HomeMy WebLinkAboutMWMC Agenda Packet
THE FULL PACKET IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE
www.mwmcpartners.org
MWMC MEETING AGENDA
Friday, March 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; Meeting ID: 818 1156 0858; Passcode: 699360
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 2/11/22 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 March 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 – 7:55 IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS………………………………………………………Matt Stouder
Action Requested: Nominate and elect a Commission President and Vice President to
serve through March 2023.
7:55 – 8:35 V. PRELIMINARY FY2022-23 REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM BUDGET …….…….…
…………………………………..………Matt Stouder, Dave Breitenstein, Katherine Bishop
Action Requested: Informational and Discussion
8:33 – 8:50 VI. MOBILE WASTE HAULER RATE FOR FY2022-23….James McClendon & Dave Breitenstein
Action Requested: Informational and Discussion
8:50 – 9:10 VII. ADMIN BUILDING ALTERNATIVE SELECTION…………………………Mark Van Eeckhout
Action Requested: Informational and Discussion
9:10 – 9:30 VIII. BUSINESS FROM COMMISSION, GENERAL MANAGER, & WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
9:30 IX. ADJOURNMENT
MWMC MEETING MINUTES
Friday, February 11, 2022, at 7:30 a.m.
The MWMC Meeting was held remotely via computer and phone.
Meeting was video recorded.
Commissioner Yeh opened the meeting at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken by Josi Rodriguez.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present Remotely: Pat Farr, Bill Inge, Doug Keeler, Walt Meyer, Joe Pishioneri, Peter Ruffier,
and Jennifer Yeh
Staff Present Remotely: Lou Allocco, Meg Allocco, Steve Barnhardt, Katherine Bishop, Dave Breitenstein,
Brian Conlon, Carrie Holmes, Lynn Kief, Shawn Krueger, Barry Mays, Troy McAllister, James McClendon,
April Miller, Todd Miller, Michelle Miranda, Brooke Mossefin, Bryan Robinson, Josi Rodriguez, Loralyn
Spiro, Matt Stouder, Valerie Warner, and Greg Watkins
Guests Present Remotely: Ryan Pasquarella and Scott Schlag (Grove, Mueller & Swank, P.C.)
Legal Counsel Present Remotely: Brian Millington (Thorp, Purdy, Jewett, Urness, & Wilkinson, PC)
CONSENT CALENDAR
a. MWMC 1/14/22 Minutes
MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER FARR WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
PISHIONERI TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY 7/0.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
FY2020-21 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS
Valerie Warner, MWMC Accountant, introduced Ryan Pasquarella, a partner at Grove, Mueller & Swank,
P.C., MWMC’s independent auditors. Mr. Pasquarella has been the lead auditor on MWMC’s financial
statements for many years, and he went over the audit report and discussed statements of MWMC’s
revenues, expenses, cash flows, and changes of net position. His roll under the auditing standards is to
provide reasonable assurance the financial statements are free from material misstatement. The
Governance letter explains “reasonable assurance” as Grove, Mueller & Swank, P.C. does not give
absolute assurance that every number is completely accurate in the financial statements.
AGENDA ITEM IIa
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 2 of 7
Financial Analysis
Mr. Pasquarella pointed out on the Balance Sheet (page 40 in the agenda packet, and page 21 in the
audit report) the total assets ($233,432,973), deferred outflows ($1,851,203), total liabilities ($39,661,828),
which makes the net position $195,622,348. The operating revenues on the Income Statement were
$34,456,365 and total operating and administrative expenses were $19,556,143 for FY2021 (for more
detail see page 41 in the agenda packet, and page 22 in the audit report). The comparative condensed
financial statements serve as the key financial data and indicators for management, monitoring, and
planning. Mr. Pasquarella did not find anything that makes him to believe there are material errors in the
numbers, and there were no instances found during the audit process where the proposed numbers
needed adjusting by finance. On December 14th, 2021, the MWMC audit was submitted to the audits
division.
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ruffier said in regard to the compliance letter, the second paragraph states
certain representations in this letter are described as being limited to matters that are material. My
perusal of the letter did not indicate any limitation statements. Mr. Pasquarella said if there is
something completely insignificant to the Commission, we do not need that in the financial statements
themselves, we just want to care about the material items in here. Commissioner Ruffier said basically,
there were no limitations for material statements and there were none identified? Mr. Pasquarella said
correct, there were none identified.
Commissioner Ruffier said on the income table, the line that says operating income would be net from
operating reserves, minus expenses. What happens to that $5,510,000? Mr. Pasquarella said that is a
revenue over your expense for the year, and the Commission will probably use that $5.5 million for
future Capital projects and a buffer for any changes in expenditures. The $5.5 million is basically a cash
component going into the next year. Commissioner Ruffier said in regard to a budgeting standpoint, it
seems if we run a $5 million surplus year to year, there is some consideration in how we set the rates.
Mr. Pasquarella said there are lots of Capital expenditures related to maintaining and expanding
infrastructure and saving money. This $5.5 million year over year will reduce the amount of debt taken
out with future capital projects. Commissioner Ruffier said the non-operating revenues net $3 million
and includes Capital contributions, so would the $5.5 be just for operating expenses, not Capital? Mr.
Pasquarella said it could be, but it is really how MWMC decides to use the money. This money is more
unrestricted and can be used for other things, but my guess is most of that is used for the Capital
projects.
MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
RUFFIER TO APPROVE THE FY2020-21 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 7/0.
FY2022-23 REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM CAPITAL BUDGET & 5-YEAR PLAN
Troy McAllister, MWMC Managing Engineer and Greg Watkins, Maintenance Manager presented the first
draft of the FY2022-23 RWP Capital Budget and 5-Year Capital Plan.
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 3 of 7
Projects Completed FY2021-22
Renewable Natural Gas Upgrades – staff are utilizing the new infrastructure, obtaining some runtime,
and documenting details. The MWMC is receiving and tracking renewable gas money from this
project and will report back as needed to the Commission. This project is currently under a one-year
construction warranty.
Riparian Shade Credit Program – staff will be closing this job out and re-budget it into a different
project name and project number.
Aeration System – is an evaluation study being closed out and a new project number will be
assigned in FY2022-23.
Facilities Plan Engineering Services – is used as needed for consultant services and will be closed out.
Projects Carried Over to FY2022-23
Poplar Harvest Management Services – staff are wrapping up the current contracts, coordinating
harvest cuttings, and will use those cuttings to replant the poplar farm.
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update – DEQ will issue a draft permit in a few weeks and then issue a
final permit. Staff are preparing for new comprehensive facilities planning to establish a new 20-year
project list and will need to update the treatment plant Conditional Use Permit.
Class A Disinfection Facilities – this project is past the 90% design phase and staff are seeking grant
money. Staff hope to provide an update to the Commission at the March MWMC meeting.
Recycled Water Demonstration – this project inner ties with the Class A Disinfection Facilities. Staff
anticipates two or three end-users.
Glenwood Pump Station Upgrades - consultants services are evaluating upgrades related to
resiliency topic and pumping capacity. There are two existing pumping systems, with capacity for
two additional pumps. This wastewater pump station serves parts of Eugene and Springfield.
Resiliency Follow-Up – staff has consultant recommendations for seismic, flooding in the collection
system, treatment plant, and other areas. Staff are focused on the Willakenzie pump station,
Glenwood pump station, and the subsurface and geotechnical evaluation near the Owasso Bridge.
$3.7 million would be available from July 2020 to June 30, 2023.
Administration Building Improvements – is in the planning phase. With design consultant help, there
are three big picture options with sub concepts to consider. Staff will discuss the different options
and pricing with the Commission in 2022.
New Projects for FY2022-23
Aeration Basin Upgrades (2023-2026) – staff anticipates presenting an update to the Commission in
March or April 2022.
Tertiary Filtration (Phase 2) – the project team plans to look at different technologies and permit
renewal requirements and focus on the MWMC infrastructure needs/priorities. The team anticipates
obtaining the DEQ draft permit in the upcoming weeks.
Water Quality Trading Programs – this MWMC project has been repackaged and helps with shading
and water quality in the upper Willamette River basin area.
WPCF Stormwater Infrastructure – staff will update the stormwater related elements of the
Conditional Use Permit for the treatment plant. Rain garden systems and other solutions are being
considered.
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 4 of 7
Summary of Exhibit 12 for FY2022-23
FY 21-22
Carryover
To FY22-23
New Funding
For FY22-23
Total FY 22-23
Budget
Projects to be Carried Over $14,660,000 $4,940,000 $19,600,000
Newly Budgeted Projects $0 $11,300,000 $11,300,000
TOTAL $14,660,000 $16,240,000 $30,900,000
Mr. Watkins continued with the presentation and discussed the equipment replacement and major
rehabilitation program.
FY2022-23 Equipment Replacement
Upgrades to the Distributed Control System (DCS) – the 18-year-old computer system ties into the
instrumentation and controls how the information is sent on the operations console (staff are then
able to manage the plant remotely). A number of components reached an end of expected life, and
the stages of support are being phased out for the communication backbone and experiencing
liability issues with input/output modules (hard connection of instruments to the control system).
Ethernet cable is going to be installed to provide reliable and faster communication.
Tractor, Paddle Mixer w/Aerator Attachment - used to turn over and mix the bio solids.
Integrated Tool Carrier, CAT Loader, Facilities - used to empty out the dewater beds.
Sodium Hypochlorite Tank – there are currently 3 fiberglass tanks (12 years old). The primary
containment is compromised, and the secondary containment is still in place.
Sludge Grinder, Sluice Trough #2, Pretreatment – the manufacturers are using a new style, and staff
are unable to obtain old replacements parts.
Electric Carts – have reached end of service life and parts are shipped from Canada.
Discrete Analyzer, ESB Laboratory (instead of SGTHEM, discontinued from ER) – staff plans to use an
instrument as a replacement, that processes the tests faster and uses less chemicals.
Mower, 72” Desk, Zero Turn w/ Mulcher, Facilities – used to mow the lawns and facilities.
Equipment 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 Carts (x1), Maintenance 25,000
Discrete Analyzer, ESB Laboratory (*instead of SGTHEM, discontinued from ER) 24,000
Mower, 72” Desk, Zero Turn w/ Mulcher, Facilities 20,000
Total $3,220,000
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 5 of 7
Roof Repair / Rebuild / Replacement
BMF Operations Building
Facility Maintenance Building
Primary Pump Room
Weld Shop
Willakenzie Pump Station
FY22-23 Major Rehabilitation Program
Interior Dome Recoating, #1 Digester - coating needs to be replaced on the top interior.
Grit Channels, Wood Baffels - the walls hanging down from the top are currently redwood baffels and
need to be replaced.
Project Description FY 22-23 Proposed Budget
Interior Dome Recoating, #1 Digester $280,000
Roof Replacement, Operations Building, BMF 97,000
Roof Replacement, Willakenzie Pump Station 75,000
Roof Replacement, Welding Shop, Maintenance 55,000
Roof Replacement, Facilities Maintenance Workshop 55,000
Grit Channels, Wood Baffels (x4), Replacement 50,000
Roof Replacement, Clarifiers Pump Room, Primary 35,000
Ops/Maintenance Building Improvements 15,000
Total $662,000
MWMC 5-Year Capital Plan
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 6 of 7
DISCUSSION: Commissioner Keeler said on page 83 of the PDF document, for the FY22-23, it shows a
Caterpillar tool carrier for $350,000. That also shows up a couple pages later in the FY23-24. Are we
getting 2 pieces of equipment? Mr. Watkins said they are two separate pieces of equipment being
purchased.
Commissioner Meyer asked about the sludge grinder and said, doesn’t that grind the rags? Mr. Watkins
said that is correct, it is not sludge but screening grinding. Commissioner Meyer asked, do you need to
grind those since they are dewatered and taken to the landfill? What is the benefit of grinding? Mr.
Watkins said they hang up the dewatering system and clog up equipment, also staff spend a lot of time
cleaning the equipment out.
Commissioner Ruffier said the presentation includes FY22-23 and 23-24. Is the intent just to provide
information for projected budgets, or are we being asked to also approve the FY23-24 budget? Mr.
McAllister said we are focused on FY22-23 that starts July 1st because things can change but we want to
give you the best information for the upcoming years. Mr. Stouder said that is in response to the
Commission request to add more detail for what is coming in the following years, with equipment
replacement.
Commissioner Ruffier said we are facing a significant increase in Capital projects, planning, and project
management. There is also the potential for increased requirements associated with the renewed
permit. It would be ideal to have conversations with Mr. Stouder and Mr. Breitenstein to ensure sufficient
staffing on the upcoming projects and expenditures. Mr. Stouder said on the Capital side we are in a
position to respond to the projects with the approved level of staffing. It has been difficult to fill
positions, and some open positions need a second (or third) round to fill them. Pending retirements will
also impact the MWMC. On the administrative side we are in a good position to complete routine
business, yet additional requests have been difficult. Mr. Breitenstein said there is a vacant
Management Analyst position we intend to fill that would support future CIP projects. Conversations
about staffing have been discussed in regard to O&M work, the Recycled Water Project, along with the
RNG new infrastructure.
