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.
Mr. Robinson said the continuation of the permit renewal process and continuation of the plant
operations conducted under a DEQ administratively extended permit, it is not a negative result of
MWMC treatment performance, staff actions, or the DEQ staff effort. This is a result of a long-standing
condition of the DEQ water quality NPDES program, and the complex nature of the MWMC permit.
Permit Development Timeline (anticipated)
May – June 2021: Pre-Permit Data and Plan Submittals and Application Updates
June – November 2021: DEQ RPA and Permit Limit Assessments
November – December 2021: Plan Submittal Updates and Compliance Schedule
January – February 2022: Applicant Review Draft (and EPA Review). At a previous MWMC meeting
this date was July – August 2021.
February – March 2022: DEQ Draft Permit Revisions
March – April 2022: Public Notice & Hearing
April – May 2022: DEQ Permit Finalization
April – June 2022: Permit Issued
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier said in regard to the schedule, you said it has taken DEQ a long time
to develop the draft for applicant review, and your schedule gives us maybe a month to review and
respond with comments. Do you believe that is going to be sufficient amount of time? Mr. Miller said
DEQ has a standard two-week applicant review comment period and entertain requests for extensions.
The MWMC has preliminarily requested at least a three-week applicant review period. While the permit is
being developed, MWMC and DEQ staff are working together to look over preliminary RPA, limits, and
addressing issues embodied in the permit. Hopefully there will be no surprises in the applicant review
draft, but we will not know, until we see it.
Mr. Robinson reviewed the completed milestones
October 2020 – MWMC 2021 PIP identification
November 2020 – DEQ permit writing team announced
May 2021– DEQ & MWMC pre-permit coordination meeting
June 2021– Toxics/ammonia draft RPA presented
June 2021– Biosolids Management Plan and Recycled Water Reuse Plan (Class D) submittals
July 2021– DEQ permit writing team change
September 2021– DEQ facilities inspection
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 8 of 17
October 2021– DEQ calculation of temperature limit
December 2021– Water quality trading plan submittal
December 2021 – Draft compliance schedule proposed
DEQ notified MWMC staff in November 2020 and said a three person permit writing team was assigned.
Unfortunately, only six-months later that team was adjusted. Even with small inconsistencies, it has not
slowed down the progress of the MWMC.
Pending Issues
Draft Permit Review and Issuance Timeline – staff is hoping for the additional week to be granted as
request to equal a three-week review.
Water Quality Trading Plan Approval – submitted at the end of the year, DEQ is currently reviewing.
Final Toxics, Ammonia, and Temperature RPA/Limits – DEQ is currently reviewing.
Final Temperature Compliance Schedule – DEQ is currently reviewing. Staff are hoping to get a draft
permit back soon.
Mr. Miller said DEQ produces RPA’s and then submits that information to the MWMC. These figures are
reasonable potential analysis and gathered by running the MWMC data to determine if anything triggers
a permit limit. Staff reviewed the information with consultant assistance and responded, therefore the
submittal to the RPA was MWMC’s response to the DEQ RPA.
Mr. Robinson said the applicant review process will happen in tandem with the EPA. Jacobs Engineering
Group is under contract to help with analyzing draft permit RPA’s. ACWA (the Association of Clean Water
Agencies) can also aid with the process as they have a permit review team that Mr. Robinson and Mr.
Miller are members of. The MWMC anticipates having scheduled meetings and written comments
internally to assess the draft permit and will submit comments to DEQ. The MWMC’s Legal counsel plan
to review that information and lead into the 30-day public comment period and public hearing. Mr.
Miller’s participation in the Ashland public permit has guided the expectations for the MWMC permit.
The MWMC, ACWA, DEQ, and EPA will more than likely provide comments prior to the finalization of the
MWMC permit. The final, closed-door in-house DEQ permit review session after the public comment
period and all comments are received is where the final determinations are made, on what is included in
the permit. The new MWMC water quality permit will be approved by the EPA, and then signed,
monitored, and enforced by DEQ. Once signed, the actual effective date is when the new permit
regulations come into effect.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Meyer said based upon the completed RPA work, were there toxics that look
problematic? Mr. Robinson said he would not classify them as problematic. Ammonia is showing a
lower limit, but there are not any perceived problems right now. Mr. Miller said that is correct in terms of
actually proposing any limits, there are no problems. When DEQ drafted their RPA in the Spring they had
indicated a few toxics, but after the data was reevaluated, those went away. Mr. Robinson said DEQ is
eliminating their tier one tier two monitoring program. Staff could have extra monitoring involved for
pesticides and other toxics, but that is still being determined.
Commissioner Keeler said on the public process part, what are we anticipating? There may not be a lot
of recent case studies, but what we will get as far as third party and individual comments about the
permit? Mr. Miller said we are not aware of anyone tracking our permits, but we do know Northwest
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 9 of 17
Environmental Advocates (NWEA) has a public information request with DEQ. This group tries to obtain
permit information earlier than anybody else and also requested a public hearing for the City of Ashland.
In discussions with DEQ, staff have asked if we should expect third party requests for a public hearing,
since our water quality trading program garners interest from groups like NWEA. Staff anticipates some
attention and have worked with DEQ to preschedule that public hearing. If you wait for the public to
request it, the timeline is prolonged another 30-days. The public hearing is not currently pre-scheduled
but once DEQ finishes the applicant review draft, they will be announcing that along with the public
review draft. Commissioner Keeler said the Commission has demonstrated proactiveness through the
years and is proficient at telling our good story. Those things will bode well for us, depending on what
kinds of questions and comments come in.
Commissioner Ruffier said the EPA is typically not forthcoming to their thoughts on permit applicant
provisions. Do we have any insight into what EPA’s position may be on the draft permit conditions? Mr.
Miller said he does not and thinks it will be a wait and see. At the ACWA level with permits overall, there
has been disappointment with EPA administration advocating for advancements in permits, in terms of
green infrastructure and water quality trading. On the EPA staff level, they tend to be more critical and
scrutinize permits for consistency with the Clean Water Act. Overall, DEQ and EPA have a good open
dialogue and relationship. Staff does not expect pushback from EPA but will not know until the process
moves forward.
Commissioner Meyer said DEQ indicated they are eliminating the waiver of daily mass loads on new
permits. Instead of a daily mass load wavier on flows that reaches a certain threshold, they will require us
to submit for a mass load increase. Have you heard anything about that? Mr. Miller said that discussion
has come up. In a recent DEQ meeting, they said it would get triggered when a facility does an upgrade
and changes their rating, in which that waiver would go away. As long as the permit is based on the
same facility sizing and rating the previous permit was, the mass load limit would stay the same. DEQ has
not indicated it will change for us, on the MWMC permit.
Mr. Robinson continued with the presentation to discuss the upcoming five-year permit cycle. Once the
new permits effective date is in place, the clock will start. When certain actions are due, as stipulated in
the NPDES template, the monitoring matrix will be written into the new permit with specific MWMC
conditions.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Meyer said the sludge depth survey is typically inserted for lagoons. Staff
should explain it is not necessary because we clean those at least every other year. That is more
applicable for lagoon-based treatment plants. Mr. Millington said permit compliance obligations in that
slide are subject to change, depending on what the actual permit says once we go through the entire
process. There could be things on there that are adjusted significantly.
AERATION IMPROVEMENTS UPDATE – P80100
Barry Mays, Design and Construction Coordinator and Josh Johnson, Senior Engineer at Brown and
Caldwell, updated the Commission on the progress of the Aeration Basin Project. At the last update in
February of 2021, staff listed the condition assessments and various other assessments on the project. In
the 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan, aeration basin improvements were planned to be completed in two
phases. Staff have assessed four active basins to determine if additional basins are needed, and when
that needs to happen.
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 10 of 17
Mr. Mays said in FY1920 the MWMC budgeted $1 million dollars as part of the next phase (phase 2) of
the aeration basin design. Staff recommended phase 2 should include an evaluation of the existing
aeration system and other improvements. Various assessments were completed such as a condition
assessment, process and biological assessment, process modeling for future loads and flows,
optimization assessment, and an energy assessment that led to a business case evaluation. The business
case evaluation takes all various tech memos, workshops, and staff recommendations and then rolls that
into three alternative recommendations from the consultant. Lifecycle cost evaluations and construction
packaging and scheduling are also in those three alternatives
Mr. Johnson discussed the cost estimate classification and explained staff are in the beginning stages of
the project. The class five estimate is currently at a conceptual level. This level of project development is
between 0% and 2%, compared to 100% development that contains a bid package and contractor. With
a very broad range of costs and numbers, there may be uncertainties. As the project develops there may
be elements added or taken away, or reviewed information that comes out.
Mr. Mays presented the three alternatives, based on Brown and Caldwell’s evaluations.
Alternative 1
Complete condition-based rehab
projects by 2024.
Replace transformers TU-3 & TU-4,
add a second turbo blower and
various electrical upgrades by 2024.
Upgrade of two additional aeration
basins by 2035.
Combined Rehab Projects
Substations & 2nd Turbo Blower
Substation TU3 & 4
2nd Turbo Blower
Yokogawa DCS Upgrade
Basins Seismic Retrofits
Subtotal for 2022 – 2024 timeline
$11,100,000
$11,200,000
$2,600,000
$2,800,000
$800,000
$28,500,000
Upgrade 2 Additional Basins 2032 – 2035
SCC Seismic Retrofits (TBD)
$10,200,000
$3,900,000
Total Alternative1 Costs $42,600,000
Three alternatives were given by Brown and Caldwell and are broken down into three categories. Last
year’s memo listed the equipment Brown and Caldwell assessed that either needed replaced or
considered replaced, because of age or being obsolete within 2-5 years. That equipment is in the
condition-based rehab project. The replacement of the transformers, blowers, and various electrical
equipment were broken out due to the domino effect in replacing this equipment. The transformers
pose a problem because they are 4160 volts and most equipment at the plant is 480 volts. If the
transformers are replaced, then the 4160 volts are not compatible. The MCC’s and VFD’s also run the
Hoffman blowers (4160 volts) and it is recommended to add a second turbo blower. Mr. Johnson said
when you see Capital costs for the blower replacement, it is really an electrical project with the addition
of a new blower. Substation TU3 is the main feed for the secondary process and an original equipment
to the plant. A failure in 2018 took away redundancy designed into that substation. Substation TU4 is
also an original equipment and ideally as the plant grows, it will be used to feed new turbo blowers.
Currently there is not sufficient capacity to feed a 480-volt turbo blower and TU4 is not double ended,
which lets power wrap around a failed component to some extent and provide redundancy.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Meyer asked if the plan is to ultimately abandon the 4160-power feed? Mr.
Johnson said that is correct. The 4160 volt feeds the original centrifugal blowers and I’m unsure if
anything else on that feed needs to be addressed. The goal would be to move away from that.
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 11 of 17
Mr. Mays said in his conversations with Steve Forester on replacing the transformers around the plant,
he commented that most transformers are 480 already and it is ideal to make everything the same.
Commissioner Meyer asked are the centrifugal blower motors the only motors or systems still on the
4160? Mr. Mays said to his understanding, yes. Mr. Watkins confirmed the large multi-stage centrifugal
blowers are the only 4160 pieces of equipment at the plant and the turbo blower is 480 volts.
Commissioner Meyer asked how often do you have to use the centrifugal blowers? Mr. Johnson said if
you are looking at demand for air, it would be relatively infrequent. Peaks in demand for air pose a
problem, and the process for switching the 480-volt turbo blower and the centrifugal blower has to be
done manually.
Commissioner Meyer said if you replace TU3, you need to expand the 480 transformer and replace at
least one centrifugal blower to move towards a complete 480 system, is that correct? Mr. Johnson said
yes, these projects are closely coupled together. Mr. Mays said that is a reason for breaking the
transformers and blowers out separately from all other condition-based rehab. When using the neurosis
blower and the Hoffman blowers, these pieces of equipment do not play well together, and their air
pressure systems are different. Alternative 1 also shows upgrades to the profinet system, in which the
RNG already has.
Alternative 2
Complete condition-based rehab
projects by 2024.
Continue to operate transformers,
existing turbo, and centrifugal
blowers till 2032-2035 timeline. This
would require motor replacement
and rebuild of existing blowers in
condition-based rehab projects in
2022-2024 timeline.
Upgrade of two additional aeration
basins by 2035. Including
replacement of substation TU-3 and
TU-4, second turbo blower and
various electrical systems upgrades.
Combined Rehab Projects
Existing blower rebuild
Yokogawa DCS Upgrade
Basins Seismic Retrofits
Subtotal for 2022-2024 Timeline
$11,100,000
$1,100,000
$ 2,800,000
$ 800,000
$15,800,000
Substations & 2nd Turbo Blower
Substation TU3 & 4
2nd Turbo Blower
Upgrade 2 additional Basins 2032 – 2035
Subtotal for 2032-2035 Timeline
$11,200,000
$ 2,600,000
$10,200,000
$24,000,000
SCC Seismic Retrofits (TBD) $ 3,900,000
Total Alternative 2 Costs $43,700,000
Mr. Mays said Alternative 2 is also a condition-based rehab project, and the same equipment would be
used until the upgrades are completed in 2035. After that, substation 2, 3 and 4 would be replaced with
the addition of a second blower and other various equipment systems.
Alternative 3
Complete condition-based rehab
projects by 2024.
Complete replacement of substation
TU-3 and TU-4, second Neuros blower
Combined Rehab Projects
Yokogawa DCS Upgrade
Basin Seismic Retrofits
Subtotal for 2022 – 2024 timeline
$11,100,000
$ 2,800,000
$ 800,000
$14,700,000
Substations & 2nd Turbo Blower
Substation TU3 & 4
2nd Turbo Blower
$11,200,000
$ 2,600,000
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 12 of 17
and various electrical systems
upgrades before 2030.
Upgrade of two additional aeration
basins by 2035.
Subtotal for 2022 – 2030 Timeline $13,800,000
Upgrade 2 Additional Basins 2032 – 2035
SCC Seismic Retrofits (TBD)
$10,200,000
$ 3,900,000
Total Alternative 3 Costs $42,600,000
Alternative 3 is the least favorable, consists of three projects, and gives a continuous construction
project from 2024 - 2035. Mr. Johnson explained the intent here is seeing what would happen to the
lifecycle cost if the initial Capital cost was spread out over a longer period. The downside is significant in
terms of disruption to the plant staff and normal operations.
Next Steps
Recommendation - Alternative 1
Resolution (Design Consultant Services) - Construction Bidding by 2024. The February 2020 memo
allows staff to direct appoint Brown and Caldwell to the design and construction of the aeration-
based system.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Keeler said this is a lot of money and requested more information. In the
referenced 2004 facilities plan, there is a comment in the second paragraph talking about future deals,
demands, the new permit, and community growth. What reference materials from past Commission
meetings should I look at to better understand the cost of these project alternatives? Mr. Mays said
MWMC submitted a February 2020 memo regarding the contract with Brown and Caldwell, and a
February 2021 memo describing equipment that either needs replaced or is becoming obsolete.
Mr. Stouder said we can package up those memos and send them to you. Mr. Mays said we can also
send out tech memos. Mr. Johnson said we have a forthcoming report summarizing both the business
case evaluation and previous tech memos and anticipate that in the next 2-3 weeks.
Commissioner Ruffier asked what the current thinking is with regards to MWMC financing the Capital
projects, whether we use a loan, issue bonds, or sell finance? Mr. Stouder said this project is different
than what we traditionally see because of the large chunk of money now, and large chunk of money in
10 years. Staff budgeted for $16 plus million previously and have a healthy Capital reserve. The project is
larger than anticipated but we have adequate funds to cover it. There is uncertainty with the permit
coming, but the 5-year Capital budget will be presented next month, and staff can provide details for the
Commission. Mr. Mays said due to the project size, going through the capital improvement side would
be best.
Commissioner Meyer said this work shows we do not have to expand the capacity of the aeration basin
until 2035 (plus or minus), because it is wrapped into the facilities plan. We are two permit cycles out and
who knows what will happen in that time frame. Expanding the 5th and 6th basin is off the table for the
time being because it is at least 10 years out. On the replacement side, the seismic upgrade of the
building is a separate issue. That comes out of the seismic study and can be pursued separately
depending on how critical it is compared to other facilities. Replacing the electrical transformers, related
MCC’s, and blower is a big lump but at least we have a sense of what is involved. Another piece is the
$11 million condition assessment project. I’m uncomfortable on the level of effort involved in that study
and would like more details. Mr. Mays said we do not currently have schematic drawings. In our contract
with Brown and Caldwell, there is money designated for them to do the basis of design and that could
be what we need to proceed and get a better cost estimate. Mr. Johnson said that is a fair comment,
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 13 of 17
Commissioner Meyer. We do have vendor quotes supporting the rehab estimate and it would not much
to get it to a Class 4 estimate. The piping, valve, and profibus replacement is a significant element of the
cost. Mr. Stouder said we will gather additional information on project estimates, work it back into the
MWMC meeting schedule, and present additional information to the Commission.
FOLLOW-UP TO FY20 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT
James McClendon, Eugene Wastewater Finance and Administrative Manager discussed an overview of
efforts made to date, to reduce GHG emissions. The Commission expressed interest at the September
2021 meeting on what opportunities may provide the most impact for further reductions to Greenhouse
Gas (GHG) emissions arising from the Regional Wastewater Program.
Mr. McClendon said Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) are managed by City of Springfield staff and
project managers. Asset Management Capital Programs (AMCP) refer to equipment replacement, major
rehabilitation, and smaller scale Capital projects managed by City of Eugene staff, all within the
partnership of MWMC. “Emissions” refers to greenhouse gas emissions measured in metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent. This presentation offers no recommendations on how to further reduce
greenhouse gas emissions at MWMC facilities, because Mr. McClendon is not a trained environmental
scientist or environmental engineer. Historical emissions data will be explained to highlight several areas
where further emissions could possibly be achieved.
Efforts Taken to Reduce GHG Emissions at MWMC Facilities (2011 - 2021)
Solid Waste Reduction - implemented recycling/composting/waste reduction program
Natural Resource Conservation - implemented paper saving techniques and switched to electronic
records, implemented use of recycled water at BMF, implemented use of biodiesel in City fleet
vehicles, implemented 'zero waste' policy for organizational events, and reduced need for process
chemicals due to reduced I&I from both cities (less flow = less chemical need).
Electricity Conservation - made improvements to reduce inflow and infiltration (I&I) through the
CMOM program (both cities), replaced multi-stage blower with turbo blower for aeration, replaced
coarse diffusers with fine bubble diffusers, added variable frequency drives wherever suitable,
replaced/installed high efficiency motors, replaced gas mixing with mechanical mixers on the
digesters, installed LED lighting outdoors and indoors wherever possible, increased efficiency of air
compressors through control/management optimization, installed passive grit collection system,
and optimized odorous air control systems.
Chemical Exposure Reduction - replaced two pesticides with less toxic products, and installed
mowing strips, hand weeding, burning/scraping, and regrading to reduce pesticide use.
During the same period of time staff produced emissions inventory reports every other year, starting in
2010. Scope 1 emissions come directly from wastewater treatment and biosolids management, scope 2
pertains to electricity usage, and scope 3 refers to indirect emissions from solid waste handling, CIP
work, AMCP work, commuting, and business travel. The electricity MWh consumed column are not
emissions and are the quantity or volume of electricity consumed in each year in megawatt hours.
Indirect emissions (scope 3) are challenging because it contains the most variability and volatility year to
year. This includes concrete, steel, manufactured components, and project materials with high carbon
footprints. CIP and AMCP projects are within control, but staff need to maintain the equipment,
rehabilitate equipment, implement, and get the projects started in order to be permit compliant.
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 14 of 17
An earlier improvement to the aeration basins and old centrifugal blowers was approved by the
Commission, yet staff did not see the benefit for 5 - 10 years. Project managers completed this project to
reduce electricity use and were unaware of the 20% reduction over time. The RNG facility has recently
come online and is projected to consume more resources, electricity, and materials. The beneficial
effects of the RNG facility, with respect to greenhouse gas emissions, will not be seen for years, primarily
in the complete capture of methane from the anaerobic digesters. These big projects, even with a high
carbon footprint, are investing now for a benefit in the future.
Projects completed in the past 2-3 years increase the carbon footprint, making it difficult to reduce or
offset the impact of those projects in the near term. Staff cannot plant enough trees at the biocycle farm
to offset that. From an operations and maintenance standpoint staff are investigating ways to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, primarily through the Environmental Management System Program (part of
the ISO 14001 standard). A working group at the wastewater division collaborate with MWMC project
managers and discuss ways to conserve resources and reduce emissions.
Mr. McClendon displayed a chart of the FY20 emissions inventory report, showing scope 1 emissions
from direct wastewater treatment and biosolids activity. The wastewater treatment plant, WPCF, and
biosolids facility have the greatest volume of emissions from year to year. Staff have completed
exploratory work into how fugitive methane release from sludge lagoons is measured and doing that
would require consultant experts. By far the wastewater treatment plant is the greatest user of
electricity, however, this usage was reduced by 20% in the last 10 years from aeration basin
improvements and the new blower. Pump stations consume a fair amount of electricity and biosolids
management uses the lowest amount of electricity. Solid waste does have a possibility for emissions
reduction, but it is difficult to manage. As staff replace sewer pipes and pipelines, the excavated debris
are considered hazardous waste and will likely be hauled to Short Mountain Landfill. Continued
emissions reduction has to be a long-term approach.
- Market Based Emissions Factor Applied-
MWMC
Presentation
Year
Emissions
Inventory
Reporting
Period
Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3
Total
Emissions
MTCO2e
Electricity
MWh
Consumed
Major Source of
Emissions
2013 2010
4,520
635
7,511
12,666
19,457
CIP and O&M supply
chain (Scope 3)
2013 2012
4,909
252
4,746
9,906
19,023
treatment operations
(Scope 1)
2015 2014
4,208
264
3,951
8,423
18,407
treatment operations
(Scope 1)
2018 (ready
in 2017)
FY 2015-2016
4,533
176
3,786
8,495
17,122
treatment operations
(Scope 1)
2019 FY 2017-2018
4,448
240
8,952
13,640
16,384
CIP and O&M supply
chain (Scope 3)
2021 FY 2019-2020
4,817
791
5,068
10,676
15,557
CIP and O&M supply
chain (Scope 3)
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 15 of 17
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier said he recognized the challenges in seeking further reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions. If we started by incorporating a greenhouse gas assessment piece to our
activities, we could get better information on where our opportunities exist. If a greenhouse gas analysis
was added to the repair/replace assessment for equipment, it might help lead us in a direction to choose
a lowered GHG emissions decision. Gathering more information about the potential greenhouse gas
emissions associated with the Capital projects might be informative and help us make better choices.
Commissioner Inge said there is a 20% reduction in electricity, but then a big spike in electricity. Why the
big spikes in the last couple of years? Mr. McClendon said when contractors and subcontractors work on
the RNG Facility, they consume electricity paid for by the MWMC at regional wastewater rates, adding to
the carbon footprint and increases in emissions, in addition to the supply chain and logistics. Mr.
Stouder said the CoGen was also down for a significant amount of time, which created challenges (i.e.,
increasing the need for purchased electricity). Commissioner Inge said that makes sense, except these
construction projects have been worked on for several years, and the big spike was in 2021. On the
Capital supply chain in scope 3, we also had a big spike there. Mr. McClendon said that spike is from
FY2017-18 when staff worked on the 4th digester and expanded the maintenance building. The FY2019-
20 spike is from work on the maintenance building, finishing construction on the Environmental Services
Laboratory building, and starting construction on the RNG Facility. The electricity usage somewhat
correlates with the type of Capital work going on.
Commissioner Inge said it appears to me, in real terms, these are not wildly significant amounts, correct?
Mr. McClendon said in terms of emissions, if we are only talking about scope 2 electricity, then it is not a
wildly significant amount. The electricity cost has not gone down, and utility expenses have gone up.
The usage has gone down which creates an environmental benefit.
Commissioner Inge asked is the total emission in metric tons, of CO2? Mr. McClendon said yes.
Commissioner Inge asked is 13,640 a significant number, or how does it relate? Mr. McClendon was
unsure and said he would come back in the next inventory report with the answer. Staff have not
completed a comparison in how our regional treatment facility compares to other treatment plants,
because it is a challenge. We are an activated sludge treatment plant and cannot compare to a trickle
filter treatment plant. Mr. Breitenstein said he thinks the higher values of energy use were driven by
downtime of the CoGen system, Capital improvement projects, and the rebuilding of that system. While
not generating our own power, we bought more from EWEB. Mr. Van Eeckhout said past discussions
imply the RNG will reduce greenhouse gases by 7,500 metric tons of CO2 annually, equivalent to around
1600 passenger vehicles for that volume.
Commissioner Inge said he was interested to know how we compare to others across the country.
Commissioner Keeler asked about benchmarking too. If it is not a big staff undertaking, there may be
literature from NACWA or other resources laying that out, based on population served for a similar
operation. Mr. Stouder said we can take a high level look at that and see if there is anything available. If
not, we can determine what level of effort it would take.
Commissioner Ruffier said he also endorses benchmarking using readily available sources of
information. This effort would focus on continual improvement to impact our operational abilities to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Stouder said in the original request we discussed what staff are
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 16 of 17
doing with greenhouse gas emissions beyond the inventories. In Key Outcome 1 we added a climate
action planning indicator and put down exploring development of the climate policy or statement. Right
now, we have neither of those. The follow up request involved discussing areas to look at within our
system where we may be able to reduce GHG. We will likely need a consultant to identify areas to make a
more meaningful reduction. Commissioner Ruffier said an option to move this forward is adding a
target under our objectives of high environmental standards, to establish a baseline and look for
opportunities to move it forward. Mr. Stouder asked should we keep the existing target of exploring the
Climate Action statement or change that statement based on Commissioner Ruffier’ s comments?
Commissioner Meyer asked if we implement our temperature trading program and plant trees as part of
the temperature management plan, do we get a credit in this assessment? Mr. McClendon did not have
the answer and said he will investigate it and let Commissioner Meyer know.
Commissioner Inge said on the spreadsheet you referenced complicating factors, what are the
complicating factors? Mr. McClendon said we need goods and services, and process chemicals, and
electricity in order to clean the water. Anything manufactured and taken out of the ground will be added
to our emissions. Treatment process related emissions is hard to control and depends on flow. We need
to plan for growth in the community, which will add to overall loading and higher emissions. The facility
is around 40 years old, and many structures are not thermally efficient. The engine generator was taken
offline in favor of the RNG facility, and we are no longer generating electricity. Additional reductions are
not expected, and we can foresee an increase in emissions over the next few years depending on
projects being worked on.
Commissioner Ruffier responded to Mr. Stouder and said keeping the existing target of developing a
climate action statement or policy is good. A metric of greenhouse gas emissions is a reasonable target
for control or measurement and would be useful as a backstop. Mr. Stouder said that is very helpful.
BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier asked two questions pertaining to the December Communication
Packet. In the operations permit summary, on the graph of CBOD, we got close to the limits for August
and September. Was there any particular reason why we got that close? Mr. Breitenstein said there was
a process upset that did not allow staff to remove the typical amount of CBOD. Even though the final
conclusions are unknown, we did come in under limit. Staff will provide details to the Commission on
those events. Commissioner Ruffier was curious if it was a systemic issue or a one-off type of thing.
Commissioner Ruffier asked what caused the power outages on November 22? Mr. Breitenstein said
the unexpected power outages were not caused by EWEB but were from the main breaker on the main
power tripping. A rat got into the service panel and shorted out the electrical supply, which powers the
heaters that keep condensation out. This caused a condensation build up. Everything has been resolved.
BUSINESS FROM GENERAL MANAGER
Mr. Stouder said a few staff are traveling to the NACWA conference at the end of January to attend the
conference and accept the awards for MWMC.
Justin Green, DEQ water quality administrator, has resigned. Jennifer Weigal, assistant deputy, will be
acting in Mr. Green’s capacity.
January 14, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 17 of 17
BUSINESS FROM WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
Mr. Breitenstein said in mid-December the plant flows increased to 182 MGD, the highest flow the plant
has experienced in the last five years. Operational staff successfully treated everything. In January the
flows came back at 143 MGD. Staff got their diversion modes in and with no issues on the permit.
Eugene and Springfield did not have sanitary sewer overflows associated with the high flow events.
Commissioner Yeh adjourned the meeting at 9:55am
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: February 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Valerie Warner, MWMC Accountant
SUBJECT: FY 2020-21 Audited Financial Statements and Report
ACTION
REQUESTED: Approve, by motion the annual financial report
_____________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
The Commission is required to issue an Annual Financial Report, which has been audited by
an independent Certified Public Accounting firm. The financial statements are the
responsibility of the Commission’s management. The accompanying statements for the
MWMC were audited again this year by Grove, Mueller & Swank, P.C.