Commissioner Ruffier said we have benefited from our ability to engage in the monitoring and data
analysis, which has been helpful with the DEQ permit. It would be ideal to see that capability continued,
and not just follow their lead. Mr. Breitenstein said we recently lost our resident expert in data analysis
and were unsuccessful in the recruitment process. Staff have been utilizing contractual services for the
open position and are pleased with their services.
Commissioner Pishioneri said both directors have always communicated anytime there are staffing
issues and have been current when it comes to giving us issue papers to request additional funding.
He has no doubt Mr. Stouder and Mr. Breitenstein will continue to provide great communication around
this topic, and their work is greatly appreciated.
Mr. Stouder said in regard to the audit conversation, the total dollar numbers for CIP and Capital
improvements is large in FY22-23 and small in other years within Exhibit 13. Projects spanning multiple
years will have money carried forward and the new permit will present additional work. There is a lot of
money here when you refer back to the unrestricted money available, unless dedicated for Capital. The
Capital program and Asset Management really drive that. Those numbers are a bit out of proportion
from the equipment placement and DCS, and over time that number will creep up because the MWMC
plant is 40 years old and getting older.
February 11th, 2022, MWMC Minutes
Page 7 of 7
BUSINESS FROM GENERAL MANAGER
Mr. Stouder said Commissioner Meyer and Commissioner Keeler have been reappointed by their
respective City Councils in Eugene and Springfield for another term at MWMC.
The RNG Facility has successfully injected over the last month, thanks to the leadership from both
project managers and staff in Eugene and Springfield. The Commission can expect a project acceptance
memo soon and staff are planning the ribbon cutting in March.
Ms. Spiro, Ms. Miller, and Mr. Miller accepted 3 awards at the NAWCA Conference in Scottsdale Arizona.
Springfield received an award (in combination with MWMC) for a CMOM video, Todd Miller received an
individual award, and MWMC received an award for a partnership video put together by the
communication team.
The State of Oregon has indicated they will remove the mask mandate at the end of March, possibly
sooner. With that, staff expects to hold the April MWMC meeting in the Library Meeting Room (LMR). The
March MWMC meeting will be held remotely. For future in-person meetings, attendees will have the
option to join remotely.
BUSINESS FROM WASTEWATER DIRECTOR
Mr. Breitenstein said at the January MWMC meeting the Commission asked about benchmarking. After
researching this, external benchmarking against any data from publish surveys could not be done.
However, staff were able to find a water environment federation publication that focused on how and
why facilities are inventorying their greenhouse gases. The drivers are similar to MWMC’s internal
energy, climate, and resource recovery goals. Of these ten plants, the study was about 50/50 in terms of
how they intend to use the information. Half were for internal performance measurement and half used
it for decision making. The standardization of methodologies for greenhouse gas inventory at this stage
make the consistency challenging with evaluating data, when comparing it to our own historical results.
In conclusion, it will be a while before published benchmarking data can be expected.
Since January 1st, 2022, the RNG uptime has been at 70%, with the facility running on a 24 hour per day
basis. The longest period of time has been 16 consecutive days, and most shutdowns were from receipt
point facility equipment and communications issues with Northwest Natural. No issues have been
caused from the equipment MWMC is operating and maintaining.
MWMC and Green Lane have a good working relationship. Green Lane has remote access to aid in
remote troubleshooting and optimize the RNG performance.
ADJOURNMENT AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
Commissioner Yeh adjourned the meeting at 8:35am, moved to the executive session, and stated:
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission will now meet in executive session pursuant to
ORS 192.660(2)(f) for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel about information or records exempt
from public disclosure because they are subject to attorney-client privilege. Representatives of the news
media and designated staff shall be allowed to attend the executive session. All other members of the
audience are asked to leave the meeting. If any news media are present, please announce yourself and
the news media you are representing. Representatives of the news media are specifically directed not to
report on or otherwise disclose any of the deliberations or anything said about these subjects during the
executive session, except to state the general subject of the session as previously announced. No
decision may be made in executive session. At the end of the executive session, the meeting will end.
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Matt Stouder, Executive Officer
SUBJECT: Election of Officers
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Nominate and elect a Commission President and Vice President to serve through
March 2023
ISSUE
The Commission elects new officers every March for one-year terms and is requested to determine
officer positions for the term of March 2022 through March 2023.
DISCUSSION
Traditionally, the Commission has employed a practice of rotating the officer positions among the three
jurisdictions on an annual basis, and rotates the Commissioner serving as Vice President to President.
However, there are no formalized guidelines in the MWMC Bylaws regarding the rotation of officers
among the jurisdictions, nor any restrictions on the number of consecutive years a Commissioner serves
in a particular office.
President Jennifer Yeh is a Eugene City Councilor, and Vice President Joe Pishioneri is a Springfield City
Councilor. If the Commission chooses to follow its traditional practice, Commissioner Pishioneri would
become President, and the new Vice-President would be a representative from Lane County.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Commission is requested to nominate and elect from among its members a Commission President
and Vice President to serve through March 2023.
AGENDA ITEM IV
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Katherine Bishop, ESD Programs Manager
SUBJECT: Preliminary FY 2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program Budget
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Provide comments and direction to staff for finalization of the Regional
Wastewater Program Budget for FY 2022-23
ISSUE
The Preliminary Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) Budget and Capital Improvements Program for
fiscal year 2022-23 (FY 22-23) is attached for your review. During the Commission meeting on March
11, 2022, staff will present the proposed operating budget as well as scenarios for FY 22-23 user rates
for consideration. The Commission is requested to provide input and direction on the Preliminary
RWP Budget and Capital Improvements Program Budget for finalization of the budget document in
preparation for a public hearing on April 8, 2022.
DISCUSSION
On January 14, 2022, the Commission reviewed the proposed Key Outcomes and Performance
Indicators as part of the Budget Kick-Off. On February 11, 2022, the Commission reviewed the
proposed Capital Budget and 5-Year Capital Improvement Program Plan.
Proposed Capital Programs Budget - The proposed FY 22-23 capital programs budget is $34,782,000,
of which $3,882,000 or 11% reflects asset management. Approximately $14.7M of the capital budget
includes carryover funding from FY 21-22 for projects that span multiple years and/or may continue
into FY 22-23. Projects include: the Operations/Administration Building Improvements, Class A
Disinfection Facilities, Resiliency Follow-Up, Comprehensive Facility Plan Update, Glenwood Pump
Station Upgrades, Poplar Harvest Management Services, and the Recycled Water Demonstration
Project. The 5-year capital improvement plan total is $105,201,000 as displayed in Exhibit 13, on page
50 of the budget.
AGENDA ITEM V
Memo: Preliminary FY 2022-23 Regional Wastewater Program Budget
March 3, 2022
Page 2 of 2
Proposed Operating Program Budget - The total proposed FY 22-23 operating program budget is
$22,296,000 reflecting an increase of 7.9% ($1,622,988) when compared to the FY 21-22 adopted
budget. Exhibit 3, on page 16 of the preliminary budget document, displays the RWP operating
budget summary by program area.
Operations and Maintenance - The proposed operations and maintenance budget for Eugene is
$17,169,000, reflecting an overall increase of 7.3% or ($1,172,881) when compared to the adopted
FY 21-22 budget. The Operations and Maintenance staffing remains level at 79.36 Full-time
equivalent (FTE). The personnel services component of the budget reflects a budget increase of
3.1% ($309,808) in regular wages and employee related benefits. The materials and services
budget reflects a total net budget increase of 11.2% ($642,073), and the capital outlay budget
reflects a one-time increase of $359,000. Exhibit 11, on page 39 of the budget document displays
the Eugene operations and maintenance line-item budget summary.
Administration - The proposed administration budget for Springfield is $5,127,000, reflecting an
overall net increase of 9.6% ($450,105) when compared to the adopted FY 21-22 budget. The
Administration FTE staffing remains level at 17.76 FTE. The personnel services component of the
budget reflects a budget increase of 7.7% ($175,473) in regular wages and employee related
benefits. The materials and services budget reflects a net budget increase of 11.5% ($274,632).
Exhibit 9, on page 32 of the budget document displays the Springfield administration line-item
budget summary.
Proposed User Fee Rate Change - The Preliminary Regional Wastewater Program Budget for FY 22-23 is
based on a 3.5% user fee rate adjustment effective July 1, 2022.
Fiscal Impact to a Residential Monthly Bill - The proposed 3.5% rate adjustment to the regional
wastewater component would result in a $0.98 monthly increase from $27.97 to $28.95 for a
residential customer based on 5,000 gallons of wastewater treated.
In addition to the monthly user fee adjustment, the Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) brown gas sales
are currently projected at $1,500,000 in FY 22-23. With the RNG sales and the proposed 3.5% user
rate change, sufficient revenues will be generated to fund daily operations, planned capital projects
and debt service obligations. While maintaining positive cash flow and capital reserves for
investments in capital improvement infrastructure, and planning for the MWMC’s National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit renewal in the current 2022 calendar year. Rate
scenarios will be presented at the March 11th meeting for Commission consideration and direction.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Commission is requested to provide comments and direction for finalization of the Regional
Wastewater Program Budget and Capital Improvements Program FY 22-23.
ATTACHMENT
1. Preliminary FY22-23 Regional Wastewater Program Budget
Regional Wastewater Program Budget
and Capital Improvements Program
Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Metropolitan Wastewater
M ANAGEMENT COMMISSION
partners in wastewater management
Preliminary
ATT 1 - Preliminary FY22-23 Regional Wastewater Program Budget
Cover photo: aerial view of the Water Pollution Control Facility on River Avenue.
Preliminary
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM BUDGET
and
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
Fiscal Year 2022-23
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission is scheduled to adopt the Operating
Budget and Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for FY 22-23 on April 8, 2022. The Budget and
CIP are scheduled to be ratified by the Springfield City Council on May 2, 2022, the Eugene City
Council on May 9, 2022, and the Lane County Board of Commissioners on May 10, 2022. The
Commission is scheduled to give final ratification of the Budget and CIP on June 10, 2022.
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
Jennifer Yeh, President (Eugene)
Joe Pishioneri, Vice President (Springfield)
Bill Inge, Vice President (Lane County)
Pat Farr (Lane County)
Doug Keeler (Springfield)
Walt Meyer (Eugene)
Peter Ruffier (Eugene)
STAFF:
Matthew Stouder, MWMC Executive Officer/General Manager
Dave Breitenstein, Wastewater Director
Nathan Bell, MWMC Finance Officer
www.mwmcpartners.org
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Table of Contents
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
FY 2022-23 BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
for the
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Budget Message... .................................................................................................................... 1
Acronyms and Explanations ..................................................................................................... 3
Regional Wastewater Program Overview ................................................................................ 5
Exhibit 1: Interagency Coordination Structure ............................................................... 13
BUDGET SUMMARY
Regional Wastewater Program Budget and Program Summary ............................................ 14
Exhibit 2: Regional Operating Budget Summary ........................................................... 14
Exhibit 3: Line Item Summary by Program Area ........................................................... 16
Exhibit 4: Budget Summary and Comparison ................................................................. 17
RESERVE FUNDS
Regional Wastewater Program Reserve Funds ...................................................................... 21
Exhibit 5: Operating Reserves Line Item Budget ........................................................... 22
OPERATING PROGRAMS
Regional Wastewater Program Staffing ................................................................................. 25
Exhibit 6: Regional Wastewater Program Organizational Chart .................................... 25
Exhibit 7: Regional Wastewater Program Position Summary ........................................ 26
Springfield Program and Budget Detail ................................................................................. 28
Exhibit 8: Springfield Administration Program Budget Summary ................................. 31
Exhibit 9: Springfield Administration Line Item Summary ............................................ 32
Eugene Program and Budget Detail ....................................................................................... 33
Exhibit 10: Eugene Operations & Maintenance Program Budget Summary ................... 38
Exhibit 11: Eugene Operations & Maintenance Line Item Summary ............................. 39
CAPITAL PROGRAM
Regional Wastewater Capital Improvements Program .......................................................... 40
Exhibit 12: Capital Program Budget Summary ................................................................ 43
Exhibit 13: Capital Program 5-Year Plan ........................................................................ 50
CAPITAL PROJECT DETAIL
Capital Program Project Detail Sheets ................................................................................... 51
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget Message
Page 1 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
BUDGET MESSAGE
Members of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
MWMCs’ Customers and Partnering Agencies
We are pleased to present the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission’s budget for
fiscal year 2022-23. This budget funds operations, administration, and capital projects planned
for the Regional Wastewater Program.
MWMC Background
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was formed by Eugene,
Springfield, and Lane County through an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) in 1977 to provide
wastewater collection and treatment services for the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The
seven-member Commission, appointed by the City Councils of Eugene and Springfield and the
Lane County Board of Commissioners, is responsible for oversight of the Regional Wastewater
Program. Since 1983, the Commission has contracted with the cities of Springfield and Eugene
to provide all staffing and services necessary to maintain and support the Regional Wastewater
Program.
The MWMC has been providing high-quality wastewater services to the metropolitan area for 45
years. The service area for the MWMC consists of approximately 250,000 residents, including
80,800 residential and commercial accounts. The MWMC is committed to clean water, the
community’s health, the local environment, and to providing high quality services in a manner
that will achieve, sustain, and promote balance between community, environmental, and
economic needs.
Budget Development Process
The MWMC’s budget development schedule begins in January, with a budget kick-off to review
key outcomes the Commission strives to achieve, along with performance indicators identified to
measure results of annual workplans over time. February includes a presentation of the draft
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget and five-year capital plan, and in March the
operating budget programs and user fee rate scenarios are presented for discussion and direction.
In April, the Commission holds public hearings on the Preliminary Regional Wastewater
Program (RWP) Budget and CIP, and regional wastewater user rates. In May, the RWP budget is
provided to the three governing bodies of Springfield, Eugene and Lane County for their review,
input and ratification. The RWP Budget and CIP returns to the MWMC in June for final
approval, with budget implementation occuring July 1.
Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget
The Administration and Capital Improvements Program (CIP) components of the MWMC’s
budget are reflected in the City of Springfield’s RWP budget. Operations, maintenance,
equipment replacement, major rehabilitation, and major capital outlay components are reflected
in the City of Eugene’s RWP budget. Both cities’ Industrial Pretreatment Programs are managed
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget Message
Page 2 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
locally in compliance with the MWMC Model Ordinance, and are also included in the RWP
budget.
Capital Budget - The capital program reflects a continued focus on design and construction
of capital improvements planned to ensure that operation of the Regional Wastewater
Facilities meets environmental regulations, and that adequate capacity will be provided to
meet the needs of a growing service area. The Capital Budget for FY 22-23 is $34.7 million,
and the five-year Capital Plan is currently projected at $105.1 million.
Operating Budget - The FY 22-23 RWP Operating Budget for personnel services, materials
and services and capital outlay expenses is $21.9 million, reflecting a 5.9% increase when
compared to the prior year adopted budget (as well as compared to the prior year amended
budget). The FY 22-23 budget includes Debt Service payments that total $4.1 million as
scheduled repayment of the $32.7 million for revenue bonds issued in May 2016, and
$104,250 in Clean Water SRF loans to fund the Facilities Plan capital improvements.
Revenues - The RWP is 100% funded by user fees, from customers and industries receiving
regional wastewater services. FY 22-23 user fee revenues (including septage service) are
projected at $36.8 million. This level of revenue is based on a recommended 3.5% increase
on regional monthly wastewater user fees, and septage and hauled waste user fees, to meet
revenue objectives for planned capital improvements.
Balanced Budget - The RWP achieves and maintains a structurally balanced budget with
resources equal or greater than expenditures to set aside a portion of fund balance in reserves.
In summary, the FY 22-23 budget implements the Commission’s adopted 2019 Financial Plan
policies, funding operations and administration sufficiently to maintain service levels and to
meet the environmental performance necessary for compliance with the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued jointly to the MWMC and the two cities.
Regulatory Permit Status
Since 2006, the MWMC’s NPDES permit has been administratively extended by the Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) pending ongoing litigation and future regulatory standards that
are anticipated to include more stringent requirements. During this period of regulatory
uncertainty the MWMC continues to reduce debt obligations, while planning financially to be
positioned for future permit renewal. Currently, the anticipated target for permit issuance is by
the end of the third quarter of calendar year 2022.
Respectfully submitted,
Matt Stouder
MWMC Executive Officer
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Acronyms and Explanations
Page 3 FY 21-22 BUDGET AND CIP
ACRONYMS AND EXPLANATIONS
AMCP – Asset Management Capital Program. 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.
BMF – Biosolids Management Facility. The Biosolids Management Facility is an important part
of processing wastewater where biosolids generated from the treatment of wastewater are turned
into nutrient rich, beneficial organic materials.
CIP – Capital Improvements Program. This program implements projects outlined in the 2004
Facilities Plan and includes projects that improve performance, or expand treatment or hydraulic
capacity of existing facilities.
CMOM – Capacity Management and Maintenance Program. The CMOM program addresses wet
weather issues such as inflow and infiltration with the goal to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows
to the extent possible and safeguard the hydraulic capacity of the regional wastewater treatment
facility.
CWSRF – Clean Water State Revolving Fund. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan
program is a federal program administered by the Oregon DEQ that provides low-cost loans for
the planning, design and construction of various water pollution control activities. (DEQ)
EMS – Environmental Management System. An EMS is a framework to determine the
environmental impacts of an organization’s business practices and develop strategies to address
those impacts.
ESD – Environmental Services Division. The ESD is a division of the City of Springfield’s
Development and Public Works Department that promotes and protects the community’s health,
safety, and welfare by providing professional leadership in the protection of the local
environment, responsive customer service, and effective administration for the Regional
Wastewater Program.
IGA – Intergovernmental Agreement. Pursuant to ORS 190.010, ORS 190.080, and ORS
190.085, the IGA is an agreement between the cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County
that created the MWMC as an entity with the authority to provide resources and support as
defined in the IGA for the Regional Wastewater Program.
MWMC – Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. The MWMC is the Commission
responsible for the oversight of the Regional Wastewater Program. In this role, the MWMC
protects the health and safety of our local environment by providing high-quality management of
wastewater conveyance and treatment to the Eugene-Springfield community. The Commission is
responsible for the oversight of the Regional Wastewater Program.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Acronyms and Explanations
Page 4 FY 21-22 BUDGET AND CIP
NPDES – National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. The NPDES permit program
is administered by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in fulfillment of
federal Clean Water Act requirements. The NPDES permit includes planning and technology
requirements as well as numeric limits on effluent water quality.
RNG – Renewal Natural Gas Upgrades consisting of biogas purification facilities at the treatment
plant and connection to the Northwest Natural utility grid. Together, the system will allow the
MWMC to sell the upgraded gas (RNG) as a renewable fuel through offtake agreements.
RWP – Regional Wastewater Program. Under the oversight of the MWMC, the purpose of the
RWP is to protect public health and safety and the environment by providing high quality
wastewater management services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The MWMC and
the regional partners are committed to providing these services in a manner that will achieve,
sustain, and promote balance between community, environmental, and economic needs while
meeting customer service expectations.
SDC – System Development Charge. SDCs are charges imposed on development so that
government may recover the capital needed to provide sufficient capacity in infrastructure
systems to accommodate the development.
SRF – Clean Water State Revolving Fund. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan program
is a federal program administered by the Oregon DEQ that provides low-cost loans for the
planning, design and construction of various water pollution control activities. (DEQ)
SSO – Sanitary Sewer Overflows. Discharges of raw sewage.
TMDL – Total Maximum Daily Load. The federal Clean Water Act defines Total Maximum
Daily Load as the maximum amount of any pollutant that can be safely assimilated by a waterway
in one day without significant degradation of water quality.
TSS – Total Suspended Solids. Organic and inorganic materials that are suspended in water.
WPCF – Regional Water Pollution Control Facility. The WPCF is a state-of-the-art facility
providing treatment of the wastewater coming from the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area.
The WPCF is located on River Avenue in Eugene. The treatment plant and 49 pump stations
distributed across Eugene and Springfield operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year
to collect and treat wastewater from homes, businesses and industries before returning the cleaned
water, or effluent, to the Willamette River. Through advanced technology and processes, the
facility cleans, on average, up to 30 million gallons of wastewater every day.
WWFMP – Wet Weather Flow Management Plan. This plan evaluated and determined the most
cost-effective combination of collection system and treatment facility upgrades needed to manage
excessive wet weather wastewater flows in the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 5 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
OVERVIEW
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was formed by Eugene,
Springfield, and Lane County through an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) in 1977 to provide
wastewater collection and treatment services for the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The
seven-member Commission is composed of members appointed by the City Councils of Eugene
(3 representatives), Springfield (2 representatives) and the Lane County Board of Commissioners
(2 representatives). Since its inception, the Commission, in accordance with the IGA, has been
responsible for oversight of the Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) including: construction,
maintenance, and operation of the regional sewerage facilities; adoption of financing plans;
adoption of budgets, user fees and connection fees; adoption of minimum standards for industrial
pretreatment and local sewage collection systems; and recommendations for the expansion of
regional facilities to meet future community growth. Staffing and services have been provided in
various ways over the 45 years of MWMC’s existence. Since 1983, the Commission has
contracted with the Cities of Springfield and Eugene for all staffing and services necessary to
maintain and support the RWP. Lane County’s partnership has involved participation on the
Commission and support for customers that are served by the MWMC in the Santa Clara
unincorporated area.
Regional Wastewater Program Purpose and Key Outcomes
The purpose of the RWP is to protect public health and safety and the environment by providing
high quality wastewater management services to the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The
MWMC and the regional partners are committed to providing these services in a manner that
will achieve, sustain, and promote balance between community, environmental, and economic
needs while meeting customer service expectations. Since the mid-1990s, the Commission and
RWP staff have worked together to identify key outcome areas within which to focus annual
work plan and budget priorities. The FY 22-23 RWP work plans and budget reflect a focus on
the following key outcomes or goals. In carrying out the daily activities of managing the regional
wastewater system, we will strive to achieve and maintain:
1. Achieve and Maintain high environmental standards;
2. Fiscal management that is effective and efficient;
3. A successful intergovernmental partnership;
4. Maximum reliability and useful life of regional assets and infrastructure;
5. Public awareness and understanding of MWMC, the regional wastewater system, and
MWMC’s objectives of maintaining water quality and a sustainable environment.
The Commission believes that these outcomes, if achieved in the long term, will demonstrate
success of the RWP in carrying out its purpose. In order to help determine whether we are
successful, indicators of performance and targets have been identified for each key outcome.
Tracking performance relative to identified targets over time assists in managing the RWP to
achieve desired results. The following indicators and performance targets provide an important
framework for the development of the FY 22-23 RWP Operating Budget, Capital Improvements
Program, and associated work plans.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 6 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Outcome 1: Achieve and maintain high environmental standards.
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• Average removal efficiency of
carbonaceous biochemical
oxygen demand (CBOD) and
total suspended solids (TSS)
(permit limit 85%)
97% 97% 95%
• High quality biosolids (pollutant
concentrations less than 50% of
EPA exceptional quality criteria)
Arsenic 21%
Cadmium 12%
Copper 29%
Lead 8%
Mercury 5%
Nickel 5%
Selenium 12%
Zinc 29%
Arsenic 25%
Cadmium 15%
Copper 30%
Lead 10%
Mercury 10%
Nickel 10%
Selenium 15%
Zinc 30%
Arsenic <50%
Cadmium <50%
Copper <50%
Lead <50%
Mercury <50%
Nickel <50%
Selenium <50%
Zinc <50%
• ISO14001 Environmental
Management System – Continual
Improvement of Environmental
Performance
All objectives met
and no major
nonconformaties
All objectives met
and no major
nonconformaties
Reduce waste gas
flaring; Produce
gas for use as
renewable fuel;
Install new
laboratory
information
management
system
• NPDES Permit Renewal --- Complete toxics
monitoring;
Coordinate renewal
process with DEQ
Prepare updates to
plans
(Groundwater,
Biosolids,
Recycled Water,
WQ Trading, etc.);
Begin
implementation of
new permit
requirements
• Climate Action Planning --- --- Complete FY
2019-20
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Inventory; Explore
development of a
Climate Action
Statement/Policy
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 7 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Outcome 1: Achieve and maintain high environmental standards (continued)
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• Urban Waters & Wildlife
Partnership
--- Explore
Partnership
Identify MWMC
opportunities
• Resource Recovery --- Construct RNG
system; Begin
design of UV
Disinfection for
Recycled Water
Full scale RNG
production;
Construction of
Class A
Disinfection
Facilities
Outcome 2: Achieve and maintain fiscal management that is effective and efficient.
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• Annual budget and rates align
with the MWMC Financial Plan
Policies met Policies met Policies met
• Annual audited financial
statements
Clean audit Clean audit Clean audit
• Uninsured bond rating AA AA AA
• Reserves funded at target levels Yes Yes Yes
• Maintain Sound Financial
Practices per the MWMC
Financial Plan
Yes Yes Yes
• Ensure rates and rate changes are
planned, moderate and
incremental to avoid rate hikes
--- 3.5% 3.5%
• Debt-to-Equity Ratio
(Total debt divided by total equity)
--- 10.0 0.3
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 8 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Outcome 3: Achieve and maintain a successful intergovernmental partnership.