DISCUSSION
At the February 2022 MWMC meeting, a member of the audit team from Grove, Mueller &
Swank, P.C. will comment on the audit and management report (both attached.) Staff and the
auditors will answer any questions the Commission may have.
ACTION REQUESTED
By motion, accept the Annual Financial Report, including the audited financial statements for
FY 2020-21.
ATTACHMENT
1. FY 2020-21 Annual Financial Report
2. Management Report
AGENDA ITEM IV
Metropolitan Wastewater
M ANAGEMENT COMMISSION
partners in wastewater management Fiscal Year 2020-2021
Annual Financial Report
Regional Wastewater Program
ATT1 - FY2020-21 Annual Financial Report
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA
For the Years Ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
Page
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Governing Board iii
FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditor's Report 15-16
Management's Discussion & Analysis 19-24
Basic Financial Statements
Comparative Statements of Net Position 27
Comparative Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position 28
Comparative Statements of Cash Flows 29
Notes to Financial Statements 30-38
Supplemental Information
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Position 41
Schedule of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Position (Non-GAAP Budgetary
Basis) - Budget and Actual
Regional Wastewater Fund 42
Regional Wastewater Capital Fund 43
COMPLIANCE SECTION
Independent Auditor's Report Required by Oregon State Regulations 47-48
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
For the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
,QWURGXFWRU\6HFWLRQ
GOVERNING BOARD
June 30, 2021
Jennifer Yeh Eugene Council Representative
Eugene, OR 97401 President
Joe Pishioneri Springfield Council Representative
Springfield, OR 97478 Vice-President
Pat Farr Lane County Board of Commissioners Representative
Eugene, OR 97401
Walt Meyer Eugene Citizen Representative
Eugene, OR 97405
Peter Ruffier Eugene Citizen Representative
Eugene, OR 97405
Bill Inge Lane County Citizen Representative
Eugene, OR 97402
Doug Keeler Springfield Citizen Representative
Springfield, OR 97477
The governing board may be contacted at the address below.
ADMINISTRATION
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
Matt Stouder MWMC General Manager/Executive Officer
Dave Breitenstein Wastewater Division Director
Nathan Bell MWMC Finance Officer
)LQDQFLDO6HFWLRQ
,QGHSHQGHQW$XGLWRU¶V5HSRUW
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
Governing Board
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
Report on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying statements of net position of Metropolitan Wastewater Management
Commission (MWMC) as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, and the related statements of revenues, expenses and
changes in net position, and cash flows for the years then ended, and the related notes to the financial
statements, which collectively comprise MWMC's basic financial statements as listed in the table of
contents.
Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the
design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation
of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor'sResponsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted
our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free from material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of
the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those
risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to MWMC’s preparation and fair
presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of MWMC’s internal
control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of
accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management,
as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our
audit opinion.
15
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, and the
respective changes in financial position, and cash flows thereof for the years then ended,in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Other Matters
Management’s Discussion and Analysis
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management's
discussion and analysis (MD&A) be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such
information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the
basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context.We have applied
certain limited procedures to the MD&A in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the
information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries,
the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial
statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited
procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Supplemental Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that collectively
comprise MWMC’s basic financial statements. The supplemental information is presented for purposes of
additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements.
The supplemental information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates
directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such
information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial
statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information
directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to
the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplemental information
is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
Other Reporting Required by Oregon Minimum Standards
In accordance with Minimum Standards for Audits of Oregon Municipal Corporations, we have issued our
report dated December 14,2021, on our consideration of MWMC's compliance with certain provisions of
laws and regulations, including the provisions of Oregon Revised Statutes as specified in Oregon
Administrative Rules. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of compliance and
the results of that testing and not to provide an opinion on compliance.
GROVE, MUELLER & SWANK, P.C.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
By:
Ryan T. Pasquarella, A Shareholder
December 14,2021
16
0DQDJHPHQW¶V 'LVFXVVLRQDQG$QDO\VLV
17
18
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
As management of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC),
we offer readers of MWMC’s financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of
the financial activities of MWMC for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. Please read it
in conjunction with MWMC’s basic financial statements, which begin on page 29.
Mission
The purpose of the MWMC is to protect health, safety and the environment by providing
high quality wastewater management services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan
area. The MWMC and its regional partners are committed to providing these services in
a manner that is effective, efficient, and meets customer service expectations. Since
the mid-1990’s, the Commission and staff have worked together to identify key outcome
areas within which to focus the annual work plan and budget priorities, as well as
planning capital and construction administration.
Responsibility and Controls
The City of Springfield performs all administrative duties, as well as planning and capital
construction of major capital assets for the MWMC in accordance with the provisions of
an intergovernmental service agreement among the City of Springfield, the City of
Eugene, and the MWMC.
The City of Eugene performs all operations and maintenance duties for the MWMC in
accordance with the provisions of the intergovernmental service agreement among the
City of Eugene, the City of Springfield, and the MWMC.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
Total assets and deferred outflows of resources at June 30, 2021 were $235.3
million and exceeded liabilities by $195.6 million (i.e. net position). The increase in
net position for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 was $8.5 million. The increase
in net position for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020 was $9.3 million. The
decrease of $800 thousand was the result of a $1.2 million increase in operating
costs and an $800 thousand decrease in interest revenue, offset by a $1.4 million
increase in capital contributions. Of the total net position, $8.2 million is restricted
for capital improvements, $116.3 million represents net investment in capital
assets, $.2 million for debt service, and $70.9 million is unrestricted and available
for future appropriation.
Operating revenues for the year were $34,456,365. This is .2% less than the fiscal
year 2020 operating revenue of $34,538,644. Fiscal year 2020 showed very little
change from 2019 with operating revenues decreasing by just $10,658.
19
Total operating and maintenance expenses for the year were $15.3 million and the
total administration expenses were $4.3 million compared to the prior year when
expenses were $14.7 and $3.9 million respectively, and 2019 when they were
$14.2 and $3.6 million respectively.
OVERVIEW OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) serves as an introduction to the basic
financial statements and supplementary information. The MD&A represents
management’s examination and analysis of MWMC’s financial condition and
performance.
The financial statements report information about MWMC using the accrual basis of
accounting. As such, revenues are recognized when they are earned and expenses are
recognized when they are incurred.
The financial statements include a statement of net position, a statement of revenues,
expenses, and changes in net position, a statement of cash flows and notes to the
financial statements. The statement of net position provides information about the
nature and amount of resources and obligations at year-end. The statement of
revenues, expenses, and changes in net position presents the results of the business
activities over the course of the fiscal year and information on how the net position
changed during the year. The statement of cash flows presents changes in cash and
cash equivalents resulting from operational, capital and related financing, and investing
activities. This statement presents information about cash receipts and cash
disbursements, without consideration of the earnings event, when an obligation occurs,
or depreciation of capital assets.
The notes to the financial statements provide required disclosures and other information
that are essential to a full understanding of material data provided in the statements.
The notes present information about the MWMC’s accounting policies, significant
account balances and activities, material risks, obligations, commitments, and
contingencies.
The financial statements represent a consolidation of two budgetary funds: the Regional
Wastewater Fund and the Regional Wastewater Capital Fund. For financial reporting
purposes, management considers the activities relating to the operation of wastewater
management to be of a unitary nature and they are reported as such. For operational
purposes, the accounts of wastewater management are organized on the basis of
funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. Supplementary
information comparing the budget to actual revenues and expenses is provided.
The financial statements were prepared by City of Springfield staff from the detailed
books and records of the MWMC. The financial statements were audited during the
independent external audit process.
20
Financial Analysis
The following comparative condensed financial statements serve as the key financial
data and indicators for management, monitoring, and planning.
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Statements of Net Position
2021 2020 2019
Current and other assets 96,931,955$ 91,306,511$ 88,591,275$
Capital assets, net, where applicable,
of accumulated depreciation 136,501,018 134,532,472 137,006,868
Total assets 233,432,973 225,838,983 225,598,143
Deferred outflows of resources 1,851,203 2,197,798 2,544,395
Current liabilities 6,886,945 5,946,528 8,082,665
Long-term liabilities 32,774,883 34,981,950 42,210,347
Total liabilities 39,661,828 40,928,478 50,293,012
Net position:
Net investment in capital assets 116,286,944 110,829,285 104,491,746
Restricted for capital improvement 8,231,886 5,387,377 5,343,704
Restricted for debt service 183,192 183,192 435,603
Unrestricted 70,920,326 70,708,449 67,578,473
Total net position 195,622,348$ 187,108,303$ 177,849,526$
The largest portion of the MWMC’s net position is net investment in capital assets,
followed by unrestricted assets, and then the restricted amounts held for investment in
the capital improvement plan and finally, the remaining amount that is restricted for debt
service.
Total net position for MWMC continues to show a growth trend with most of that growth
in the category of net investment in capital assets, although due to strong system
development charge revenue in FY21, the category of restricted for capital improvement
also showed substantial growth. MWMC is deliberately focused on a robust capital
program that will maintain plant infrastructure to withstand the wear and tear of time, to
meet current and future regulatory requirements, to survive natural disasters and to
incorporate modern technologies. At the same time, MWMC has taken opportunities to
retire long-term debt when cash has accumulated and interest rates are favorable.
21
Statements of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position
2021 2020 2019
Operating revenues 34,456,365$ 34,538,644$ 34,549,302$
Operations & maintenance (15,280,858) (14,683,457) (14,221,359)
Administration (4,275,285) (3,908,139) (3,621,535)
Depreciation (9,389,412) (9,175,822) (8,934,423)
Operating income 5,510,810 6,771,226 7,771,985
Non-operating revenues (expenses), net
(includes capital contributions)3,003,235 2,487,551 3,496,987
Change in net position 8,514,045$ 9,258,777$ 11,268,972$
Operating revenues decreased by .2% from fiscal year 2020 to 2021 and decreased by
.03% from fiscal year 2019 to 2020. The fiscal year 2021 decrease was primarily due to
small decreases in intergovernmental revenue and septic hauler fees.
Operations & maintenance expenses increased by approximately $597 thousand or 4%
compared to fiscal year 2020. The MWMC experienced small increases and decreases
throughout the budget but the most significant differences between fiscal 2020 and
2021 appear in the following line items: Contractual Services $86K increase, Internal
Charges to City of Eugene for Risk Management $70K, Chemicals for Wastewater
Process $76K, Utilities $80K, Equipment Maintenance on Lab Equipment $46k.
Net non-operating revenues/(expenses) increased from $2.5 million in fiscal year ending
June 30, 2020 to $3 million for the year ending June 30, 2021. This was mainly due to
the significant increase in system development charge revenue of $1.4 million.
Capital Assets
MWMC’s investment in capital assets as of June 30, 2021 was $136.5 million (net of
accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes land,
construction in progress, buildings, machinery and equipment, and other assets. The
net increase in the MWMC’s investment in capital assets for the current fiscal year was
1.46%. MWMC added $11.4 million of assets this year as part of the continuing capital
improvement plan in place for the facilities upgrades, and this was offset by $9.4 million
in annual depreciation.
22
Major capital asset events during the current fiscal year included the following:
Work continued on the Renewable Natural Gas Upgrade project, with expenses of
$8.7 million.
Work continued on the Aeration Basin Improvement project, with expenses of
$1.4 million
Work continued on the Class A Disinfection project, with expenses of $1.2 million
Work on the WPCF Lagoon Removal/Decommissioning was substantially
completed, with costs of $3.6 million transferred from work in progress to Plant
and Building.
MWMC’s Capital Assets
(net of accumulated depreciation)
2021 2020 2019
Land 8,339,727$ 8,339,727$ 8,619,727$
Construction in progress 15,862,972 9,400,632 14,315,469
Buildings 68,920,609 70,495,403 64,749,060
Machinery and equipment 41,438,058 44,112,991 47,617,010
Other assets 1,939,652 2,183,719 1,705,602
Total 136,501,018$ 134,532,472$ 137,006,868$
June 30,
Debt Administration
At the end of the current fiscal year, the MWMC had total bonded debt outstanding (net
of unamortized premium) of $21.2 million, all of which is secured solely by sewer
revenues. Notes payable were comprised entirely of one State Revolving Fund Loan
(SRF) which was obtained as additional funding to implement the Facilities Plan at more
advantageous interest rates than would result from issuing another revenue bond. In
November 2018, two of the five SRF loans were retired, a third was retired in October
2019 and the fourth was paid off in December 2020, leaving a balance of $900
thousand as of June 30, 2021.
Additional information on the MWMC’s capital assets and related debt can be found in
Note F and Note H, beginning on page 37 of this report.
23
Economic Factors and Next Year’s Budget and Rates
For the year ended June 30, 2022, MWMC approved a 3.5% rate increase that was
effective July 1, 2021 (a 0% increase was effective July 1, 2020). The new rate resulted
in an average residential billing of $27.97 per month based on typical residential
consumption of 5,000 gallons per month. The budget included an annual capital
contribution of $9.8 million in order to fund implementation of the ongoing Capital
Improvement Plan.