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• NPDES Permit Renewal Prepared plans and
associated work
with permit
application
Submit required
information;
Review applicant
draft; Permit
issued
Permit
implementation
• Implement and adopt revised
local limits and an updated
MWMC pretreatment model
ordinance within the
pretreatment program
Conducted system
sampling; revised
limits and updated
model ordinance to
reflect current
CFRs
Preliminary
approval from
DEQ; Initiate
public notice
Adopt local
ordinances in
Eugene and
Springfield;
Begin
implementation
• Partnership Assessment Tool --- Scope assessment
tool options;
present
concepts/options
for Commission
consideration
Begin
implementation
and data
collection
• Interagency coordination
regarding Capacity Management
Operations and Maintenance
(CMOM) Program
CMOM Program
updated and
presented to the
Commission
Quarterly meetings
between Eugene
and Springfield;
Annual update to
the Commission
Quarterly meetings
between Eugene
and Springfield;
Annual update to
the Commission
• Community presentations
regarding MWMC partnership,
services and outcomes
delivered jointly
2 community
presentations
delivered by staff
to groups in the
service area
4 community
presentations
delivered by staff
to groups in the
service area
4 community
presentations
delivered by staff
to groups in the
service area
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 9 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Outcome 4: Maximize reliability and useful life of regional assets and infrastructure.
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• Preventive maintenance
completed on time (best
practices benchmark is 90%)
92% 94% 90%
• Preventive maintenance to
corrective maintenance ratio
(benchmark 4:1-6:1)
5.6:1 5:1 5:1
• Emergency maintenance required
(best practices benchmark is less
than 2% of labor hours)
2% 1% <2%
• Asset management (AM)
processes and practices review
and development
Annual update to AM
plan completed
--- Bi-Annual
update
to AM plan;
Improve
methodology to
determine asset
remaining life
• MWMC Resiliency Plan Presented final plan
to the Commission
Plan
implementation
Continue plan
implementation
Pump Station
to conveyance
pipe transition
kits
• Strategic Projects Complete buried pipe
condition assessment
Develop
assessment plan
Begin
assessment of
highest priority
pipes
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 10 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Outcome 5: Achieve and maintain public awareness and understanding of MWMC, the
regional wastewater system, and MWMC’s objectives of maintaining water quality and a
sustainable environment.
Indicators: Performance:
FY 20-21
Actual
FY 21-22
Estimated Actual
FY 22-23
Target
• Communications Plan Implemented 2021
Communications Plan
Continue
implementation of
2021 Plan
Update 2021 Plan
as needed based
on market trends
• Promote MWMC
social media
channels and
website
Grew Facebook
followers to 639,
Twitter to 174 and
Instagram to 246; no
website analytics
available
Implement strategies
to grow Facebook
followers to 1,000,
Twitter to 250 and
Instagram to 650; no
website analytic
targets set
Implement
strategies to grow
Facebook followers
to 1,200, Twitter to
300 and Instagram
to 850 and website
visitors to 5,000
with 14,000
pageviews and a
bounce rate of 70%
• Create and
distribute MWMC
e-newsletters
Distributed monthly
and increased
distribution to 237
subscribers; no analytic
targets set
Distribute monthly
and increase
distribution to 550
subscribers; no
analytic targets set
Distribute monthly
and increase
distribution to 700
subscribers with an
open rate of 38%
and a click-through
rate of 10%
• Pollution prevention
campaigns
2 campaigns,
3 sponsorships;
reaching ≤40% of
residents in the
service area due to
COVID-19
2 campaigns,
4 sponsorships;
reaching 40% of
residents in the
service area
2 campaigns,
4 sponsorships;
reaching 40% of
residents in the
service area
• Provide tours of
the MWMC
Facilities
Due to COVID-19,
only one tour provided;
recorded and shared via
4J Library
Due to COVID-19,
limited number of
tours provided
Provide tours for
greater than 1,000
people
• Clean Water University Reached ≤25% of 5th
Graders in the
service area due to
COVID-19
Reach 25% of 5th
Graders in the
service area
Reach >25% of 5th
Graders in the
service area
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 11 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Roles and Responsibilities
In order to effectively oversee and manage the RWP, the partner agencies provide all staffing
and services to the MWMC. The following sections describe the roles and responsibilities of
each of the partner agencies, and how intergovernmental coordination occurs on behalf of the
Commission.
City of Eugene
The City of Eugene supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, provision of
operation and maintenance services, and active participation on interagency project teams and
committees. Three of the seven MWMC members represent Eugene – two citizens and one City
Councilor. Pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), the Eugene Wastewater
Division operates and maintains the Regional Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF), the
Biosolids Management Facility (BMF) and associated residuals and reclaimed water activities,
along with regional wastewater pumping stations and transmission sewers. In support of the
RWP, the Division also provides technical services for wastewater treatment; management of
equipment replacement and infrastructure rehabilitation; biosolids treatment and recycling;
industrial source control (in conjunction with Springfield staff); and regional laboratory services
for wastewater and water quality analyses. These services are provided under contract with the
MWMC through the regional funding of 79.36 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees.
City of Springfield
The City of Springfield supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, provision of
MWMC administration services, and active coordination of and participation on interagency
project teams and committees. Two MWMC members represent Springfield – one citizen and
one City Councilor. Pursuant to the IGA, the Springfield Development and Public Works
Department, provides staff to serve as the MWMC Executive Officer / General Manager,
respectively. The Environmental Services Division and Finance Department staff provide
ongoing staff support to the Commission and administration of the RWP in the following areas:
legal and risk management services; financial management and accounting; coordination and
management of public policy; regulatory and permit compliance issues; coordination between
the Commission and the governing bodies; long-range capital project planning, design, and
construction management; coordination of public information, education, and citizen
involvement programs; and coordination and development of regional budgets, rate proposals,
and revenue projections. Springfield staff also provides local implementation of the Industrial
Pretreatment Program, as well as billing coordination and customer service. These services are
provided under contract with the MWMC through the regional funding of 16.85 FTE of
Development and Public Works Department staff and .88 FTE of Finance Department staff, and
.03 FTE of City Manager’s Office for a total 17.76 FTE as reflected in the FY 22-23 Budget.
Lane County
Lane County supports the RWP through representation on the MWMC, including two MWMC
members that represent Lane County – one citizen and one County Commissioner. Lane
County’s partnership initailly included providing support to manage the proceeds and repayment
of the RWP general obligation bonds to finance the local share of the RWP facilities
construction. These bonds were paid in full in 2002. The County, while not presently providing
sewerage, has the authority under its charter to do so. The Urban Growth Boundary includes the
two Cities (urban lands) and certain unincorporated areas surrounding the Cities which lies
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 12 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
entirely within the County. Federal funding policy requires sewage treatment and disposal within
the Urban Growth Boundary to be provided on a unified, metropolitan basis.
Interagency Coordination
The effectiveness of the MWMC and the RWP depends on extensive coordination, especially
between Springfield and Eugene staff, who provide ongoing program support. This coordination
occurs in several ways. The Springfield MWMC Executive Officer / MWMC General Manager,
together with the Eugene Wastewater Division Director coordinate regularly to ensure adequate
communication and consistent implementation of policies and practices as appropriate. The
Eugene and Springfield Industrial Pretreatment Program supervisors and staff meet regularly to
ensure consistent implementation of the Model Industrial Pretreatment Ordinance. In addition,
interagency project teams provide input on and coordination of ongoing MWMC administration
issues and ad hoc project needs.
Exhibit 1 on the following page reflects the interagency coordination structure supporting the
RWP. Special project teams are typically formed to manage large projects such as design and
construction of new facilities. These interagency staff teams are formulated to provide
appropriate expertise, operational knowledge, project management, and intergovernmental
representation.
Relationship to Eugene and Springfield Local Sewer Programs
The RWP addresses only part of the overall wastewater collection and treatment facilities that
serve the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The Cities of Eugene and Springfield both
maintain sewer programs that provide for construction and maintenance of local collection
systems and pump stations, which discharge to the regional system. Sewer user fees collected by
the two Cities include both local and RWP rate components.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Overview
Page 13 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
EXHIBIT 1
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL LANE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
EUGENE
WASTEWATER DIVISION
- Regional Facility Operation and Maintenance
- Major Rehab and Equipment Replacement
- Technical Services
- Eugene Pretreatment Program
- Pump Station and Interceptor Operations and
Maintenance
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
- Billing and Customer Service
MAINTENANCE DIVISION
- Regional Sewer Line Support
SPRINGFIELD
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
- Planning
- Capital Construction
- Rates, Revenues
- Permit Coordination
- Interagency Coordination
- Public Information/Education
- Springfield Pretreatment Program
- Legal and Risk Services
- Billing and Customer Service
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
- Accounting and Financial Reporting
INTERAGENCY COORDINATION AND PROJECT TEAMS
- Administrative Policy Decisions and Coordination
- Operational Policy Decisions and Coordination
- Capital Project Planning and Coordination
- Design Standards Development
- Capital Construction Guidance
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
INTERAGENCY COORDINATION STRUCTURE
Operation & Maintenance Contract Administration Contract
KEY OUTCOMES ACHIEVED
BUDGET SUMMARY
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 14 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
FY 22-23 BUDGET
The MWMC’s RWP Operating Budget provides the Commission and governing bodies with an
integrated view of the RWP elements. Exhibit 2 provides a summary of the overall Operating
Budget. Separate Springfield and Eugene agency budgets and staffing also are presented within
this budget document. Major program areas supported by Springfield and Eugene are described
in the pages that follow and are summarized in Exhibit 3 on page 16. Finally, Exhibit 4 on page
17 combines revenues, expenditures, and reserves to illustrate how funding for all aspects of the
RWP is provided. It should also be noted that the “Amended Budget FY 21-22” column in all
budget tables represents the updated FY 21-22 RWP budget as of February 8, 2022, which
reconciled actual beginning balances at July 1, 2021, and approved budget transfers and
supplemental requests.
Notes:
1. The Change column and Percent Change column compare the Proposed FY 22-23 Budget
with the originally Adopted FY 21-22 Budget column.
2. Personnel Services, Materials and Services, and Capital Outlay budget amounts represent
combined Springfield and Eugene Operating Budgets that support the RWP.
3. Capital Outlay does not include CIP, Equipment Replacement, Major Capital Outlay, or
Major Rehabilitation, which are capital programs.
ADOPTED
BUDGET
AMENDED
BUDGET
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
Full-Time Equivalent Staffing Level 97.12 97.12 97.12 0.00 0.0%
Personnel Services (2)$12,411,719 $12,411,719 $12,897,000 $485,281 3.9%
Materials & Services (2)8,123,295 8,174,303 9,040,000 916,705 11.3%
Capital Outlay (2, 3)138,000 208,000 359,000 221,000 160.1%
Equip Replacement Contributions (4)750,000 750,000 1,600,000 850,000 113.3%
Capital Contributions (5)9,800,000 9,800,000 13,000,000 3,200,000 32.7%
Debt Service (6)4,110,375 4,110,375 4,108,550 (1,825) 0.0%
Working Capital Reserve (7)900,000 900,000 900,000 - 0%
Rate Stability Reserve (8)2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 - 0%
Insurance Reserve (9)1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 - 0%
Operating Reserve (10)4,215,639 6,546,665 4,348,173 132,534 3.1%
Rate Stabilization Reserve (11)2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 - 0%
SRF Loan Reserve (12)186,616 186,616 50,000 (136,616) -73%
Budget Summary $46,135,644 $48,587,678 $51,802,723 $5,667,079 12.3%
EXHIBIT 2
REGIONAL OPERATING BUDGET SUMMARY
INCLUDING RESERVE CONTRIBUTIONS
CHANGE (1)
INCR/(DECR)
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 15 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
4. The Equipment Replacement Contribution is a budgeted transfer of operating revenues to
reserves for scheduled future equipment replacement, including all fleet equipment and
other equipment, with an original cost over $10,000, and with a useful life expectancy
greater than one year. See table on page 21 for year-end balance.
5. The Capital Reserve Contribution is a budgeted transfer of operating revenues to
reserves. Capital is passed through the Springfield Administration Budget. See table on
page 22 for year-end balance.
6. The Debt Service line item is the sum of annual interest and principal payments on the
Revenue Bonds and Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans made from the
Operating Budget (derived from user rates). The total amount of Debt Service budgeted
in FY 22-23 is $4,108,550.
7. The Working Capital Reserve acts as a revolving account which is drawn down and
replenished on a monthly basis to fund Eugene’s and Springfield’s cash flow needs.
8. The Rate Stability Reserve is used to set aside revenues available at year-end after the
budgeted Operating Reserve target is met. Internal policy has established a level of $2
million for the Rate Stability Reserve. See Exhibit 5 on page 20 for year-end balance.
9. The Insurance Reserve was established to set aside funds to cover the insurance
deductible amount for property and liability insurance coverage, for losses per
occurrence. The Insurance Reserve is set at $1.5 million.
10. The Operating Reserve is used to account for the accumulated operating revenues net of
operations expenditures. The Commission’s adopted policy provides minimum guidelines
to establish the Operating Reserve balance at approximately two months operating
expenses of the adopted Operating Budget. The Operating Reserve provides for
contingency funds in the event that unanticipated expenses or revenue shortfalls occur
during the budget year.
11. The Rate Stabilization Reserve contains funds to be used at any point in the future when
net revenues are insufficient to meet the bond covenant coverage requirements. The
Commission shall maintain the Rate Stabilization Reserve account as long as bonds are
outstanding. This reserve is set at $2 million.
12. The Clean Water SRF loan reserve is budgeted as required per loan agreements.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 16 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
SPRINGFIELD ACTUALS
ADOPTED
BUDGET
AMENDED
BUDGET
PROPOSED
BUDGET CHANGE
MWMC ADMINISTRATION FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 INCR/(DECR)
Personnel Services $1,450,583 $1,751,851 $1,751,851 $1,918,920 $167,069 9.5%
Materials & Services 1,785,568 2,190,714 2,241,722 2,455,723 265,009 12.1%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $3,236,151 $3,942,565 $3,993,573 $4,374,643 $432,078 11.0%
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT
Personnel Services $384,002 $402,464 $402,464 $407,533 $5,069 1.3%
Materials & Services 106,079 149,995 149,995 157,675 7,680 5.1%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $490,082 $552,459 $552,459 $565,208 $12,749 2.3%
ACCOUNTING
Personnel Services $127,161 $137,211 $137,211 $140,547 $3,336 2.4%
Materials & Services 31,542 44,658 44,658 46,602 1,944 4.4%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $158,703 $181,869 $181,869 $187,149 $5,280 2.9%
TOTAL SPRINGFIELD
Personnel Services $1,961,746 $2,291,526 $2,291,526 $2,467,000 $175,474 7.7%
Materials & Services 1,923,189 2,385,367 2,436,375 2,660,000 274,633 11.5%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $3,884,935 $4,676,893 $4,727,901 $5,127,000 $450,107 9.6%
EUGENE
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Personnel Services $1,689,977 $2,508,683 $2,508,683 $2,552,416 $43,733 1.7%
Materials & Services 388,131 994,978 994,978 1,014,868 19,890 2.0%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $2,078,108 $3,503,661 $3,503,661 $3,567,284 $63,623 1.8%
BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT
Personnel Services $1,403,312 $1,460,913 $1,460,913 $1,507,844 $46,931 3.2%
Materials & Services 971,998 936,089 936,089 968,966 32,877 3.5%
Capital Outlay 3,485 - - - - --
TOTAL $2,378,795 $2,397,002 $2,397,002 $2,476,810 $79,808 3.3%
INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CONTROL
Personnel Services $549,916 $677,414 $677,414 $696,580 $19,166 2.8%
Materials & Services 85,274 213,477 213,477 220,444 6,967 3.3%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $635,190 $890,891 $890,891 $917,024 $26,133 2.9%
TREATMENT PLANT
Personnel Services $4,768,093 $5,035,102 $5,035,102 $5,222,767 $187,665 3.7%
Materials & Services 2,973,317 3,265,962 3,265,962 3,825,502 559,540 17.1%
Capital Outlay 10,510 138,000 208,000 359,000 221,000 160.1%
TOTAL $7,751,920 $8,439,064 $8,509,064 $9,407,269 $968,205 11.5%
REGIONAL PUMP STATIONS
Personnel Services $193,945 $194,052 $194,052 $201,271 $7,219 3.7%
Materials & Services 255,049 270,193 270,193 290,496 20,303 7.5%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $448,994 $464,245 $464,245 $491,767 $27,522 5.9%
BENEFICIAL REUSE SITE
Personnel Services $235,411 $244,028 $244,028 $249,122 $5,094 2.1%
Materials & Services 62,487 57,228 57,228 59,724 2,496 4.4%
Capital Outlay - - - - - --
TOTAL $297,898 $301,256 $301,256 $308,846 $7,590 2.5%
TOTAL EUGENE
Personnel Services $8,840,654 $10,120,192 $10,120,192 $10,430,000 $309,808 3.1%
Materials & Services 4,736,256 5,737,927 5,737,927 6,380,000 642,073 11.2%
Capital Outlay 13,995 138,000 208,000 359,000 221,000 160.1%
TOTAL $13,590,905 $15,996,119 $16,066,119 $17,169,000 $1,172,881 7.3%
TOTAL REGIONAL BUDGET $17,475,840 $20,673,012 $20,794,020 $22,296,000 $1,622,988 7.9%
NOTE: Does not include Major Rehabilitation, Equipment Replacement or Major Capital Outlay
EXHIBIT 3
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM OPERATING BUDGET
LINE ITEM SUMMARY BY PROGRAM AREA
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 17 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Note: * The Change compares the proposed FY 22-23 budget to the originally adopted FY 21-22 budget column.
ADOPTED
BUDGET
AMENDED
BUDGET
PROPOSED
BUDGET CHANGE*
FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 INC(DECR)
Administration $4,676,893 $4,727,901 $5,127,000 $450,107
Operations 15,996,119 16,066,119 17,169,000 1,172,881
Capital Contribution & Transfers 9,800,000 9,800,000 13,000,000 3,200,000
Equipment Replacement - Contribution 750,000 750,000 1,600,000 850,000
Operating & Revenue Bond Reserve 10,802,255 13,133,281 10,798,173 (4,082)
Debt Service 4,110,374 4,110,374 4,108,550 (1,824)
Total Operating Budget $46,135,641 $48,587,675 $51,802,723 $5,667,082
Funding:
Beginning Balance $8,732,548 $11,184,582 $12,052,852 3,320,304
User Fees 36,050,000 36,050,000 36,875,000 825,000
Other 1,353,093 1,353,093 2,874,871 1,521,778
Total Operating Budget Funding $46,135,641 $48,587,675 $51,802,723 $5,667,082
Adminstration Building Improvements 7,230,000 7,582,063 6,500,000 (730,000)
Class A Disinfection Facilities 6,770,000 7,644,162 5,300,000 (1,470,000)
Glenwood Pump Station Upgrades 1,800,000 2,048,574 1,800,000 0
Poplar Harvest Mgmt. Services 660,000 788,267 330,000 (330,000)
Comprehensive Facility Plan Update 600,000 638,558 2,040,000 1,440,000
Resiliency Follow-Up 490,000 695,908 3,300,000 2,810,000
Recycled Water Demonstration Project 340,000 365,242 330,000 (10,000)
Aeration Basin Upgrades (2023 to 2026)- - 5,000,000 5,000,000
Tertiary Filtration - Phase 2 - - 3,000,000 3,000,000
Water Quality Trading Program - - 3,000,000 3,000,000
WCPF Stormwater Infrastructure - - 300,000 300,000
Aeration Basin Improvements - Phase 2 440,000 1,286,692 - 0
Facility Plan Engineering Services - 80,892 - 0
RNG Upgrade Facilities 2,000,000 2,146,263 - 0
Riparian Shade Credit Program 1,370,000 1,440,102 - 0
Asset Management:
Equipment Replacement Purchases 963,000 2,348,700 $3,220,000 2,257,000
Major Rehab 165,000 419,300 662,000 497,000
Major Capital Outlay - 370,000 - 0
Total Capital Projects $22,828,000 $27,854,723 $34,782,000 $11,954,000
Funding:
Equipment Replacement $963,000 $2,348,700 $3,220,000 2,257,000
SDC Improvement Reserve 4,414,570 5,321,745 3,916,270 (498,300)
Capital Reserve 17,450,430 20,184,278 27,645,730 10,195,300
Total Capital Projects Funding $22,828,000 $27,854,723 $34,782,000 $11,954,000
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL PROGRAM BUDGET
BUDGET SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
EXHIBIT 4
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 18 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
BUDGET AND RATE HISTORY
The graphs on page 19 show the regional residential wastewater service costs over a 5-year
period, and a 5-year Regional Operating Budget Comparison. Because the Equipment
Replacement, Major Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Major Capital Outlay programs are
managed in the Eugene Operating Budget, based on the size, type and budget amount of the
project these programs are incorporated into either the 5-year Regional Operating Budget
Comparison graph or the 5-Year Capital Programs graph on page 20. The Regional Wastewater
Capital Improvement Programs graph on page 20 shows the expenditures over the recent five
years in the MWMC’s Capital Program and including Asset Management projects. A list of
capital projects is located in Exhibit 13 on page 47.
As shown on the Regional Residential Sewer Rate graph on page 19, regional sewer user
charges have incrementally increased to meet the revenue requirements necessary to fund facility
improvements as indentified in the 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan. This Plan and the subsequent
2014 Partial Facilies Plan Update demonstrated the need for a significant capital investment in
new and expanded facilities to meet environmental performance requirements and capacity to
serve the community through 2025. Although a portion of these capital improvements can be
funded through system development charges (SDCs), much of the funding for approximately
$196 million in capital improvements over the 20-year period will come from user charges. This
has become a major driver of the MWMC’s need to increase sewer user rates, moderately and
incremental on an annual basis.
The National Association of Clean Water Agency (NACWA) publishes an annual Cost of Clean
Water Index, which indicates the national average charges for wastewater services. The index
includes average wastewater charges by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regions. Of the
EPA regions, Region 10, which includes Oregon, Washington and Idaho, reflects the second
highest wastewater expenses nationwide, based on demographics, geography, regulatory
requirements, and a range of other issues. Within Region 10, the annual change in the cost of
clean water index reflected a 4.2% average increase over the past 3 years.
In FY 21-22 the MWMC regional user rates increased by 3.5% over the prior year rates. The FY
22-23 Budget is based on a 3.5% user rate increase over the FY 21-22 rates. This increase will
provide for Operations, Administration, Capital programs, reserves and debt service, continuing
to meet capital and operating requirements and supporting the Commission’s Financial Plan
policies, as well as financially positioning for future investments in capital assets.
The following chart displays the regional component of a residential monthly bill when applying
the base and flow rates to 5,000 gallons of wastewater treated, which includes a 3.5% or $0.98
increase effective July 1, 2022.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 19 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
The graph below displays the regional component of a residential monthly bill, when applied to
5,000 gallons of wastewater treated for the recent 5-year period.
The graph below displays the Regional Operating Budget amounts for the recent 5-year period.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Budget and Program Summary
Page 20 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
The graph below displays the Regional Wastewater Capital Improvement Program Budget
amounts for the recent 5-year period.
$33,100,000
$18,667,000
$25,775,000
$29,568,031
$34,782,000
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
REGIONAL WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS
5-YEAR BUDGET COMPARISON
RESERVE FUNDS
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Reserves
Page 21 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
RESERVES
The RWP maintains reserve funds for the dedicated purpose to sustain stable rates while fully
funding operating and capital needs. Commission policies and guidance, which direct the amount
of reserves appropriated on an annual basis, are found in the MWMC Financial Plan. Further
details on the FY 22-23 reserves are provided below.
OPERATING RESERVES
The MWMC Operating Budget includes six separate reserves: the Working Capital Reserve,
Rate Stability Reserve, Rate Stabilization Reserve, State Revolving Fund (SRF) Reserve,
Insurance Reserve and the Operating Reserve. Revenues are appropriated across the reserves in
accordance with Commission policy and expenditure needs. Each reserve is explained in detail
below.
WORKING CAPITAL RESERVE
The Working Capital Reserve acts as a revolving account that is drawn down and replenished on
a monthly basis to provide funds for payment of Springfield Administration and Eugene
Operations costs prior to the receipt of user fees from the Springfield Utility Board and Eugene
Water and Electric Board. The Working Capital Reserve is set at $900,000 for FY 22-23,
$200,000 of which is dedicated to Administration and $700,000 is dedicated to Operations.
RATE STABILITY RESERVE
The Rate Stability Reserve was established to implement the Commission’s objective of
maintaining stable rates. It is intended to hold revenues in excess of the current year’s operating
and capital requirements for use in future years, in order to avoid potential rate spikes. The
amount budgeted on an annual basis has been set at $2 million, with any additional net revenues
being transferred to the capital reserve for future projects.
RATE STABILIZATION RESERVE
The Rate Stabilization Reserve contains funds to be used at any point in the future when net
revenues are insufficient to meet the bond covenant coverage requirement. The Commission
shall maintain the Rate Stabilization account as long as bonds are outstanding. In FY 22-23 no
additional contribution to this reserve is budgeted and the balance at June 30, 2022, will remain
at $2 million.
CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND (SRF) RESERVE
The Clean Water SRF Reserve was established to meet revenue coverage requirements for SRF
loans. The SRF Reserve is set at $50,000 for FY 22-23.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Reserves
Page 22 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
INSURANCE RESERVE
The Insurance Reserve was established to set aside funds to cover the insurance deductible
amount for property and liability insurance coverage, for losses per occurrence. The Insurance
Reserve is set at $1.5 million for FY 22-23.
OPERATING RESERVE
The Operating Reserve is used to account for accumulated operating revenues net of operating
expenditures (including other reserves). The Commission’s adopted policy provides guidelines to
establish the Operating Reserve at a minimum target of two months expenses. For FY 22-23, the
Operating Reserve is budgeted at $4,348,173, which includes approximately two months of total
Personnel Services, Materials and Services, and Capital Outlay in accordance with Commission
policy.
EXHIBIT 5
OPERATING RESERVES
ADOPTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 22-23
Beginning Balance $8,732,548 $11,184,582 $12,052,852
User Fee Revenue 35,400,000 35,400,000 36,200,000
Septage Revenue 650,000 650,000 675,000
Other Revenue 1,250,921 1,250,921 1,256,127
Interest 75,000 75,000 80,000
RNG Revenue 0 0 1,500,000
Transfer from Reimbursement SDCs 23,172 23,172 24,744
Personnel Services (12,411,718)(12,411,718)(12,897,000)
Materials & Services (8,119,293)(8,170,301)(9,026,000)
Capital Outlay (138,000)(208,000)(359,000)
Interfund Transfers (10,550,000)(10,550,000)(14,600,000)
Debt Service - SRF Loan (104,250)(104,250)(103,750)
Debt Service - 2016 Revenue Bond (4,006,125)(4,006,125)(4,004,800)
Working Capital (900,000)(900,000)(900,000)
Insurance Reserve (1,500,000)(1,500,000)(1,500,000)
SRF Loan Reserve (186,616)(186,616)(50,000)
Rate Stability Reserve (2,000,000)(2,000,000)(2,000,000)
Rate Stabilization Reserve (2,000,000)(2,000,000)(2,000,000)
Operating Reserve $4,215,639 $6,546,665 $4,348,173
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Reserves
Page 23 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
CAPITAL RESERVES
The MWMC Capital Budget includes four reserves: the Equipment Replacement Reserve, SDC
Reimbursement Reserves, SDC Improvement Reserves, and the Capital Reserve. These reserves
accumulate revenue to help fund capital projects including equipment replacement and major
rehabilitation. They are funded by annual contributions from user rates, SDCs, and loans. Each
reserve is explained in detail below.
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RESERVE
The Equipment Replacement Reserve accumulates replacement funding for three types of
equipment: 1) major/stationary equipment items valued over $10,000 with life expectancy
greater than one year; 2) fleet vehicles maintained by the Eugene Wastewater Division; and 3)
computer servers that serve the Eugene Wastewater Division. Contributions to the Equipment
Replacement Reserve in the FY 22-23 budget total $1,600,000, additional budget details are
provided below.
The Equipment Replacement Reserve is intended to accumulate funds necessary to provide for
the timely replacement or rehabilitation of equipment, and may also be borrowed against to
provide short-term financing of capital improvements. An annual analysis is performed on the
Equipment Replacement Reserve. Estimates used in the analysis include replacement costs,
interest earnings, inflation rates and useful lives for the equipment.
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (SDC) RESERVES
SDCs are required as part of the MWMC IGA. They are connection fees charged to new users to
recover the costs related to system capacity, and are limited to funding Capital Programs. The
purpose of the SDC Reserves is to collect and account for SDC revenues separately from other
revenue sources, in accordance with Oregon statutes. The Commission’s SDC structure includes
a combination of “Reimbursement” and “Improvement” fee components. Estimated SDC
revenues for FY 22-23 are approximately $1,800,000. The projected beginning SDC Reserve
balance on July 1, 2022 is $8,063,391.
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RESERVE
ADOPTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 22-23
Beginning Balance 13,929,952 15,166,259 13,717,558
Annual Equipment Contribution 750,000 750,000 1,600,000
Interest 150,000 150,000 75,000
Equipment Purchases (963,000) (2,348,700) (3,220,000)
Equipment Replacement Reserve $13,866,952 $13,717,559 $12,172,558
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Reserves
Page 24 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
CAPITAL RESERVE
The Capital Reserve accumulates funds transferred from the Operating Reserve for the purpose
of funding the CIP, Major Capital Outlay and Major Rehabilitation Program costs. The intent is
to collect sufficient funds over time to construct a portion of planned capital projects with cash in
an appropriate balance with projects that are funded with debt financing. The FY 22-23 Budget
includes a contribution from the Operating Reserve of $13,000,000. The beginning balance on
July 1, 2022, is projected to be $58,937,814. Additional budget detail on the CIP, Major Capital
Outlay and Major Rehabilitation Program reserves is provided below.
REIMBURSEMENT SDC RESERVE
ADOPTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 22-23
Beginning Balance $1,696,386 $1,759,681 $1,965,509
Reimbursement SDCs Collected 200,000 200,000 200,000
Interest 25,000 25,000 15,000
SDC Compliance Charge 4,000 4,000 4,000
Transfer to Fund 612 (23,172)(23,172)(24,744)
Materials & Services (2,000)(2,000)(4,000)
Reimbursement SDC Reserve $1,900,214 $1,963,509 $2,155,765
IMPROVEMENT SDC RESERVE
ADOPTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 22-23
Beginning Balance $4,016,833 $6,323,429 $6,097,882
Improvement SDCs Collected 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000
Interest 25,000 25,000 30,000
Materials & Services (2,000)(2,000)(10,000)
Funding for Capital Improvement Projects (4,414,570) (5,321,745) (3,916,270)
Improvement SDC Reserve $1,225,263 $2,624,684 $3,801,612
CAPITAL RESERVES
ADOPTED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 21-22
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 22-23
Beginning Balance $53,327,365 $56,005,992 $58,937,814
Transfer from Operating Reserve 9,800,000 9,800,000 13,000,000
Interest 525,000 525,000 300,000
Other Income 10 10 10
Funding For Capital Improvement Projects (17,285,430)(19,394,978)(26,983,730)
Funding For Major Rehabilitation (165,000)(419,300)(662,000)
Funding For Major Capital Outlay - (370,000)-
Capital Reserve $46,201,945 $46,146,724 $44,592,094
OPERATING PROGRAMS
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Staffing
Page 25 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
EXHIBIT 6
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM*
ORGANIZATION CHART FY 22-23
Metropolitan Wastewater Management
Commission
CITY OF EUGENE **Wastewater Division79.36 FTE
Division Director.85 FTE
Operations Manager.93 FTE
Wastewater
Treatment Plant41.11 FTE
Regional Pump
Stations
1.31 FTE
Computer
Services2.73 FTE
Biosolids
Management 12.67 FTE
Operations
16.0 FTE
Beneficial Reuse Site
1.82 FTE
Equipment Maintenance
10.3 FTE
Facility
Maintenance10.32 FTE
Laboratory2.65 FTE
Industrial
Pretreatment 5.35 FTE
Stores
2.67 FTE
Env Data
Analyst.65 FTE
User Fee
Support1.0 FTE
Operations
6.97 FTE
Operations
.53 FTE
Equipment
Maintenance.85 FTE
Equipment Maintenance
.59 FTE
Equipment Maintenance
2.57 FTE
Facility Maintenance
2.03 FTE
Facility
Maintenance.39 FTE
Laboratory
1.27 FTE
Laboratory.66 FTE Laboratory.15 FTE
Regulations &Enforcement
3.38 FTE
Admin Support5.36 FTE
Support Services
15.32 FTE
Sampling
.74 FTE Sampling.44 FTE Sampling.16 FTE
PW Maint1.10 FTE
Sampling.70 FTE
Safety, Env &
Health Supervisor
.89 FTE
Management Analyst.89 FTE
Project Mgr..93 FTE
PW Financial
Services.20 FTE
Assistant City Manager
.03 FTE
MWMC Executive Officer/
General Manager.75 FTE
Administration
Support
.30 FTE
Accounting.88 FTE
MWMC
Administration12.85 FTE
Industrial
Pretreatment3.25 FTE
Administration
Support1.85 FTE
Regulations
&
Enforcement2.95 FTE
Budget & Financial
Management1.15 FTE
Property/
Risk Mgmt
.20 FTE
Customer Service.25 FTE
Public
Education2.0 FTE
Construction
Management5.40 FTE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD **Environmental Services Division & Finance Department
17.76 FTE
Facility
Maintenance.46 FTE
Special
Projects/ Planning
2.00 FTE
Notes:
* Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) figures represent portions of Eugene and Springfield staff funded by
regional wastewater funds.
** The chart represents groups of staff dedicated to program areas rather than specific positions.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Staffing
Page 26 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
BUDGET BUDGET PROPOSED FTE
CLASSIFICATION FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 CHANGE
SPRINGFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES & FINANCE
Accountant 0.80 0.80 0.80 -
Accounting Manager 0.08 0.08 0.08 -
Administrative Specialist 2.65 2.65 2.65 -
Assistant City Manager 0.08 0.03 0.03 -
Design & Construction Coordinator 3.00 3.00 3.00 -
Environmental Analyst 0.00 1.00 1.00 -
Environmental Management Analyst 0.90 0.90 0.90 -
Environmental Services Program Manager 0.80 0.80 0.80 -
Environmental Services Supervisor 0.95 1.95 1.95 -
Environmental Services Technician 2.00 2.00 2.00 -
ESD Division Director/MWMC Executive Officer 0.80 0.80 0.80 -
Management Analyst 0.75 0.75 0.75 -
Managing Civil Engineer 1.75 1.00 1.00 -
Public Information & Education Analyst 2.00 2.00 2.00 -
TOTAL SPRINGFIELD 16.56 17.76 17.76 -
EXHIBIT 7
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
POSITION SUMMARY
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Staffing
Page 27 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
BUDGET BUDGET PROPOSED FTE
CLASSIFICATION FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 CHANGE
EUGENE WASTEWATER DIVISION & OTHER PW
Administrative Specialist, Sr 1.78 1.78 1.78 -
Administrative Specialist 0.95 0.95 0.95 -
Application Support Technician, Sr 0.95 0.95 0.95 -
Application Systems Analyst 1.78 1.78 1.78 -
Custodian 1.00 2.00 2.00 -
Finance & Admin Manager 0.89 0.89 0.89 -
Electrician 1 3.28 3.28 3.28 -
Engineering Associate 0.35 0.35 0.35 -
Maintenance Worker 13.25 13.25 13.25 -
Management Analyst 5.14 5.14 5.14 -
Parts and Supply Specialist 1.78 1.78 1.78 -
PW Financial Services Manager 0.20 0.20 0.20 -
Utility Billing Coordinator 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Wastewater Lab Assistant 0.82 0.82 0.82 -
Wastewater Division Director 0.85 0.85 0.85 -
Wastewater Instrument Electrician 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Wastewater Plant Operations Manager 0.93 0.93 0.93 -
Wastewater Operations Supervisor 2.00 2.00 2.00 -
Wastewater Plant Maintenance Supervisor 2.88 2.88 2.88 -
Wastewater Pretreatment & Lab Supervisor 0.82 0.82 0.82 -
Wastewater Technician 36.71 36.71 36.71 -
TOTAL EUGENE 78.36 79.36 79.36 -
GRAND TOTAL 94.92 97.12 97.12 -
POSITION SUMMARY
EXHIBIT 7 (Continued)
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Springfield Budget Detail
Page 28 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES
The City of Springfield manages administration
services for the RWP under the Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission (MWMC). The programs
maintained by Springfield to support the RWP are
summarized below and are followed by Springfield’s
regional wastewater budget summaries. Activities, and
therefore program budgets, for the MWMC
administration vary from year to year depending upon
the major construction projects and special initiatives
underway. A list of the capital projects Springfield staff
will support in FY 22-23 is provided in Exhibit 12 on
page 40.
MWMC ADMINISTRATION
The Springfield Environmental Services Division (ESD) and Finance Department provide
ongoing support and management services for the MWMC. The ESD Director serves as the
MWMC Executive Officer and General Manager. Springfield provides the following
administration functions: financial planning management, accounting and financial reporting;
risk management and legal services; coordination and management of public policy;
coordination and management of regulatory and permit compliance issues; coordination between
the Commission and the governing bodies; long-range capital project planning and construction
management; coordination of public information, education, and citizen involvement programs;
sewer user customer service; and coordination and development of regional budgets, rate
proposals, and revenue projections.