Requests for Information
This financial report is designed to provide our citizens and rate payers with a general
overview of the finances for those funds maintained by the MWMC and to show
MWMC’s accountability for the funds it receives. Questions concerning any of the
information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should
be addressed to:
MWMC Accountant
City of Springfield
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
24
%DVLF)LQDQFLDO6WDWHPHQWV
25
26
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
Comparative Statements of Net Position
June 30,
2021 2020
ASSETS
Cash and investments
Unrestricted 77,815,970$ 75,457,187$
Restricted 11,766,303 8,944,278
Accounts receivable 275,788 203,251
Intergovernmental receivable, net 5,457,373 5,043,910
Inventory 585,158 590,635
Accrued interest 138,943 190,759
Prepaid expenses 43,645 50,200
Deposits 700,000 700,000
Notes receivable (System Development Charges) 148,775 126,291
Capital assets:
Land and construction in progress 24,202,699 17,740,359
Other capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 112,298,319 116,792,113
Total assets 233,432,973 225,838,983
DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Deferred charge for debt refunding 1,851,203 2,197,798
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts and contracts payable 3,340,195 2,387,972
Other accrued liabilities 59,311 41,285
Interest payable 141,083 167,068
Current portion of notes payable 100,000 245,749
Current portion of revenue bonds payable 3,245,000 3,090,000
Unearned revenues 1,356 14,454
Due to other governments 14,054,606 12,416,714
Notes payable 800,000 900,010
Revenue bonds payable (net of unamortized premium, and current portion)17,920,277 21,665,226
Total liabilities 39,661,828 40,928,478
NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets 116,286,944 110,829,285
Restricted for capital improvement 8,231,886 5,387,377
Restricted for debt service 183,192 183,192
Unrestricted 70,920,326 70,708,449
Total net position 195,622,348$ 187,108,303$
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
27
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
Comparative Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position
2021 2020
Operating revenues:
Sewer user fees 34,379,034$ 34,490,604$
Other operating receipts 77,331 48,040
Total operating revenues 34,456,365 34,538,644
Operating expenses:
Operations and maintenance 15,280,858 14,683,457
Administration 4,275,285 3,908,139
Depreciation 9,389,412 9,175,822
Total operating expenses 28,945,555 27,767,418
Operating income 5,510,810 6,771,226
Non-operating revenues (expenses):
Interest income 471,463 1,763,924
Interest expense (745,823)(918,211)
Lease income 53,608 50,507
Gain (loss) on disposal of capital assets (13,685)(380,154)
Miscellaneous revenue 38,521 157,075
Total non-operating revenues (expenses)(195,916) 673,141
Income before contributions 5,314,894 7,444,367
Capital contributions 3,199,151 1,814,410
Change in net position 8,514,045 9,258,777
Net position, beginning of year 187,108,303 177,849,526
Net position, end of year 195,622,348$ 187,108,303$
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
For the years ended June 30,
28
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
Comparative Statements of Cash Flows
2021 2020
Cash flows from operating activities:
Cash received from customers 33,893,034$ 34,416,701$
Cash paid to other governments (10,661,753) (10,782,796)
Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services (6,274,217) (7,946,363)
Other operating receipts 81,836 45,948
Net cash provided by operating activities 17,038,900 15,733,490
Cash flows from capital and related financing activities:
Acquisition and construction of capital assets (11,371,644) (7,081,578)
Proceeds from sale of capital assets 20,919 157,073
Proceeds of capital contributions 3,199,151 1,814,410
Principal paid on notes payable (245,759) (5,703,583)
Principal paid on revenue bonds payable (3,243,354) (3,108,352)
Interest payments (771,808) (977,120)
Net cash used in capital and related financing activities (12,412,495) (14,899,150)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Interest received 523,278 1,839,526
Notes receivable issued (142,289) (146,826)
Cash received on notes receivable 119,805 132,759
Lease income 53,608 50,507
Net cash provided by investing activities 554,402 1,875,966
Net increase (decrease) in cash and investments 5,180,808 2,710,306
Cash and investments, beginning of year 84,401,465 81,691,159
Cash and investments, end of year 89,582,273$ 84,401,465$
Reconciliation of operating income to net cash provided
by operating activities:
Operating income 5,510,810$ 6,771,226$
Adjustments to reconcile operating income to net
cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 9,389,415 9,175,822
Changes in assets / liabilities:
Intergovernmental receivable (413,463) 51,941
Accounts receivable (54,935) (125,844)
Prepaid expenses 6,555 8,974
Accounts and contracts payable 952,223 (1,679,876)
Due to other governments 1,655,918 1,534,875
Inventory 5,478 (1,536)
Unearned revenue (13,098) (2,092)
Net cash provided by operating activities 17,038,900$ 15,733,490$
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
For the years ended June 30,
29
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE A – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was established on February 9, 1977
through an intergovernmental agreement between Lane County and the Cities of Eugene and Springfield.
It was formed to construct, operate, and maintain regional sewage facilities. The Commission is
composed of seven voting members from Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County. Three of the seven
members are elected officials from each of the partner agencies’ governing bodies.
The financial operations of MWMC are reported as an entity using enterprise fund accounting. It is
MWMC’s intent that the costs of providing services to users on a continuing basis will be financed or
recovered primarily through an equitable fee levied on all user classes.
Reporting Entity
These financial statements include all funds, organizations, departments, and offices that are not legally
separate from the MWMC.
The City of Springfield performs all administrative duties and construction of major capital assets for
MWMC in accordance with the provisions of a July 14, 1983 service agreement, which was updated and
reaffirmed in 2005. The City of Eugene performs all operations and maintenance duties for MWMC under
the same updated service agreement. The agreement is part of an arrangement among the Cities of
Eugene and Springfield and MWMC whereby the two Cities perform all necessary operational and staff
support activities of MWMC.
Basis of Accounting
The financial operations of MWMC are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. As such,
revenues are recognized when they are earned and expenses are recognized when they are incurred.
All activities of the MWMC are accounted for within two proprietary (enterprise) funds. Proprietary funds
are used to account for operations that are (a) financed and operated in a manner similar to a private
business enterprise where the intent of the governing body is that the cost (expenses, including
depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or
recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) where the governing body has decided that periodic
determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital
maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes.
The accounting and financial reporting treatment applied to MWMC is determined by its measurement
focus. The transactions of MWMC are accounted for on a flow of economic resources measurement
focus. With this measurement focus, all assets, deferred outflows, liabilities and deferred inflows
associated with the operations are included on the statement of net position. Net position (i.e., total
assets plus deferred outflows of resources less total liabilities plus deferred inflows of resources) is
segregated into four categories: net investment in capital assets; restricted for capital improvements;
restricted for debt service; and unrestricted net position.
MWMC distinguishes operating revenue and expenses from non-operating items. Operating revenues
and expenses generally result from providing services to users. The principal operating revenues involve
charges for services and the major operating expenses include the costs of plant operation and
maintenance, administration, and depreciation of capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting
these definitions are reported in these financial statements as non-operating revenues and expenses.
30
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE A – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES – Continued
Cash and Investments
MWMC participates in a cash and investment pool maintained by the City of Springfield. The amount
reported as cash and investments is the MWMC share of the total City of Springfield cash and investment
pool. As of June 30, 2021, MWMC does not maintain investments separate from the investment pools.
State statutes authorize the City to invest in obligations of the U.S. Treasury and its agencies, bankers’
acceptances, high grade commercial paper, the State of Oregon Local Government Investment Pool, and
repurchase agreements.
Fair Value Measurements
Investments are stated at fair value.
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received at the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The City
categorizes fair value measurements within the hierarchy established by GASB Statement 72. This
hierarchy defines three levels of inputs used to assess fair value which allows financial statement users to
identify the level of reliability and determine variance risk between actual amounts received during a sale
of assets or transfer of liabilities to that which is reported in the financial statements for the measurement
date.
For purpose of the statement of cash flows, cash and investments in the City-wide investment pool
(including restricted cash, investments and LGIP) are considered cash and cash equivalents. The pool
has the general characteristics of a demand deposit account for MWMC in that MWMC may deposit
additional cash at any time and may withdraw cash at any time without prior notice or penalty.
Intergovernmental Receivable
The municipal water utilities for the Cities of Eugene and Springfield bill and collect sewer user fees. The
collected amounts are due to the MWMC. Accordingly, MWMC records the amounts due from the local
water utilities as its intergovernmental receivable. Both utilities have historically collected over 99% of
accounts receivable, therefore only a small allowance for uncollectible amounts is recorded.
Restricted Assets
Assets whose use is restricted for construction or other purposes by provisions of state law, grants, bond
or other agreements, are segregated.
When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the MWMC’s practice to use
restricted resources first, when applicable, then unrestricted resources as they are needed.
31
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE A – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES – Continued
Capital Assets
All capital assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost. Cost includes labor, materials,
and related indirect costs. The cost of additions, renewals, and betterments over $10,000 are capitalized.
Repairs and minor replacements are charged to operating expenses.
All depreciation is accumulated and shown as a reduction of historical costs reported on the Statement of
Net Position. Depreciation has been provided over the estimated useful lives of the assets using the
straight-line method. Upon disposal of such assets, the accounts are relieved of the related historical
costs and accumulated depreciation and resulting gains and losses are reflected in income.
The estimated useful lives agree with those used for cost analysis purposes as required by federal
regulations. They are as follows:
Plant and buildings 10 – 50 years
Machinery and equipment 1 – 50 years
Accumulated Unpaid Vacation, Sick Pay and Other Benefit Amounts
The portions of accumulated unpaid vacation, sick, and compensatory time that are not expected to be
paid within the year are reported as long-term liabilities as “due to other governments” since all
employees are contracted from the cities of Eugene and Springfield.
Long-term Debt
Long-term debt is reported as a liability in the Statement of Net Position. Bond issuance costs are
expensed in full in the year incurred and deferred amounts on refunding are amortized over the life of the
new debt. Bond premiums and discounts are amortized using the bonds outstanding method.
Use of Estimates
In preparing the Commission’s financial statements, management is required to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets
and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Risk Management
MWMC is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts, theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets.
MWMC carries commercial insurance for such risks of loss. Settled claims resulting from these risks
have not exceeded commercial insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years.
New Accounting Pronouncements
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021, the MWMC implemented the following GASB
pronouncements:
32
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE A – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES – Continued
GASB Statement No. 84 – Fiduciary Activities. The objective of this statement is to improve
guidance regarding the identification of fiduciary activities for accounting and financial reporting
purposes and how those activities should be reported. The adoption and implementation of
Statement No. 84 did not have a significant impact to the MWMC.
GASB Statement No. 90 – Majority Equity Interests. The primary objectives of this statement are
to improve the consistency and comparability of reporting a government’s majority equity interest
in a legally separate organization and to improve the relevance of financial statement information
for certain component units. The adoption and implementation of Statement No. 90 did not have
a significant impact to the MWMC.
GASB Statement No. 98 – The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. This statement does
not impact the MWMC.
GASB Statements No. 87, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, and 97 – These are other pronouncements that
have been issued by the GASB but not yet required to be implemented by the MWMC.
NOTE B – INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS
In accordance with the MWMC service agreement dated July 14, 1983 and updated on July 5, 2005, the
City of Eugene is responsible for the operations of the regional sewage facilities. The agreement
obligated MWMC for costs incurred by the City of Eugene in operating and maintaining the Regional
Sewage Facilities. These costs include employee benefits for City of Eugene employees. The
interagency payable at June 30, 2021 for operation and maintenance costs incurred by the City of
Eugene is $2,489,245 ($1,666,345 for 2020). The total costs charged to MWMC for the year ended June
30, 2021 were $15,280,858 ($14,683,457 for 2020). The City of Springfield, in accordance with the
MWMC service agreement dated July 14, 1983 and updated July 5, 2005, provides the technical,
financial, and administrative support services to MWMC. Costs charged to MWMC for the years ended
June 30, 2021 and 2020 were $4,275,285 and $3,908,139 respectively and include employee benefits for
City of Springfield employees.
These costs include a pro-rata share of other post-employment benefits, specifically medical, dental and
vision coverage for eligible retirees, their spouses, domestic partners, and dependents on a self-pay
basis. Due to the effect of age, retiree claim costs are generally higher than claim costs for all members
as a whole. The difference between retiree claim costs and the amount of retiree healthcare premiums
represents implicit employer contribution. In addition, life insurance benefits are provided to fully disabled
employees. The actuarial computed liability for the plan at June 30, 2021 was $951,643 ($862,834 for
2020).
MWMC has no employees of its own. All personnel costs reflected are related to the employees of the
cities of Eugene and Springfield contracted to do the work of MWMC. In addition to the post-employment
benefit liability referenced above, MWMC has recorded an interagency payable to the respective cities for
the compensated absences of $896,889 ($762,777 for 2020), and the net pension liability of $12,206,074
($10,791,103 for 2020) computed for those employees. The total interagency payable due to the cities of
Eugene and Springfield is $14,054,606 ($12,416,714 for 2020.)
33
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE C – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
At June 30, 2021, MWMC was obligated by contracts for uncompleted construction projects for
$2,699,747. At June 30, 2020, the obligation on contracts for capital improvement projects was
$12,577,158
NOTE D – STEWARDSHIP, COMPLIANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Budgetary information
MWMC follows these procedures in establishing the budgetary data reflected in the statements presented
in the supplementary information section.
In the spring of each year, the Executive Officer submits a proposed budget to the Metropolitan
Wastewater Management Commission. The budget is prepared on the modified accrual basis of
accounting. Estimated revenues and expenditures are budgeted for by fund, department, and category.
Information on the past year’s actual receipts and expenditures and the current-year amended budget are
provided in the budget document. MWMC conducts a public hearing for the purpose of obtaining citizen
comments on the budget. MWMC then adopts the budget. All three governmental bodies included in the
intergovernmental agreement, the City of Springfield, the City of Eugene, and Lane County, ratify the
budget as appropriate. MWMC then makes a final adoption by resolution.
MWMC may change the budget throughout the year by transferring appropriations between levels of
control and by adopting supplemental budgets. Any changes adopted by MWMC in this manner must
also be adopted by the City of Springfield, because MWMC’s budget is included in the budget of the City
of Springfield. Management may transfer budget amounts between individual line items within the control
level, but cannot make changes between the legal levels of control. During the fiscal year ended June
30, 2021, MWMC adopted several transfer resolutions and supplemental budgets increasing
expenditures by $4,044,800. This was funded by adjustments to beginning cash - carrying forward
budget planned, but not spent at the end of FY 2020.
NOTE E – RESTRICTED CASH AND INVESTMENTS
The Commission maintains cash and investments in several fund accounts in accordance with bond
resolutions and Commission authorization. Descriptions of these fund account types are as follows:
System Development Charge Reserves – Used to account for charges assessed and collected in
conjunction with installation of new sewer services in the Regional Sewer System and are restricted by
State of Oregon Statutes to system enhancements and other related capital expenditures.
Investments for Bond Principal and Interest – Used to account for cash and investments restricted by
Bond Indentures of Trust for future payment of principal and interest on debt.
State Revolving Loan Reserves – Deposits held for debt service as required by the State of Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality for Clean Water State Revolving Fund Loan Agreements.
34
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE E – RESTRICTED CASH AND INVESTMENTS - continued
Insurance Reserve - Deposits held by direction of the Commission for use towards future insurance
claims.
Detailed amounts for restricted cash and investments were as follows:
2021 2020
State Revolving Fund loan reserves 183,192$ 183,192$
System development charge reserves 8,083,111 5,261,086
Investments for bond principal and interest 2,000,000 2,000,000
Insurance reserve 1,500,000 1,500,000
Total restricted cash and investments 11,766,303$ 8,944,278$
NOTE F– CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital asset activity for the year ended June 30, 2021 was as follows:
Beginning Decreases and Ending
Balance Increases Reclassifications Balance
Capital assets, not being depreciated:
Land 8,339,727$ -$ -$ 8,339,727$
Construction in progress 9,400,632 10,018,717 (3,556,377) 15,862,972
Total capital assets, not being depreciated 17,740,359 10,018,717 (3,556,377) 24,202,699
Capital assets, being depreciated:
Buildings 153,754,528 298,005 3,556,377 157,608,910
Machinery and equipment 128,056,755 1,037,862 (374,190) 128,720,426
Other 5,553,054 17,060 - 5,570,114
Total capital assets, being depreciated 287,364,337 1,352,927 3,182,187 291,899,450
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings (83,259,125) (5,429,177) - (88,688,301)
Machinery and equipment (83,943,764) (3,699,110) 360,505 (87,282,368)
Other (3,369,335) (261,128) - (3,630,462)
Total accumulated depreciation (170,572,224) (9,389,415) 360,505 (179,601,131)
Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 116,792,113 (8,036,488) 3,542,692 112,298,319
Capital assets, net 134,532,472$ 1,982,229$ (13,684)$ 136,501,018$
35
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE F– CAPITAL ASSETS - continued
Capital asset activity for the year ended June 30, 2020 was as follows:
Beginning Decreases and Ending
Balance Increases Reclassifications Balance
Capital assets, not being depreciated:
Land 8,619,727$ -$ (280,000)$ 8,339,727$
Construction in progress 14,315,469 6,436,527 (11,351,364) 9,400,632
Total capital assets, not being depreciated 22,935,196 6,436,527 (11,631,364) 17,740,359
Capital assets, being depreciated:
Buildings 142,774,319 85,145 10,895,064 153,754,528
Machinery and equipment 128,377,634 559,906 (880,785) 128,056,755
Other 4,816,754 - 736,300 5,553,054
Total capital assets, being depreciated 275,968,707 645,051 10,750,579 287,364,337
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings (78,025,259) (5,233,866) - (83,259,125)
Machinery and equipment (80,760,624) (3,683,771) 500,631 (83,943,764)
Other (3,111,152) (258,183) - (3,369,335)
Total accumulated depreciation (161,897,035) (9,175,820) 500,631 (170,572,224)
Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 114,071,672 (8,530,769) 11,251,210 116,792,113
Capital assets, net 137,006,868$ (2,094,242)$ (380,153)$ 134,532,472$
NOTE G – REBATABLE ARBITRAGE
On May 3, 2016 MWMC issued $32,725,000 in revenue bonds. Interest earnings on unspent bond
proceeds can result in an arbitrage rebate due to the federal government. Arbitrage regulations require
that the first installment date computation be made at five years from the delivery date. The rebate is
required to be made within 60 days of the calculation. MWMC’s liability is estimated at zero as of June
30, 2021.
NOTE H – LONG TERM DEBT
Revenue Bonds
MWMC issued $32,725,000 in revenue bonds as a result of a bond refunding in FY2015-16. The bond
premium of $5,249,467 is being amortized over the life of the bonds. Additionally, a deferred charge for
debt refunding of $3,639,258 is being amortized over the life of the 2016 bonds with $1,851,203
unamortized as of June 30, 2021. There are no longer specific reserves required by the bond covenants.
36
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE H – LONG TERM DEBT - continued
Revenue obligation bonds payable transactions for the year ended June 30, 2021 are as follows:
Final Effective Outstanding Issued Matured Outstanding
Issue Maturity Interest July 1,During During June 30,Due Within
Date Date Rate 2020 Year Year 2021 One Year
Sewer system revenue bonds
serviced by fund revenues:
Series 2016 5/3/2016 2027 1.461%21,585,000$ -$ 3,090,000$ 18,495,000$ 3,245,000$
Unamortized premium 2,670,277
Due in current year (3,245,000)
Total revenue bonds payable 17,920,277$
Revenue obligation bonds payable transactions for the year ended June 30, 2020 are as follows:
Final Effective Outstanding Issued Matured Outstanding
Issue Maturity Interest July 1,During During June 30,Due Within
Date Date Rate 2019 Year Year 2020 One Year
Sewer system revenue bonds
serviced by fund revenues:
Series 2016 5/3/2016 2027 1.461%24,540,000$ -$ 2,955,000$ 21,585,000$ 3,090,000$
Unamortized premium 3,170,226
Due in current year (3,090,000)
Total revenue bonds payable 21,665,226$
Maturities of bond principal and interest are as follows:
Fiscal Year Principal Interest
2022 3,245,000$ 761,125$
2023 3,410,000 594,750
2024 3,590,000 419,750
2025 3,750,000 255,000
2026 3,900,000 102,000
2027 600,000 12,000
18,495,000$ 2,144,625$
Notes Payable
In September 2009 the MWMC entered into a Note Payable with the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ). The Note was a direct placement. The Note is a “Revenue Secured Loan”
and the DEQ was granted a security interest in the MWMC’s Net Revenues. Other provisions include:
note is subordinate to Revenue Bonds in existence at the time the Note was taken and possibly to future
Revenue Bonds subject to the Master Declaration, there are no prepayment penalties, the Note is subject
to a late payment fee of 5% of the late payment, the MWMC must maintain a loan reserve set by the
DEQ, and the MWMC must meet and report annually on Debt Service Coverage ratio of 105% of that
fiscal year’s debt service payments. If there is an event of default which remains uncured, the DEQ may
declare the outstanding loan amount plus unpaid accrued interest and fees to be due immediately. The
37
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
NOTE H – LONG TERM DEBT - continued
DEQ may also: appoint a receiver at the MWMC’s expense, set and collect utility rates, direct the State
Treasurer of the State of Oregon to withhold any amounts otherwise due to the MWMC. To date, the
MWMC has complied with all of the Note provisions and there have been no events of default.
At June 30, 2021, note payable was as follows:
Beginning Ending Due Within
Balance Additions Reductions Balance One Year
Notes payable 1,145,759$ -$ (245,759)$ 900,000$ 100,000$
At June 30, 2020, note payable was as follows:
Beginning Ending Due Within
Balance Additions Reductions Balance One Year
Notes payable 6,849,342$ -$ (5,703,583)$ 1,145,759$ 245,759$
Principal and interest amounts due on the note payable in each of the next five years, and in five-year
increments thereafter, are as follows:
Fiscal Year Principal Interest
2022 100,000$ 4,250$
2023 100,000 3,750
2024 100,000 3,250
2025 100,000 2,750
2026 100,000 2,250
2027-2030 400,000 4,000
Total 900,000$ 20,250$
MWMC maintained a loan reserve of $183,192 as of June 30, 2021 in accordance with the loan
agreements with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
38
Supplemental
Information
39
40
Regional Regional
Wastewater Wastewater
Fund Capital Fund Eliminations Total
Revenues:
Charges for services 34,754,714$ -$ (322,072)$ 34,432,642$
Investment earnings 48,855 422,608 - 471,463
Intergovernmental revenue 62,404 812 - 63,216
Licenses and permits 13,015 - - 13,015
Fines and forfeitures 1,100 - - 1,100
Miscellaneous revenue 33,845 4,676 - 38,521
Total revenues 34,913,933 428,096 (322,072) 35,019,957
Expenses:
Current operating:
Finance 158,704 - - 158,704
Development and public works 19,713,332 6,179 (322,072) 19,397,439
Debt service:
Interest and premium amortization 899,176 (153,353) - 745,823
Depreciation 9,389,412 - - 9,389,412
Total expenses 30,160,624 (147,174) (322,072) 29,691,378
Excess of revenues over
(under) expenses 4,753,309 575,270 - 5,328,579
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 19,064,186 16,522,867 (35,587,053) -
Transfers out (16,522,867) (19,064,186) 35,587,053 -
Capital contributions 16,409 3,182,742 - 3,199,151
Loss on disposal of capital assets (13,685) - - (13,685)
Total other financing sources (uses)2,544,043 641,423 - 3,185,466
Change in fund net position 7,297,352 1,216,693 - 8,514,045
Fund net position, beginning of year 129,196,441 57,911,862 - 187,108,303
Fund net position, end of year 136,493,793$ 59,128,555$ -$ 195,622,348$
Year Ended June 30, 2021
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
41
Adjustments
Budget to Budget GAAP
Original Revised Basis Basis Basis
Budget Budget Actual Variance Actual Actual
Revenues:
Charges for services 35,076,000$ 35,076,000$ 34,662,895$ (413,105)$ 91,819$ 34,754,714$
Investment earnings 181,000 181,000 40,219 (140,781) 8,636 48,855
Intergovernmental revenue - - 158,826 158,826 (96,422) 62,404
Licenses and permits 9,500 9,500 13,015 3,515 - 13,015
Fines and forfeitures - - 1,100 1,100 - 1,100
Miscellaneous revenue 700,000 700,000 149,473 (550,527) (115,628) 33,845
Total revenues 35,966,500 35,966,500 35,025,528 (940,972) (111,595) 34,913,933
Expenses:
Current operating:
Finance 169,100 169,100 158,704 10,396 - 158,704
Development and public works 19,600,900 19,666,684 17,243,643 2,423,041 2,469,689 19,713,332
Debt service:
Principal 3,335,759 3,335,759 3,335,759 - (3,335,759) -
Interest 925,175 925,175 925,161 14 (25,985) 899,176
Depreciation - - - - 9,389,412 9,389,412
Total expenses 24,030,934 24,096,718 21,663,267 2,433,451 8,497,357 30,160,624
Excess of revenues over
(under) expenses 11,935,566 11,869,782 13,362,261 1,492,479 (8,608,952) 4,753,309
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 24,710 24,710 24,710 - 19,039,476 19,064,186
Transfers out (13,750,000) (13,187,108) (13,187,108) - (3,335,759) (16,522,867)
Capital contributions - - - - 16,409 16,409
Gain (loss) on disposal of assets - - - - (13,685) (13,685)
Total other financing sources (uses)(13,725,290) (13,162,398) (13,162,398) - 15,706,441 2,544,043
Change in fund net position (1,789,724) (1,292,616) 199,863 1,492,479 7,097,489 7,297,352
Fund net position, beginning of year 11,500,938 11,003,830 11,003,830 - 118,192,611 129,196,441
Fund net position, end of year 9,711,214$ 9,711,214$ 11,203,693$ 1,492,479$ 125,290,100$ 136,493,793$
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION
(NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS) - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
Year Ended June 30, 2021
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
REGIONAL WASTEWATER FUND
42
Year Ended June 30, 2021
Adjustments
Budget to Budget GAAP
Original Revised Basis Basis Basis
Budget Budget Actual Variance Actual Actual
Revenues:
Investment earnings 1,652,000$ 1,652,000$ 421,911$ (1,230,089)$ 697$ 422,608$
Intergovernmental revenue 10 10 812 802 - 812
Miscellaneous revenue 4,000 4,000 5,229 1,229 (553) 4,676
Total revenues 1,656,010 1,656,010 427,952 (1,228,058) 144 428,096
Expenses:
Current operating:
Development and public works 3,064,000 4,264,000 1,510,431 2,753,569 (1,504,252) 6,179
Capital projects 20,895,000 24,311,503 10,170,594 14,140,909 (10,170,594) -
Debt service:
Interest - - - - (153,353) (153,353)
Total expenses 23,959,000 28,575,503 11,681,025 16,894,478 (11,828,199) (147,174)
Excess of revenues over
(under) expenses (22,302,990) (26,919,493) (11,253,073) 15,666,420 11,828,343 575,270
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 13,750,000 13,187,108 13,187,108 - 3,335,759 16,522,867
Transfers out (24,710) (24,710) (24,710) - (19,039,476) (19,064,186)
Capital contributions 1,650,000 1,650,000 3,218,913 1,568,913 (36,171) 3,182,742
Total other financing sources (uses)15,375,290 14,812,398 16,381,311 1,568,913 (15,739,888) 641,423
Change in fund net position (6,927,700) (12,107,095) 5,128,238 17,235,333 (3,911,545) 1,216,693
Fund net position, beginning of year 69,022,323 74,127,123 74,127,123 - (16,215,261) 57,911,862
Fund net position, end of year 62,094,623$ 62,020,028$ 79,255,361$ 17,235,333$ (20,126,806)$ 59,128,555$
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION
(NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS) - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
REGIONAL WASTEWATER CAPITAL FUND
43
This page intentionally left blank.
44
&RPSOLDQFH6HFWLRQ
45
46
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
REQUIRED BY OREGON STATE REGULATIONS
Governing Board
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America,the financial statements of Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) as of
and for the year ended June 30, 2021, and have issued our report thereon dated December 14,2021.
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether MWMC's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grants, including the provisions of Oregon Revised Statutes as specified in Oregon Administrative
Rules 162-10-000 through 162-10-320 of the Minimum Standards for Audits of Oregon Municipal
Corporations, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of
financial statements amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
We performed procedures to the extent we considered necessary to address the required comments and
disclosures which included, but were not limited to the following:
§Deposit of public funds with financial institutions (ORS Chapter 295).
§Indebtedness limitations, restrictions and repayment.
§Budgets legally required (ORS Chapter 294).
§Insurance and fidelity bonds in force or required by law.
§Programs funded from outside sources.
§Authorized investment of surplus funds (ORS Chapter 294).
§Public contracts and purchasing (ORS Chapters 279A, 279B, 279C).
In connection with our testing nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe MWMC was not in
substantial compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants, including the
provisions of Oregon Revised Statutes as specified in Oregon Administrative Rules 162-10-000 through
162-10-320 of the Minimum Standards for Audits of Oregon Municipal Corporations.
47
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered MWMC’s internal control
over financial reporting to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the
purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an
opinion on the effectiveness of MWMC's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not
express an opinion on the effectiveness of MWMC's internal control.
Restriction on Use
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the governing board and management of
MWMC and the Oregon Secretary of State and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other
than these parties.
GROVE, MUELLER & SWANK, P.C.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
By:
Ryan T. Pasquarella, A Shareholder
December 14,2021
48
December 14, 2021
Governing Body
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
We have audited the financial statements of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission ( MWMC) as
of and for the year ended June 30, 2021,and have issued our report thereon dated December 14, 2021. Professional
standards require that we advise you of the following matters relating to our audit.
Our Responsibility in Relation to the Financial Statement Audit
As communicated in our engagement letter dated May 21, 2021, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to form and express an opinion about whether the financial statements that have been prepared by
management with your oversight are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve
you or management of your respective responsibilities.