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT (SOURCE CONTROL) PROGRAM
The Industrial Pretreatment Program is a regional activity implemented jointly by the Cities of
Eugene and Springfield. The Industrial Pretreatment section of the ESD is charged with
administering the program for the regulation and oversight of wastewater discharged to the
sanitary collection system by industries in Springfield. This section is responsible for ensuring
that these wastes do not damage the collection system, interfere with wastewater treatment
processes, result in the pass-through of harmful pollutants to treated effluent or biosolids, or
threaten worker health or safety.
This responsibility is fulfilled, in part, by the use of a permit system for industrial dischargers.
This permit system, common to both Eugene and Springfield, implements necessary limitations
on waste characteristics and establishes inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for
documenting waste quality and quantity controls. The Industrial Pretreatment section is also
responsible for locating new industrial discharges in Springfield and evaluating the impact of
those discharges on the regional WPCF. The Industrial Pretreatment Program also addresses
Program Responsibilities
▪ Administration & Management
▪ Financial Planning & Management
▪ Long-Range Capital Project Planning
▪ Project and Construction Management
▪ Coordination between the Commission and
governing bodies
▪ Coordination and Management of:
∙ Risk Management & Legal Services
∙ Public Policy Issues
∙ Regulatory and Permit Compliance
▪ Public Information, Education and Outreach
▪ Industrial Pretreatment Source Control
▪ Customer Service
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Springfield Budget Detail
Page 29 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
the wastewater discharges of some commercial/industrial businesses through the development
and implementation of Pollution Management Practices. Pretreatment program staff also
coordinates pollution prevention activities in cooperation with the Pollution Prevention Coalition
of Lane County.
ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Accounting and financial reporting services for the RWP are provided by the Accounting
division in the Springfield Finance Department, in coordination with ESD. Springfield
Accounting staff provides oversight of financial control systems, ensures compliance with all
local, state and federal accounting requirements for MWMC including debt management and
treasury management services. This division also assists ESD with preparation of the MWMC
budget, capital financing documents, sewer user rates, and financial policies and procedures.
PROGRAMS AND SIGNIFICANT SERVICE/EXPENDITURE CHANGES
In FY 22-23, the City of Springfield will support the following major regional initiatives in
addition to ongoing Commission administration and industrial pretreatment activities:
▪ Continue public information, education and outreach activities focused on the MWMC’s
Key Outcomes and Communication Plan objectives to increase awareness of the
MWMC’s ongoing efforts in maintaining water quality and a sustainable environment.
▪ Implement Capital Financing strategies necessary to meet current debt obligations,
prepare for additional debt financing, and ensure sufficient revenues in accordance with
the MWMC Financial Plan.
▪ Continue implementation of the 2004 MWMC Facilities Plan and 2014 Partial Facilities
Plan Update to meet all regulatory requirements and capacity needs. Considering
emerging environmental regulations that may impact the operation of the WPCF.
▪ Protect the Regional Wastewater Program (RWP) interests through participation in
Association of Clean Water Agencies activities.
▪ Coordinate temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) compliance through
continued development and implementation of the thermal load mitigation strategy,
including but not limited to a recycled water program.
▪ Continue participation with the Association of Clean Water Agencies and the Department
of Environmental Quality on regulatory permitting strategies and the development of
water quality trading rules.
▪ Implement resiliency planning to ensure protection of public health and safety following
natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods.
▪ Planning operationally and financially to begin the MWMC’s NPDES permit renewal,
the target date set by the DEQ for permit issuance is by the end of calendar year 2022.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Springfield Budget Detail
Page 30 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
BUDGET CHANGES FOR FY 21-22
The budget for Springfield Personnel Services, Materials and Services, and Capital Outlay for
FY 22-23 totals $5,127,000 representing an overall increase of $450,105 or 9.6% from the adopted
FY 21-22 budget, as displayed in Exhibit 8 on page 29.
Personnel Services
Personnel Services totaling $2,467,000 represents a FY 22-23 increase of $175,473 or 7.7%
above the originally adopted FY 21-22 budget. The notable changes are summarized below:
Staffing
The FY 22-23 staffing budget includes flat number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)resulting
in a total staffing level at 17.76 FTE in Springfield.
Regular Salaries and Overtime - $1,574.496, an increase of $109,222 or 7.5%
Salaries are based upon the negotiated management/labor contracts as approved by the
Springfield City Council, and staffing levels.
Employee Benefits - $524,203, an increase of $62,882 or 13.6%
The employee benefits consist mainly of PERS/OPSRP retirement system costs, FICA and
Medicare contributions.
Health Insurance - $362,559, an increase of $3,368 or 0.9%
The increase is based on group claims experience and cost projections. Costs are calculated
based on the number of employees.
Materials and Services
The Materials and Services budget total is $2,660,000 in FY 22-23, representing an increase of
$274,632 or 11.5% above the adopted FY 21-22 budget. The notable changes are summarized
below:
Billing & Collection Expense - $800,000, an increase of $70,000 or 9.6%
The $70,000 increase includes contracted billing services for Eugene and Springfield utility
billing services combined, as funded through the Springfield portion of the regional budget.
The increase reflects growth in customer transactions and billing service contracts.
Property & Liability Insurance - $420,000, an increase of $75,000 or 21.7%
The $75,000 increase reflects insurance on newly constructed infrastructure, and maintaining
incremental increases on existing assets for property insurance coverage. Including services
provided by the MWMC Agent of Record for property/liability coverage.
Internal & Indirect Charges Combined - $655,176, an increase of $38,737 or 6.1%
The $39,949 increase is based on changes in overhead costs as programmed in the FY 22-23
budget, when compared FY 21-22. Internal charges are determined by the City of
Springfield, and indirect costs are based on a methodology approved by the federal
government, which is outlined in the MWMC Intergovernmental Agreement.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Springfield Budget Detail
Page 31 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Note: * Change column compares the proposed FY 22-23 Budget to the adopted FY 21-22 Budget.
ACTUALS
ADOPTED
BUDGET
AMENDED
BUDGET
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
Personnel Services $1,961,746 $2,291,527 $2,291,527 $2,467,000 $175,473 7.7%
Materials & Services 1,931,916 2,385,368 2,436,376 2,660,000 274,632 11.5%
Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
Budget Summary $3,893,662 $4,676,895 $4,727,903 $5,127,000 $450,105 9.6%
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
INCR/(DECR)
EXHIBIT 8
SPRINGFIELD ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM
PROPOSED FY 22-23
BUDGET SUMMARY
CHANGE *
$3,969,666 $4,183,452
$4,394,800 $4,676,892 $5,127,000
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
5-YEAR MWMC BUDGET COMPARISON
SPRINGFIELD ADMINISTRATION
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Springfield Budget Detail
Page 32 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ADOPTED AMENDED PROPOSED
ACTUALS BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET
FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
PERSONNEL SERVICES
Regular Salaries $1,251,953 $1,465,274 $1,465,274 $1,574,496 $109,222 7.5%
Overtime 0 5,741 5,741 5,742 1 0.0%
Employee Benefits 422,333 461,321 461,321 524,203 62,882 13.6%
PERS/OSPRP NA
Health Insurance 287,460 359,191 359,191 362,559 3,368 0.9%
Total Personnel Services $1,961,746 $2,291,527 $2,291,527 $2,467,000 $175,473 7.7%
FTE 16.56 17.76 17.76 17.76 0.00 0.0%
MATERIALS & SERVICES
Billing & Collection Expense $668,137 $730,000 $730,000 $800,000 $70,000 9.6%
Property & Liability Insurance 326,787 345,000 345,000 420,000 75,000 21.7%
Contractual Services 36,713 143,373 143,373 206,373 63,000 43.9%
Attorney Fees and Legal Expense 33,095 183,022 183,022 183,022 0 0.0%
WPCF/NPDES Permits 154,532 167,000 167,000 167,000 0 0.0%
Materials & Program Expense 103,086 96,700 147,708 110,555 13,855 14.3%
Computer Software & Licenses 41,444 66,132 66,132 70,332 4,200 6.4%
Employee Development 4,478 20,760 20,760 23,552 2,792 13.4%
Travel & Meeting Expense 868 18,154 18,154 23,990 5,836 32.1%
Internal Charges 218,988 230,231 230,231 279,456 49,225 21.4%
Indirect Costs 343,788 384,996 384,996 375,720 (9,276)-2.4%
Total Materials & Services $1,931,916 $2,385,368 $2,436,376 $2,660,000 $274,632 11.5%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Total Capital Outlay $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0%
TOTAL $3,893,662 $4,676,895 $4,727,903 $5,127,000 $450,105 9.6%
INCR/(DECR)
CHANGE
SPRINGFIELD ADMINISTRATION
LINE ITEM BUDGET SUMMARY
EXHIBIT 9
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 33 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
CITY OF EUGENE
REGIONAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES
The Wastewater Division for the City of Eugene manages all
regional wastewater pollution control facilities serving the
areas inside the Eugene and Springfield Urban Growth
Boundaries under the Intergovernmental Agreement for the
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
(MWMC). These regional facilities include the
Eugene/Springfield Regional Water Pollution Control
Facility (WPCF), the Biosolids Management Facility, the
Beneficial Reuse Site, the Biocycle Farm site, and regional
wastewater pumping stations and transmission sewers.
In support of the water pollution control program, the division provides technical services for
wastewater treatment, management of equipment replacement and infrastructure rehabilitation,
biosolids land application, regional laboratory services, resource recovery operations, and an
industrial source control and pretreatment program in collaboration with environmental
services staff at City of Springfield.
REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT - FACILITY OPERATIONS
The Wastewater Division operates the WPCF to treat residential, commercial, and industrial
wastes to achieve an effluent quality that protects the beneficial uses of the Willamette River.
The Operations section optimizes wastewater treatment processes to ensure effluent quality
requirements are met in an efficient and cost-effective manner. In addition, the Operations
section provides continuous monitoring of the alarm functions for all plant processes, regional
and local pump stations, the Biosolids Management Facility (BMF), and the Beneficial Reuse
Site (BRS).
REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT - FACILITY MAINTENANCE
The mechanical, electrical, and facilities maintenance sections of the Wastewater Division are
responsible for preservation of the multi-million-dollar investment in the equipment and
infrastructure of the WPCF, regional pump stations, pressure sewers, as well as the BMF, BRS,
and Biocycle Farm. These sections provide a preventative maintenance program to maximize
equipment life and reliability; a corrective maintenance program to repair unanticipated
failures; and a facility maintenance program to maintain the buildings, treatment structures,
and grounds.
BIOSOLIDS AND RECYCLED WATER MANAGEMENT
The Residuals Management section of the Wastewater Division operates the BMF and
Biocycle Farm to process and land apply biological solids (biosolids) produced as a result of
the activated sludge treatment of wastewater. After further processing the biosolids from the
WPCF, the dried material is applied to approved agricultural land. Biosolids are also applied
on poplar trees at the Biocycle Farm as a beneficial nutrient and soil conditioner. In addition,
this section utilizes recycled water for the processing of biosolids and for irrigation. This
section also operates the BRS, which formerly served to treat wastewater from food processing
operations.
Program Responsibilities
Facility Operations
Facility Maintenance Biosolids Management
Environmental Services
Management Information Services
Administration and Management
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 34 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Environmental Services is comprised of Industrial Source Control (Pretreatment), Analytical
Services, and Sampling Team.
Industrial Source Control (ISC) - The pretreatment program is a regional activity implemented
jointly by the cities of Eugene and Springfield. The ISC group of the Wastewater Division is
charged with administering the pretreatment program for the regulation and oversight of
commercial and industrial wastewaters discharged to the wastewater collection system by
fixed-site industries in Eugene and by mobile waste haulers in the Eugene and Springfield
areas. This group is also responsible for ensuring that these wastes do not damage the
collection system, interfere with wastewater treatment processes, result in the pass-through of
harmful pollutants to treated effluent or biosolids, or threaten worker health or safety.
This responsibility is fulfilled through the use of a permit and discharge authorization system
for industrial and commercial users of the wastewater collection system. This permit system,
common to both Eugene and Springfield, implements necessary prohibitions and limitations on
waste characteristics and establishes inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for
documenting waste quality and quantity controls. The staff is also responsible for locating new
industrial and commercial discharges in Eugene and evaluating the impact of their discharges
on the WPCF. The section also has responsibilities related to environmental spill response
activities.
Analytical Services - The Analytical Services group provides analytical laboratory work in
support of wastewater treatment, residuals management, industrial source control, stormwater
monitoring, and special project activities of the Wastewater Division. The laboratory's services
include sample handling and analyses of influent sewage, treated wastewater, biosolids,
industrial wastes, stormwater, surface water, and groundwater. Information from the laboratory
is used to evaluate the performance of the treatment process, make treatment process control
decisions, document compliance with regulatory requirements, demonstrate environmental
protection, and ensure worker health and safety.