Our responsibility, as prescribed by professional standards, is to plan and perform our audit to obtain reasonable,
rather than absolute, assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit of
financial statements includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the
effectiveness of MWMC’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, as part of our audit, we considered
the internal control of MWMC solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any
assurance concerning such internal control.
We are also responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are, in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are not
required to design procedures for the purpose of identifying other matters to communicate to you.
Planned Scope and Timing
We conducted our audit consistent with the planned scope and timing we previously communicated to you.
Compliance with All Ethics Requirements Regarding Independence
The engagement team, others in our firm, as appropriate, and our firm have complied with all relevant ethical
requirements regarding independence.
ATT2 - Management Report
Qualitative Aspects of the MWMC’s Significant Accounting Practices
Significant Accounting Policies
Management has the responsibility to select and use appropriate accounting policies. A summary of the significant
accounting policies adopted by MWMC is included in the notes to the financial statements. There have been no
initial selection of accounting policies and no changes in significant accounting policies or their application during
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. No matters have come to our attention that would require us, under professional
standards, to inform you about (1) the methods used to account for significant unusual transactions and (2) the effect
of significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas for which there is a lack of authoritative
guidance or consensus.
Significant Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on
management’s current judgments. Those judgments are normally based on knowledge and experience about past and
current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because
of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may
differ markedly from management’s current judgments.
The most sensitive accounting estimates affecting the financial statements are:
·Management’s estimate of the depreciation of capital assets, based on management's determination of the
useful lives and future economic benefit of the assets.
·Management’s estimate of the fair market value of investments, based on third-party brokerage information.
·Management’s estimate of the allowance for doubtful accounts, based on past experience with uncollected
accounts.
·Management’s estimate of the contractual liabilities, based on the proportionate share of the cities of Eugene
and Springfield’s other post-employment benefits, net pension liability and related deferrals, and
compensated absences. The other post-employment benefits and net pension liabilities are based on
calculations from an independent third-party actuary.
We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimates and determined that they are reasonable
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
Financial Statement Disclosures
Certain financial statement disclosures involve significant judgment and are particularly sensitive because of their
significance to financial statement users. The most sensitive disclosures affecting MWMC’s financial statements
relate to MWMC’s long-term liabilities including contractual obligations to the Cities of Eugene and Springfield and
compliance Oregon Minimum Standards and Local Budget Law.
Significant Difficulties Encountered during the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management relating to the performance of the audit.
ATT2 - Management Report
Uncorrected and Corrected Misstatements
For purposes of this communication, professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely
misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that we believe are trivial, and communicate them to the
appropriate level of management. Further, professional standards require us to also communicate the effect of
uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or
disclosures, and the financial statements as a whole and each applicable opinion unit. There were no uncorrected
misstatements.
In addition, professional standards require us to communicate to you all material, corrected misstatements that were
brought to the attention of management as a result of audit procedures. There were no corrected misstatements.
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a matter, whether or
not resolved to our satisfaction, concerning a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, which could be
significant to MWMC’s financial statements or the auditor’s report. No such disagreements arose during the course
of the audit.
Representations Requested from Management
We have requested certain written representations from management, which are included in the attached letter dated
December 14, 2021.
Management’s Consultations with Other Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters.
Management informed us that, and to our knowledge, there were no consultations with other accountants regarding
auditing and accounting matters.
Other Significant Matters, Findings, or Issues
In the normal course of our professional association with MWMC, we generally discuss a variety of matters,
including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards,operating and regulatory conditions
affecting the entity, and operational plans and strategies that may affect the risks of material misstatement. None of
the matters discussed resulted in a condition to our retention as MWMC’s auditors.
We applied certain limited procedures to management’s discussion and analysis, which is required supplementary
information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of
management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with
management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during
our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any
assurance on the RSI.
We were also engaged to report on the supplemental information, which accompanies the financial statements, but
is not RSI. With respect to this supplemental information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated
the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed
from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial
statements. We compared and reconciled the supplemental information to the underlying accounting records used to
prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.
ATT2 - Management Report
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the governing body and management of Metropolitan
Wastewater Management Commission and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.
Very truly yours,
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
ATT2 - Management Report
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: February 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Troy McAllister, MWMC Managing Engineer
Michelle Miranda, Operations Manager
Greg Watkins, Maintenance Manager
SUBJECT: FY 2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Capital Budget and 5-Year Plan
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Commission review and feedback on draft FY2022-23 Capital Program Budget
and 5-Year Capital Plan
ISSUE
The first draft of the FY2022-23 RWP Capital Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan is attached for Commission
review and comment. Staff will provide a presentation of the RWP Capital Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan
at the MWMC meeting on February 11, 2022.
DISCUSSION
The Capital Program Budget has two major components: 1) The Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
budget, and 2) the Asset Management Capital Program (AMCP) budget. The MWMC Capital Program
section of the draft FY2022-23 budget document (Attachment 1) provides a detailed discussion of the
following:
An overview of the RWP Capital Program and objectives
An overview of the RWP Capital Program funding and financial planning methods
A description of the CIP status and FY2022-23 CIP Budget
A description of the AMCP status and FY2022-23 AMCP Budget
A summary of the 5-Year Capital Plan
The proposed draft FY2022-23 budget document anticipates the following:
CIP FY2022-23 proposed budget: $30,900,000
AMCP FY2022-23 proposed budget: $3,882,000
CIP 5-year planning subtotal: $90,510,000
AMCP 5-year planning subtotal: $14,691,000
RWP Capital Program 5-year planning total: $105,201,000
AGENDA ITEM V
Memo: FY 2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Capital Budget and 5-Year Plan
February 3, 2022
Page 2 of 2
At the February 11, 2022, meeting, staff will provide a presentation summarizing the proposed FY2022-
23 Capital Program Budget and the 5-Year Capital Plan. Input provided by the Commission will be
incorporated into the final draft of the RWP Capital Budget, to be presented at the March Commission
meeting, along with the first review of the MWMC FY2022-23 Operating Budget.
ACTION REQUESTED
Commission review and feedback on draft FY2022-23 Capital Program Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan is
requested.
ATTACHMENT
1. Draft FY2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program Capital Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
CAPITAL PROGRAMS
Overview
The Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) includes two components: the Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) and the Asset Management Capital Program (AMCP). The FY 22-23 CIP Budget,
the FY 22-23 AMCP Budget, and the associated 5-Year Capital Plan are based on the 2004
MWMC Facilities Plan (2004 FP) and the 2014 Partial Facilities Plan Update. The 2004 FP was
approved by the MWMC, the governing bodies of the City of Eugene, the City of Springfield,
Lane County, and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The 2004 FP and its
20-year capital project list was the result of a comprehensive evaluation of the regional
wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
The 2004 FP built on previous targeted studies, including the 1997 Master Plan, 1997 Biosolids
Management Plan, 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), and the 2003
Management Plan for a dedicated biosolids land application site. The 2004 FP is intended to
meet changing regulatory and wet weather flow requirements and to serve the community’s
wastewater capacity and treatment needs through 2025. Accordingly, the 2004 FP established the
CIP project list to provide necessary facility enhancements and expansions over the planning
period. The CIP is administered by the City of Springfield for the MWMC. The AMCP
implements the projects and activities necessary to maintain functionality, lifespan, and
effectiveness of the MWMC facility assets on an ongoing basis. The AMCP is administered by
the City of Eugene for the MWMC and consists of three sub-categories:
▪ Equipment Replacement Program
▪ Major Rehabilitation Program
▪ Major Capital Outlay
The MWMC has established these capital programs to achieve the following RWP objectives:
▪ Compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations
▪ Protection of the health and safety of people and property from exposure to hazardous
conditions such as untreated or inadequately treated wastewater
▪ Provision of adequate capacity to facilitate community growth in the Eugene-Springfield
metropolitan area consistent with adopted land use plans
▪ Construction, operation, and management of the MWMC facilities in a manner that is as
cost-effective, efficient, and affordable to the community as possible in the short and long
term
▪ Mitigation of potential negative impacts of the MWMC facilities on adjacent uses and
surrounding neighborhoods (ensuring that the MWMC facilities are “good neighbors” as
judged by the community)
ATT1 - Draft FY2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program Capital Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Capital Program Funding and Financial Planning Methods and Policies
This annual budget document presents the FY 22-23 CIP Budget, the FY 22-23 AMCP Budget,
and 5-Year Capital Plan which includes the CIP and AMCP Capital Plan. The MWMC CIP
financial planning and funding methods are in accordance with the financial management
policies put forth in the MWMC Financial Management Plan.
Each of the two RWP capital programs relies on funding mechanisms to achieve the objectives
described above. The CIP is funded primarily through Capital Reserves, which may include
proceeds from revenue bond sales, financing through the State of Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan program, System
Development Charges, and transfers from the Operating Fund to Capital Reserves.
The RWP’s operating fund is maintained to pay for operations, administration, debt service,
equipment replacement contributions and capital contributions associated with the RWP. The
operating fund derives the majority of its revenue from regional wastewater user fees that are
collected by the City of Eugene and City of Springfield from their respective customers. In
accordance with the MWMC Financial Plan, funds remaining in excess of budgeted operational
expenditures can be transferred from the Operating Fund to the Capital Reserve fund. The
Capital Reserve accumulates revenue to fund capital projects, including major rehabilitation, to
reduce the amount of borrowing necessary to finance capital projects. In addition, a significant
amount of the CIP is funded with Improvement System Development Charges in FY 22-23.
The AMCP consists of three programs managed by the City of Eugene and funded through
regional wastewater user fees: The Equipment Replacement Program, which funds replacement
of equipment valued at or over $10,000 with a life expectancy greater than one year; The Major
Rehabilitation Program, which funds rehabilitation of the MWMC infrastructure such as roof
replacements, structure coatings, etc.; and the Major Capital Outlay Program for the initial
purchase of major equipment that will be placed on the equipment replacement list, or a one time
large capital expense. The MWMC assets are tracked throughout their lifecycle using asset
management tracking software. Based on this information, the three AMCP program annual
budgets are established and projected for the 5-Year Capital Plan.
For planning purposes, the MWMC must consider market changes that drive capital project
expenditures. Specifically, the MWMC capital plan reflects projected price changes over time
that affect the cost of materials and services. Accordingly, the 2004 FP projections were based
on the 20-city average Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENRCCI). In
addition, City of Springfield staff and MWMC design consultants monitor construction trends in
Oregon and construction changes based on the COVID pandemic (2020 to present).
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Regional Wastewater Capital Program Status and Budget
CIP Project Status and Budget
The FY 22-23 CIP Budget is comprised of the individual budgets for each of the active
(carryover) or starting (new) projects in the first year of the 5-Year Capital Plan. The total of
these FY 22-23 project budgets is $30,900,000. Each capital project represented in the FY 22-23
Budget is described in detail in a CIP project sheet that can be found at the end of this document.
Each project sheet provides a description of the project, the project’s purpose and driver (the
reason for the project), the funding schedule for the project, and the project’s expected final cost
and cash flow. For those projects that are in progress, a short status report is included on the
project sheet. In 2019, the MWMC Resiliency Planning consultant study focused on seismic
(Cascadia magnitude 9.0 earthquake) and major flooding event(s), and recommended some
infrastructure multi-year improvements for consideration during the CIP Budgeting process.
Completed Capital Projects
The following capital projects were completed in FY 21-22:
▪ Renewable Natural Gas Upgrades
▪ Riparian Shade Credit Program
▪ Aeration Basin Improvements – Phase 2 (study of existing aeration systems)
▪ Facilities Plan Engineering Services
Carryover Capital Projects
All or a portion of remaining funding for active capital projects in FY 21-22 is carried forward to
the FY 22-23 Budget. The on-going carryover projects are:
▪ Administration Building Improvements
▪ Class A Disinfection Facilities
▪ Resiliency Follow-Up
▪ Comprehensive Facility Plan Update
▪ Glenwood Pump Station Upgrades
▪ Poplar Harvest Management Services
▪ Recycled Water Demonstration Project
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Overall, the budgeting for these projects follows, and is consistent with, the estimated cost of the
listed capital projects and new information gathered during the MWMC design development
process.
New Projects for FY 22-23
▪ Aeration Basin Upgrades (2023 to 2026)
▪ Tertiary Filtration – Phase 2
▪ Water Quality Trading Program
▪ WPCF Stormwater Infrastructure
FY 22-23 Capital Budget Summary (Exhibit 12)
Exhibit 12 displays the adjusted budget and end-of-year expenditure estimates for FY 21-22, the
amount of funding projected to be carried over to FY 22-23 and additional funding for existing
and/or new projects in FY 22-23.
FY 21-22
ADJUSTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
ESTIMATED
ACTUALS
FY 21-22
CARRYOVER
TO FY 22-23
NEW
FUNDING
FOR FY 22-23
TOTAL
FY 22-23
BUDGET
Project to be Completed in FY 21-22
Renewable Natural Gas Upgrades 2,146,263 1,880,000 0 0 0
Riparian Shade Credit Program 1,440,102 270,000 0 0 0
Aeration Basin Improvements - Phase 2 1,286,692 360,000 0 0 0
Facility Plan Engineering Services 80,892 50,000 0 0 0
Projects to be Carried Over to FY 22-23
Administration Building Improvements 7,582,063 1,082,063 6,500,000 0 6,500,000
Class A Disinfection Facilities 7,644,162 2,344,162 5,300,000 0 5,300,000
Resiliency Follow-Up 695,908 395,908 300,000 3,000,000 3,300,000
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update 638,558 438,558 200,000 1,840,000 2,040,000
Glenwood Pump Station Upgrades 2,048,574 248,574 1,800,000 0 1,800,000
Poplar Harvest Management Services 788,267 558,267 230,000 100,000 330,000
Recycled Water Demonstration Project 365,242 35,242 330,000 0 330,000
New Projects in FY 22-23
Aeration Basin Upgrades (2023 to 2026)0 0 0 5,000,000 5,000,000
Tertiary Filtration - Phase 2 0 0 0 3,000,000 3,000,000
Water Quality Trading Program 0 0 0 3,000,000 3,000,000
WCPF Stormwater Infrastructure 0 0 0 300,000 300,000
TOTAL Capital Projects $24,716,723 $7,662,774 $14,660,000 $16,240,000 $30,900,000
EXHIBIT 12
Summary of FY 22-23 MWMC Construction Program Capital Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
FY 22-23 Asset Management Capital Program and Budget
The AMCP consists of the following three programs:
▪ Equipment Replacement
▪ Major Rehabilitation
▪ Major Capital Outlay
The FY 22-23 budget of each program is described below.
Equipment Replacement Program - Budget
The FY 22-23 Capital Programs budget includes $3,220,000 in Equipment Replacement
purchases that are identified on the table below.
Distributed Control System (DCS) – The plant’s distributed control system hardware is nearing
its “end of support” phase and should be replaced to maintain operational stability.
Tractor, Paddle Mixer – This tractor and attachment are used to mix and aerate the biosolids in
the air drying beds.
Integrated Tool Carrier, CAT Loader – The current loader has already been repurposed once
and is at the end of its useful life.
Sodium Hypochlorite Tank, Final – Repair the failing false bottom of the chemical storage
tank.
Sludge Grinder – The grinder is a critical spare to chop-up trash collected on the bar screens
before it is dewatered and sent to the landfill. This will replace the current spare for which parts
are no longer available.
Project Description
FY 22-23
Proposed Budget
Distributed Control System (DCS), Operations $2,070,000
Tractor, Paddle Mixer w/Aerator Attachment (Brown Bear or similar)546,000
Integrated Tool Carrier, CAT Loader, Facilities 350,000
Sodium Hypochlorite Tank, Final 100,000
Sludge Grinder, Sluice Trough #2, Pretreatment 60,000
Electric Carts (x1), Operations 25,000
Electric Cart (x1), Maintenance 25,000
Discrete Analyzer, ESB Laboratory (*instead of SGTHEM, discontinued from ER)24,000
Mower, 72” Deck, Zero Turn w/Mulcher, Facilities 20,000
Total $3,220,000
Equipment Replacement
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Electric Carts, Operations and Maintenance – Replace electric carts that are no longer reliable
and require more frequent repairs.
Discrete Analyzer – This instrument is used to analyze water quality samples required by the
NPDES permit and meet lower detection limits required by a rule change. The instrument is
standalone and does not require software or service contracts. *Note: The SGTHEM equipment
planned for FY23 replacement is obsolete and removed from ER schedule; discrete analyzer is
recommended instead of SGTHEM.
Mower, 72” Deck, Zero Turn w/Mulcher – The twelve year-old mower has electrical wiring
problems, plugs, and doesn’t starting reliably.
Major Rehabilitation Program - Budget
The FY 22-23 Capital Programs budget includes $662,000 for Major Rehabilitation projects that
are identified on the table below.
Interior Dome Recoating, #1 Digester – An industrial epoxy coating on the interior of the
digester dome protects the structural concrete from corrosive hydrogen sulfide gas. The existing
coating is delaminating.
Roof Replacements (x5) – Perform roof improvements ranging from major repairs to complete
replacement. This is following the recommendations of a third-party roof assessment company.
Grit Channels, Wood Baffles (x4) – Baffles in the grit channels that assist with separating grit
from incoming wastewater. These baffles were made of treated wood and are rotting.
Ops/Maint Building Improvements – Budget for unforeseen, larger cost improvements to
regional buildings.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Major Capital Outlay
There are no new requests for Major Capital Outlay in FY 22-23.
Asset Management Capital Budget Summary
The following table summarizes the FY 22-23 Asset Management Capital Program Budget by
project type showing a total AMCP budget of $3,882,000.
Project Description
FY 22-23
Proposed Budget
Equipment Replacement $3,220,000
Major Rehabilitation 662,000
Major Capital -
Total $3,882,000
Asset Management Capital Project Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
FY 23-24 Asset Management Capital Program Status and Budget
The AMCP consists of the following programs:
▪ Equipment Replacement
▪ Major Rehabilitation
▪ Major Capital Outlay
The FY 23-24 budget and status of each program is described below.
Equipment Replacement Program – Budget Forecast
The FY 23-24 Capital Programs budget includes $1,400,000 in Equipment Replacement
purchases that are identified in the table below.
Strain Presses, Biosolids Drying Press (x3) – The presses are used to filter, screen, dewater and
transport biosolids during processing.
Tractor-Loader, Integrated Tool Carrier (Caterpillar) – The integrated tool carrier performs
a variety of functions including sweeping drying beds, biosolids production, biosolids
application, and lifting and moving heavy objects.
Passenger Vehicles, EV/Hybrid (x3) – Replacement of two 13-year old passenger vehicles and
one 20-year old passenger vehicle.
MCC, Willakenzie PS – Parts for the Motor Control Center are obsolete and no longer
available.
Pickup Truck, Dump Bed – The 20-year old truck should be replaced because of condition and
age.
Project Description
FY 23-24
Budget Forecast
Strain Press, BioSolids Drying Press #1, BMF $375,000
Tractor/Loader, Integrated Tool Carrier (Caterpillar)350,000
Passenger Vehicles, EV/Hybrid (x3), Administration 180,000
Motor Control Center, Willakenzie PS 100,000
Pickup Truck, Dump Bed, Facilities 95,000
Augers (x2), Tractor Attachments, Biosolids Drying, BMF 90,000
Flail Mowers (x5), BMF 75,000
Pickup Truck, 4WD, Facilities 65,000
Electric Carts (x2), Plant Maintenance 50,000
Mower, 72 inch, Zero Turn w/Mulcher, Facilities 20,000
Total $1,400,000
Equipment Replacement
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Tractor Auger Attachments (x2) – The tractor attachments are used to dig holes.
Flail Mowers (x5) – A mower attachments are used for mowing grassy areas, areas overgrown
with brush, vines and other types of vegetation.
Pickup Truck, 4WD – Replacement of maintenance pickup which has reached the end of its
economic useful life and upgraded to 4-wheel drive.
Electric Carts (x2), Maintenance – Replace electric carts that are no longer reliable and require
more frequent repairs.
Mower, 72” Deck, Zero Turn w/Mulcher – The 13-year old mower should be replaced because
of condition and age.
Major Rehabilitation Program - Budget
The FY 23-24 Capital Programs budget includes $798,000 for Major Rehabilitation projects that
are identified in the table below.
Exterior Dome Coatings, Digesters – An industrial epoxy coating on the exterior of the
digester domes protects the structural concrete from deterioration.
Raw Sewage Pump Coatings, Pretreatment – An industrial epoxy coating on the raw sewage
pumps protects equipment from corrosive hydrogen sulfide gas. The existing coating is
delaminating.
Grit Channel Coatings and Rails, Preatreat – An industrial epoxy coating on the grit channels
and rails protects the equipment.
Grit Collector/Head Cells Coating, Pretreat – An industrial epoxy coating on the grit collector
and head cells protects the equipment.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Roadway and Parking Area Resealing, BMF – To maintain and protect the roads and parking
areas of the facility.
Building Improvements, Ops-Maint Buildings – Budget for unforeseen, larger cost
improvements to regional buildings.
Masonry Resealing, Ops Building, BMF – To maintain and protect the operations building at
the BMF.
Major Capital - Budget
There are no new requests for Major Capital Outlay in FY 23-24.
Summary of FY 23-24 Asset Management Capital Program Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
5-Year Capital Plan (Exhibit 13)
For each fiscal planning cycle, only the first year of budget authority is appropriated. The
remaining four years of the CIP and AMCP Capital Plans are important and useful for fiscal and
work planning purposes. However, it is important to note that the funds in the outer years of the
Capital Plan are only planned and not appropriated. Also, the full amount of obligated multi-year
project costs is often appropriated in the first year of the project, unless a smaller subset of the
project, such as project design, can be identified and funded without budgeting the full estimated
project cost. For these multi-year contracts, unspent funds from the first fiscal year will typically
be carried over to the next fiscal year until the project is completed. Accordingly, the RWP
Capital Plan presented herein is a subsequent extension of the plan presented in the adopted
FY 21-22 Budget that has been carried forward by one year to FY 22-23. Changes to the 5-Year
Plan typically occur from year to year as more information becomes available and evaluated.
Exhibit 13 displays the MWMC 5-Year Capital Plan programs budget, which includes
$90,510,000 in planned capital projects and $14,691,000 planned asset management capital
projects for an overall 5-Year Capital Plan Budget of $105,201,000.
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 TOTAL
CAPITAL PROJECTS
Biosolids Management
Poplar Harvest Management Services 330,000 330,000
Non-Process Facilities and Facilities Planning
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update 2,040,000 2,040,000
Facility Plan Engineering Services 120,000 120,000 130,000 140,000 510,000
Conveyance Systems
Resiliency Follow-Up (conveyance and/or plant)3,300,000 600,000 300,000 1,200,000 2,000,000 7,400,000
Glenwood Pump Station 1,800,000 1,800,000
Plant Performance Improvements
Administration Building Improvements 6,500,000 6,500,000
Class A Disinfection Facilities 5,300,000 5,300,000
Aeration System Upgrades (2023-2026)5,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000
Tertiary Filtration - Phase 2 3,000,000 13,500,000 16,500,000
Water Quality Trading Program 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 13,000,000
Recycled Water Demonstration Projects 330,000 330,000
WCPF Stormwater Infrastructure 300,000 300,000 600,000
Waste Activated Sludge Thickening 1,200,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 6,200,000
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $30,900,000 $29,020,000 $17,620,000 $6,830,000 $6,140,000 $90,510,000
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Equipment Replacement 3,220,000 1,400,000 1,038,000 3,615,000 1,866,000 11,139,000
Major Rehabilitation 662,000 798,000 717,000 651,000 724,000 3,552,000
Major Capital Outlay
TOTAL ASSET MANAGEMENT 3,882,000 2,198,000 1,755,000 4,266,000 2,590,000 14,691,000
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS $34,782,000 $31,218,000 $19,375,000 $11,096,000 $8,730,000 $105,201,000
EXHIBIT 13
Regional Wastewater 5-Year Capital Programs
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
POPLAR HARVEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES (P80083)
Description: This project develops a long-term poplar management strategy for the Biocycle Farm
through refinement of poplar harvest, planting practices, and identification of wood
products markets best aligned with the highest and best use of Biocycle Farm poplar. The
project ensures the timely harvest of the initial plantings in each management unit (MU)
within the regulatory 12-year rotation limit and subsequent replanting. Upon final
replanting oversight of MU-3 through FY22/23, the long-term poplar harvest and
planting will be added to operations/maintenance functions in 2023 under the Eugene
Wastewater Division.
Status: MU-1 was replanted in 2016. MU-2 was replanted in 2018-19. MU-3 was harvested in
2021 with replanting anticipated in 2022-2023.
Justification: Regulatory land use requirements for operation of the Biocycle Farm and optimization of
farm effectiveness and efficiency, including biosolids and recycled water management
strategies.
Project Driver: Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) issued by Lane County; Biosolids
Management Plan and Recycled Water Use Plan under the MWMC’s NPDES permit.
Project Trigger: Maturity of each 12-year rotation age cycle in conformance with agricultural use rules.
Estimated Project Cost: $2,082,145 (estimate 2013 to June 2023)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 13-14 = $116,009; FY 14-15 = $114,465; FY 15-16 = $136,814;
FY 16-17 = $105,653; FY 17-18 = $435,573; FY 18-19 = $138,388;
FY 19-20 = $ 110,007; FY 20-21 =$36,969; FY 21-22 = $558,267
FY 22-23 = $330,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $1,193,878 $558,267 $330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,082,145
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $1,193,878 $558,267 $330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,082,145
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
COMPREHENSIVE FACILITIES PLAN UPDATE (P80101)
Description: This will be the first MWMC Comprehensive Facilities Plan Update since the 2004
MWMC Facilities Plan. The update could include WPCF stormwater planning, NPDES
permit renewal, system development charge evaluation, facilities planning technical
services, and cost estimating for a 20-year planning horizon. The update will draw on the
most recent plant data, permit compliance requirements, and available technology able to
ensure the MWMC continues to meet future regulations, environmental standards, and
community growth.
Status: As of January 2022, consultant provided WPCF stormwater master plan (December
2021). The bulk of the planned budget is reserved for future implementation of planning
work in response to the MWMC’s anticipated NPDES permit renewal in 2022.
Justification: Evaluate and plan for future MWMC conveyance and treatment upgrades and solutions to
meet regulatory requirements, preserve public health, community growth, and water
quality standards.
Project Driver: Provide comprehensive facilities planning to develop the capital program for the
upcoming 20-year period once the MWMC receives new regulatory requirements under
the next NPDES permit #102486 renewal document.
Project Trigger: The WPCF stormwater planning portion was triggered to address local building permit
requirements for MWMC upcoming construction projects. The remaining project scope
will be initiated after the upcoming NPDES permit renewal in 2022.
Estimated Project Cost: $2,600,000
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 18-19 = $35,701; FY 19-20 = $15,174; FY 20-21 = $70,567;
FY 21-22 = $438,558; FY 22-23 = $1,840,000; FY 23-24 = $200,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
FACILITY PLAN ENGINEERING SERVICES (P80110)
Description: Engineering/technical consultant services for analysis, project definition, cost estimating,
design feedback, and general consultation regarding the MWMC Facilities Plan follow up
(2023 to 2028). The related project P80090 was closed out in FY 21/22.
Status: After the MWMC upcoming 2022 permit renewal, staff anticipates updating the Facilities
Plan under P80101 and as needed follow up support via P80110 Facility Plan
Engineering Services.
Justification: Consultant services to provide ongoing technical and engineering resources as needed
after the MWMC Comprehensive Facilities Plan Update (P80101).
Project Driver: Ongoing engineering support.
Project Trigger: Ongoing need.
Estimated Cost: $660,000 (2023 to 2028)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 23-24 = $120,000; FY 24-25 = $120,000; FY 25-26 = $130,000;
FY 26-27 = $140,000; FY 27-28 = $150,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-2022
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $120,000 $130,000 $140,000 $510,000
Total Cost $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $120,000 $130,000 $140,000 $510,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
RESILIENCY FOLLOW-UP (P80109)
Description: This project provides follow-up evaluation and some implementation of the P80096
Resiliency Study (Disaster Mitigation and Recovery Plan - dated March 2020). The 2019
study recommended seismic and flooding mitigation projects estimated at $34.6-million
to be coordinated with the MWMC ongoing infrastructure/facilities construction
program. The main objective is to address “level of service” goals before a natural
disaster such as 9.0 magnitude earthquake or major flooding. Also, the MWMC should
continue to communicate with the agencies that prepare for natural disasters that can
impact the Eugene/Springfield community.
Status: As of January 2022: Established four on-call engineering consultant agreements to help
with the recommendations from the P80096 Resiliency Study regarding proposed
mitigation projects to reduce the impact of flooding and earthquake (magnitude 9.0)
issues.
Justification: The MWMC’s facilities and wastewater conveyance and treatment services are integral
to protection of the community and public health following a major disaster such as the
anticipated Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake and major flooding.
Project Driver: Cost effectively ensure reasonable recovery of MWMC’s core facilities and services
following major disaster impacts after earthquake or flooding.
Project Trigger: Per Commission direction, consultant work began in July 2018. The MWMC plan with
consultant recommendations is dated March 2020. Established consultant agreements in
2021 with four engineering businesses.
Estimated Project Cost: Mitigation recommendations estimate: $34.6-million (2019 dollars)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 20-21 = $4,092; FY 21-22 = $395,908; FY 22-23 = $3,000,000; FY 23-24 =
$600,000; FY 24-25 = $300,000; FY 25-26 = $1,200,000; FY 26-27 = $2,000,000; and
continue the MWMC mitigation work estimated above $34-million
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $4,092 $395,908 $3,300,000 $600,000 $300,000 $1,200,000 $2,000,000 $7,800,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $4,092 $395,908 $3,300,000 $600,000 $300,000 $1,200,000 $2,000,000 $7,800,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
GLENWOOD PUMP STATION UPGRADE (P80064)
Description: Expand Glenwood pump station capacity to accommodate growth and meet Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) wastewater pump station design
requirements. The pump station was designed with stalls for additional pumps. Two
pumps are currently installed with space for two additional pumps to be added when
flow to the pump station increases with development of the Glenwood and Laurel Hills
basins. In 2019, the P80096 Resiliency Planning study recommended onsite
geotechnical evaluation and additional improvements.
Status: As of January 2022, issued consultant task order work to evaluate existing pumping
capacity and geotechnical investigation.
Justification: Additional pumping capacity will be required at this MWMC pump station to handle
increasing flows in the Glenwood area (Springfield) and the Laurel Hill area (Eugene).
Project Driver: Oregon DEQ wastewater pump station redundancy requirements and 2019 Resiliency
study recommendations.
Project Trigger: Peak wet weather instantaneous flow reaches 80 percent of the pump station firm
capacity.
Estimated Project Cost: $2,050,000 (but plan to get updated construction cost estimating in 2022)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 20-21 = $1,426; FY 21-22 = $248,574; FY 22-23 = $1,800,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $1,426 $248,574 $1,800,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,050,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $1,426 $248,574 $1,800,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,050,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS (P80104)
Description: This project will address the Administration/Operations Building workspace needs at the
Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF). It is a follow up to the 2018-2019 construction
of the P80085 new laboratory building and expansion of the existing maintenance
building. In 2019, the P80096 Resiliency Planning study recommended evaluating
MWMC options for building space including: a) constructing a new MWMC building
for immediate occupancy/use after a major natural disaster, or b) upgrade the existing
building for immediate occupancy post-earthquake (magnitude 9.0 event). There are
challenges and benefits with each of these two options that will be explored during the
initial planning phase of this project. With the creation of a building meeting immediate
occupancy design, a pre-designated “Incident Command Post” could be utilized at the
WPCF site after a natural disaster. The existing 1982 building is currently used for
operating and control of the MWMC treatment facility.
Status: As of January 2022, the project team and design consultant are beginning the process of
evaluating, short-listing, and pricing some options for Commission consideration in 2022.
Justification: The original design and construction of the WPCF Administration/Operations Building
was completed February 1982 under older building codes. Since that time, use of the
building and associated construction codes have changed substantially necessitating the
need to reevaluate the MWMC building options to address level of service goals after a
nature disaster (earthquake or flooding).
Project Driver: The need to update the existing Administration/Operations building is driven by the
necessity to provide a safe and efficient work environment for the WPCF staff. Many of
the planned changes stem from a changing wastewater/environmental business because of
changing regulations since the WPCF was originally constructed in 1982. Also, address
the P80096 recommended level of service goals to operate after magnitude 9.0
earthquake issue.
Project Trigger: Expansion and changes needed for functionality, safety, and natural disaster resiliency.
Estimated Project Cost: $7,600,000 (but may increase based on project scope and construction inflation)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 20-21 = $17,937; FY 21-22 = $1,082,063; FY 22-23 = $6,000,000;
FY 23-24 = $500,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $17,937 $1,082,063 $6,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,600,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $17,937 $1,082,063 $6,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,600,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
CLASS A DISINFECTION FACILITIES (P80098)
Description: Provides disinfection, storage, and distribution facilities needed to bring tertiary filtered
effluent to Class A standards on a consistent and reliable basis for initial demonstration of
recycled water uses on- and off-site of the MWMC treatment site. The project includes
the design, bidding, construction, and permitting of Class A recycled water disinfection
facilities.
Status: As of January 2022, the 90% design submittal is under review by the project team.
Justification: Class A recycled water is necessary to expand recycled water to landscaping, street tree,
and industrial uses. Demonstration of Class A quality and reliability is necessary for
stakeholder acceptance and future adoption of expanded recycled water uses.
Project Driver: The Thermal Load Mitigation Alternatives Evaluation, Recycled Water Program
Implementation Planning, Phase 2 Study (dated August 2014) recommended
demonstration scale use of Class A recycled water to address stakeholder acceptability
issues identified as barriers to full-scale recycled water uses.
Project Trigger: Pilot recycled water demonstration sites with willing, ready-to-proceed partners have
been identified, including City of Eugene (street tree watering) and industrial aggregate
sites for equipment washing.
Estimated Project Cost: $8 million (recycled water Class A infrastructure and upgrade one structure for 9.0
magnitude earthquake preparedness related to MWMC P80096 level of service goals)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 18-19 = $836; FY 19-20 = $15,934; FY 20-21 = $339,068; FY 21-22 = $2,344,162;
FY 22-23 = $5,300,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $355,838 $2,344,162 $5,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,000,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $355,838 $2,344,162 $5,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,000,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
AERATION SYSTEM UPGRADES [2023-2026] (P80113)
Description: In 2020 and 2021, Brown and Caldwell evaluated the existing aeration systems and
provided recommendations in January 2022 via project P80100. The P80113 project will
implement the design and construction of additional upgrades/changes to the existing
aeration systems by year 2026. Upgrades to the westerly existing aeration basins are
anticipated after year 2031.
Status: As of January 2022: Brown and Caldwell provided consultant recommendation to
upgrade the existing aeration system/equipment. The Commission was updated about the
consultant recommendations at the January 14, 2022 meeting and the Commission
requested some additional 2022 information from the MWMC project team.
Justification: Update aging (1984) existing equipment/systems such as piping, electrical,
communication technology, blower, HVAC, and other components related to the aeration
system which is part of the MWMC secondary treatment process.
Project Driver: Ongoing efforts to keep existing systems reliable and achieve required performance
outcomes to address the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit.
Project Trigger: Need to address aging aeration systems for reliability and performance upgrades.
Estimated Project Cost: $30,000,000 (revised cost estimating during the design development phase)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 22-23 = $4,000,000; FY 23-24 = $10,500,000; FY 24-25 = $10,300,000;
FY 25-26 = $5,200,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $5,000,000 $25,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $30,000,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $0 $0 $5,000,000 $25,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $30,000,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
TERTIARY FILTRATION - PHASE 2 (P80102)
Description: The phased work program anticipates installing infrastructure/support facilities for 30
mgd of filters for tertiary filtration of secondary treated effluent. Phase 2 is planned to
install filter system technology sufficient for another 10 mgd of treatment that will
increase the total filtration capacity to 20 mgd. The Phase 3 project will install the
remaining filtration technology to meet the capacity needs identified in the 2004 MWMC
Facilities Plan.
In January 2016, the project scope and cost (estimate $530K in 2015) increased to
include updating electrical switchgear and installing tertiary filter flushing headers/pipe
vents.
Status: Tertiary Filtration (Phase 2) project is anticipated to evaluate the MWMC newest permit
and start design development in FY 22-23.
Justification: The 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan proposes filters on a phased work program. Filtration
provides high quality secondary effluent to help meet permit requirements and potential
Class A recycled water product.
Project Driver: Performance reliability to meet the dry weather NPDES total suspended solids limit of
less than 10 mg/L, reuse development, and compliance with effluent limits during peak
flow conditions.
Project Trigger: NPDES permit compliance for total suspended solids (TSS): Dry weather maximum
month flow in excess of 49 mgd. Also, provide higher quality effluent so that reuse
options can be developed. Continue to monitor the MWMC NPDES permit renewal
timing anticipated in 2022.
Estimated Project Cost: $16,500,000
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 22-23 = $2,300,000; FY 23-24 = $700,000; FY 24-25 = $7,000,000;
FY 25-26 = $6,500,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $3,000,000 $0 $13,500,000 $0 $0 $16,500,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $0 $0 $3,000,000 $0 $13,500,000 $0 $0 $16,500,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
WATER QUALITY TRADING PROGRAM (P80112)
Description: The MWMC Water Quality Trading Program secures regulatory credits for enhancing
water quality through watershed restoration. The program fulfills the objectives of the
MWMC Water Quality Trading Plan under the MWMC NPDES permit, which defines
the MWMC eligible trading area in the upper Willamette basin. The program is
implemented principally through the MWMC’s membership in the Pure Water Partners
collaborative via the MWMC’s contractor-provided Credit Program Manager services
and MWMC’s IGA with EWEB. Water quality trading credits comprise the MWMC’s
primary strategy for thermal load limit compliance and may provide ancillary future
water quality or carbon benefits.
Status: The MWMC with consultant help has developed a Water Quality Trading Plan for
NPDES permit compliance and has fully evaluated the credit capacity, effectiveness, and
scale of eligible lands in the upper Willamette basin. As of March 2019, the MWMC
procured The Freshwater Trust (www.thefreshwatertrust.org) as the MWMC Credit
Program Manager. As of January 2022, the MWMC has an active agreement with The
Freshwater Trust for initial Pure Water Partners implementation assistance and ongoing
maintenance of Sponsorship Pilot shade projects. Upon NPDES permit renewal (assume
2022) and implementation of the Water Quality Trading Plan, the MWMC will
implement the permit-compliance water quality trading program scope of work with The
Freshwater Trust.
Justification: The Water Quality Trading Program will help provide cost-effective strategies for most
of the thermal load compliance dates as required under the MWMC NPDES permit
renewal in 2022.
Project Driver: Implementation of updated temperature standard requirements in the MWMC’s renewed
NPDES permit (assume 2022), including pre-TMDL and TMDL thermal load limits.
Project Trigger: The NPDES permit renewal multi-year compliance schedule implementation in 2022
through 2027 and beyond.
Estimated Project Cost: $13 million (estimate 2022 to 2027)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 22-23 = $3,000,000; FY 23-24 = $3,000,000; FY 24-25 = $2,500,000;
FY 25-26 = $2,500,000; FY 26-27 = $2,000,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-2022
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $13,000,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $0 $0 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $13,000,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
RECYCLED WATER DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS (P80099)
Description: This project provides for stakeholder engagement, community communication/outreach,
and any additional design, construction, permitting, and implementation of recycled
water point-of-use needs beyond the MWMC’s point-of-delivery of Class A recycled
water product. Project may entail onsite upgrades and retrofits to allow the use of
recycled water in partnership with end-users, point-of-delivery metering, piping, controls,
user training, information materials, and public interpretative signage.
Status: As of January 2022: Letters of intent from three demonstration site partners were secured
in 2020 and ongoing planning of demonstration site use is underway in parallel with the
Class A Disinfection Facilities design contract (P80098) approved by the MWMC on
October 9, 2020. A recycled water advisory network and informational strategy was
launched in 2020 to facilitate community partner and stakeholder identification of future
Class A recycled water uses.
Justification: Demonstration of the MWMC’s capability and consistency of recycled water for use in a
safe, effective, and publicly accepted manner is a key step toward future larger-scale
recycled water uses. Future recycled water uses may be an important strategy for
diverting effluent from the Willamette River to meet NPDES permit discharge limits for
temperature and other benefits, including providing community water resource
partnership opportunities.
Project Driver: The Thermal Load Mitigation Alternatives Evaluation-Recycled Water Program
Implementation Planning, Phase 2 Study (dated August 2014) recommended
demonstration scale use of Class A recycled water to address stakeholder acceptability
issues identified as barriers to full-scale recycled water uses.
Project Trigger: Pilot Class A recycled water demonstration sites with willing, ready-to-proceed partners
have been identified, including City of Eugene street tree watering and industrial
aggregate site equipment washing via private/public partnership.
Estimated Project Cost: $410,000
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 19-20 = $27,899; FY 20-21 = $16,859; FY 21-22 = $35,242; FY 22-23 = $330,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $44,758 $35,242 $330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $410,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $44,758 $35,242 $330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $410,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
WPCF STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE (P80111)
Description: Retrofit and/or change existing stormwater infrastructure at the Water Pollution Control
Facility (WPCF). Also, update the WPCF Conditional Use Permit (CUP) related to
stormwater infrastructure planning for upcoming construction.
Status: As of January 2022, Jacobs staff provided a Stromwater Master Plan (SWMP) dated
December 16, 2021 with consultant recommendations including the need to update the
MWMC existing CUP related to stormwater systems.
Justification: WPCF existing stormwater and drainage systems need to be retrofitted and/or changed
for upcoming construction permit approvals.
Project Driver: Maintain compliance with local and state stormwater requirements at the WPCF.
Project Trigger: Each infrastructure hard surface change at the WPCF can trigger stormwater quality and
quantity onsite controls related to project permit requirements.
Estimated Project Cost: $600,000 (update WPCF CUP for stormwater, retrofit existing three bioswales to rain
gardens, and some new rain gardens)
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 22-23 = $200,000; FY 23-24 = $250,000; FY 24-25 = $150,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-2022
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $600,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $600,000
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE THICKENING (P80078)
Description: Third gravity belt thickener (GBT) with associated at-grade building. Assumes additional
basement floor space is not required.
Status: Continue to monitor the timing of this project.
Justification: Provide additional capacity for waste active sludge (WAS) thickening process.
Project Driver: Additional capacity to provide WAS thickening with one unit offline at WWMW upper
limit flow projections. Nitrification required by the NPDES permit and increasing
wastewater flows and loads generates more WAS solids. Provide ability to conduct
recuperative thickening.
Project Trigger: Exceeding solids and hydraulic loading rate design criteria.
Estimated Project Cost: $6,200,000
Estimated Cash Flow: FY 24-25 = $1,200,000; FY 25-26 = $3,000,000; FY 26-27 = $2,000,000
Expenditure/Category:
Prior
Years
2021-22
Est. Act.2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total
Design/Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $6,200,000
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $6,200,000