Sampling Team - The Sampling Team is responsible for sampling and field monitoring
activities related to regional wastewater program functions. These include the Eugene
pretreatment program, wastewater treatment process control, effluent and ambient water
quality, groundwater quality, facultative sludge lagoons, biosolids, application site soils,
stormwater samples, and natural gas quality samples.
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SERVICES (MIS)
The MIS section provides services for electronic data gathering, analysis, and reporting in
compliance with regulatory requirements and management functions. This section also maintains
the network communication linkages with the City of Eugene and supplies technical expertise
and assistance in the selection, operation, and modification of computer systems (hardware and
software) within the division.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 35 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ADMINISTRATIVE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Administrative Services provides management, administrative, and office support to the
Wastewater Division. This support includes the general planning, directing, and managing of
the activities of the division; development and coordination of the budget; administration of
personnel records; and processing of payroll, accounts payable, and accounts receivable. This
section also provides tracking and monitoring of all assets for the regional wastewater
treatment facilities and support for reception, customer service, and other administrative needs.
The administrative services include oversight and coordination of the division’s Environmental
Management System (EMS), safety, and training programs, and an inventory/storeroom
administrative unit that purchases and stocks parts and supplies and assists with professional
services contracting. Another area this program administers is the coordination of local and
regional billing and rate activities.
PROGRAMS AND SIGNIFICANT SERVICE/EXPENDITURE CHANGES
In FY 22-23, Eugene staff will support the following major regional initiatives in addition to
ongoing operations and maintenance activities.
▪ Manage the Operations & Maintenance (O&M) responsibilities of the NPDES
wastewater discharge permit for the treatment of wastewater and the Lane Regional Air
Protection Agency (LRAPA) air emissions permit for the regional wastewater treatment
plant.
▪ Manage the O&M responsibilities of the Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) facility to
maximize production of renewable fuel and the associated renewable fuel standard
credits.
▪ Provide technical input and O&M assessments related to proposed/newly adopted
environmental regulations, renewable energy objectives, and operational resiliency. This
includes impact evaluations of the regulatory actions upon operational responsibilities
such as the federal sanitary sewer overflows (SSO), blending policy development,
Willamette River TMDLs implementation, and any newly adopted state water quality
standards.
▪ Complete scheduled major rehabilitation, equipment replacement, and other capital
projects in an efficient and timely manner.
▪ Work cooperatively on CIP elements and effectively integrate capital project work with
ongoing O&M activities with an emphasis on maintaining an effective CIP management
and coordination program with Springfield staff.
▪ Manage the O&M aspects of the BMF and the Biocycle Farm, continuing biosolids land
application practices and poplar tree management.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 36 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE O&M BUDGET FOR FY 22-23
The FY 22-23 budget for Operations and Maintenance of the regional wastewater treatment
facilities (personnel, materials and services, and capital outlay) totals $17,169,000. The amount
represents an increase of $1,171,587 or 7.3% from the FY 21-22 budget. The most significant cost
centers for the budget include regular wages, chemicals, computer equipment and software,
contractual services, fleet service charges, utilities and indirect charges. Significant items and
changes for the FY 22-23 Operations and Maintenance budget as compared to the FY 21-22 budget
include the following:
Personnel Services
Personnel Services totaling $10,430,000 represents an FY 22-23 increase of $309,808 or 3.1%.
There is no change in the current staffing level for FY 22-23, which is currently at 79.36 Full Time
Equivalent (FTE) positions. There are no significant changes for FY 22-23 in the budget categories
for Personnel Services.
Regular Wages - $5,996,435, a net increase of $305,808 or 5.4%
The current contract between City of Eugene and AFSCME was ratified in December 2021, which
includes 2% cost of living adjustment (COLA) in FY21-22; 4% COLA for FY 22-23 and
employee grade changes and boot allowance increases for certain classifications. About 83% of
Eugene staff in the regional wastewater program are AFSCME represented.
Materials and Services
The Materials and Services budget totaling $6,380,000 represents an FY 22-23 increase of
$642,073 or 11.2%. The notable changes are in the following budget categories:
Chemicals – $740,500, a net increase of $286,150 or 63.0%
The costs for hypochlorite, sodium bisulfite, and polymer (both dry and liquid) have
increased significantly. Unit prices are established through regional competitive price
agreements, and resupply orders are placed depending on the timing of treatment process and
O&M activity. Additional chemical expenses included in FY 22-23 are the H2S filter media
for the Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) facility and aluminum chlorohydrate for the Class A
Disinfection Facilities project (P80098).
Computer Equipment and Supplies – $444,573, a net increase of $58,820 or 15.2%
City of Eugene’s internal service charges for PeopleSoft licensing and maintenance, updates and
upgrades, and personnel support will total $77,218 in FY 22-23, an increase of $29,659 or 62%
over FY 21-22. The corporate software contribution is 51% of the computer equipment and
supplies budget category. Other increases budgeted in FY 22-23 are for network service, other
software application licensing and maintenance, and computer hardware.
Contractual Services – $598,750, a net increase of $139,450 or 30.4%
Greater need for contractual services is anticipated for FY 22-23, with significant increases
specific to gas analysis and support for the RNG facility, Yokogawa (DCS) support for the RNG
facility, analytical services for specific laboratory work, and professional services (engineering).
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 37 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
Fleet Operating Charges – $509,682, a net increase of $60,768 or 13.5%
The internal charges from Eugene Public Works Fleet Services comprises 92% of the fleet
operating charges category. Fleet charges are budgeted to increase by $60,768 in FY 22-23 due
to economic factors for automotive parts and equipment needed.
Materials & Program Expense – $712,026, a net decrease of $107,975 or -13.2%
Analyses of prior-year actuals indicate that expense reductions in the Materials & Program
Expense category can be planned to more closely align the budget to actual expenses.
Reductions for FY 22-23 are for equipment rental, advertising, training and related travel,
uniforms and clothing, tools and minor equipment, laundry services, and related.
Parts & Components – $363,000, a net decrease of $44,100 or -10.8%
Reductions for FY 22-23 are also planned for parts and components used in maintenance
activity in the effort to better align the budget to actual expenses.
Risk Insurance – Employee Liability – $61,869, a net decrease of $11,043 or -15.1%
For FY 22-23 City of Eugene risk services has planned for a decrease in premium expense for
employee liability insurance.
Utilities – $1,417,000, a net increase of $161,703 or 12.9%
The Utilities category includes the purchase of electricity, natural gas, water, and sewer usage
for all regional facilities. The increase for FY 22-23 is planned for higher utility expenses due to
the RNG facility becoming operational and the discontinued regular use of the CoGen (800 KW
Jenbacher engine generator). Furthermore, the utility rates charged by all utility providers were
increased in 2022.
Indirect Charges - $1,330,000, a net increase of $100,000 or 8.3%
This expenditure category includes costs for payroll processing, human resources services,
information technology services, and budget and financial services provided by the City of
Eugene to the Wastewater Division. Budgeting for Indirect Charges are planned by applying
assumptions for the Federal Indirect Rate as a proportion of the planned operating charges for
the fiscal year. As operating charges are planned to increase in FY 22-23, budgeting for indirect
charges should be increased commensurately.
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 38 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ACTUALS
ADOPTED
BUDGET
AMENDED
BUDGET
PROPOSED
BUDGET
FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
Personnel Services $8,840,654 $10,120,192 $10,120,192 $10,430,000 $309,808 3.1%
Materials & Services 4,660,214 5,737,927 5,737,927 6,380,000 642,073 11.2%
Capital Outlay 13,995 138,000 208,000 359,000 221,000 160.1%
Budget Summary $13,514,863 $15,996,119 $16,066,119 $17,169,000 $1,172,881 7.3%
INCR/(DECR)
EXHIBIT 10
EUGENE - OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
PROPOSED FY 22-23
BUDGET SUMMARY
CHANGE *
NOTE: Does not include Major Rehabilitation or Equipment Replacement
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Eugene Budget Detail
Page 39 FY 22-23 BUDGET AND CIP
ADOPTED AMENDED PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET
FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
PERSONNEL SERVICES
Regular Salaries $5,051,822 $5,690,627 $5,690,627 $5,996,435 $305,808 5.4%
Overtime 37,550 33,100 33,100 33,686 586 1.8%
Employee Benefits 2,187,304 2,530,837 2,530,837 2,534,919 4,082 0.2%
Workers' Comp/Unemploy Ins 108,860 122,079 122,079 121,411 (668)-0.5%
Health Insurance 1,455,118 1,743,549 1,743,549 1,743,549 0 0.0%
Total Personnel Services $8,840,654 $10,120,192 $10,120,192 $10,430,000 $309,808 3.1%
FTE 78.36 79.36 79.36 79.36 0.00 0.0%
MATERIALS & SERVICES
Utilities $810,187 $1,255,297 $1,255,297 $1,417,000 $161,703 12.9%
Fleet Operating Charges 549,765 448,914 448,914 509,682 60,768 13.5%
Maintenance-Equip & Facilities 243,905 234,300 234,300 232,600 (1,700)-0.7%
Contractual Services 472,113 459,300 459,300 598,750 139,450 30.4%
Materials & Program Expense 371,528 820,001 820,001 712,026 (107,975)-13.2%
Chemicals 460,292 454,350 454,350 740,500 286,150 63.0%
Parts & Components 380,555 407,100 407,100 363,000 (44,100)-10.8%
Risk Insurance - Employee Liability 120,232 72,912 72,912 61,869 (11,043)-15.1%
Computer Equip, Supplies, Maint 293,001 385,753 385,753 444,573 58,820 15.2%
Indirects 1,034,678 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,300,000 100,000 8.3%
Total Materials & Services $4,736,256 $5,737,927 $5,737,927 $6,380,000 $642,073 11.2%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Motorized Vehicles $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0%
Capital Outlay - Other 13,995 138,000 208,000 359,000 221,000 160.1%
Total Capital Outlay $13,995 $138,000 $208,000 $359,000 $221,000 160.1%
TOTAL $13,590,905 $15,996,119 $16,066,119 $17,169,000 $1,172,881 7.3%
EXHIBIT 11
EUGENE - OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
LINE ITEM BUDGET SUMMARY
CHANGE
INCR/(DECR)
CAPITAL PROGRAM
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 40 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)
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 41 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
Page 42 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
Page 43 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
Page 44 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
Page 45 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.
Project Description
FY 22-23
Proposed Budget
Interior Dome Recoating, #1 Digester $280,000
Roof Replacement, Operations Building, BMF 97,000
Roof Replacement, Willakenzie Pump Station 75,000
Roof Replacement, Welding Shop, Maintenance 55,000
Roof Replacment, Facilities Maintenance Workshop 55,000
Grit Channels, Wood Baffels (x4), Replacement 50,000
Roof Replacement, Clarifiers Pump Room, Primary 35,000
Ops/Maint Building Improvements 15,000
Total $662,000
Major Rehabilitation
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 46 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
Page 47 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 $1,340,000 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 (x2) – Replacement of two 13-year old passenger vehicles.
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 (x2), Administration 120,000
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 $1,340,000
Equipment Replacement
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 48 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.
Project Description
FY 23-24
Budget Forecast
Exterior Coatings, Domes #3 and 4, Digesters $260,000
Coating, Raw Sewage Pumps (x4), Pretreatment 240,000
Grit Channel Coating and Rails Rehab (x2), Pretreatment 175,000
Coating, Head Cells/Grit Collector, Pretreatment 65,000
Asphalt Resealing, Roadway and Parking Area, BMF 22,000
Building Improvements, Ops-Maintenance Buildings 20,000
Masonry Weather Sealing, Operations Building, BMF 16,000
Total $798,000
Major Rehabilitation
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 49 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
Project Description
FY 23-24
Budget Forecast
Equipment Replacement $1,340,000
Major Rehabilitation 798,000
Major Capital Outlay -
Total $2,138,000
Asset Management Capital Project Budget
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 50 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 $14,631,000 planned asset management capital
projects for an overall 5-Year Capital Plan Budget of $105,141,000.
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 1 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 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
Renewable Natural Gas Upgrades -
Riparian Shade Credit Program (1)-
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 $1,340,000 $1,038,000 $3,615,000 $1,866,000 $11,079,000
Major Rehabilitation 662,000 798,000 717,000 651,000 724,000 3,552,000
Major Capital Outlay
TOTAL ASSET MANAGEMENT $3,882,000 $2,138,000 $1,755,000 $4,266,000 $2,590,000 $14,631,000
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS $34,782,000 $31,158,000 $19,375,000 $11,096,000 $8,730,000 $105,141,000
EXHIBIT 13
Regional Wastewater 5-Year Capital Programs
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Capital Improvement Program
Page 51 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
Page 52 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
Page 53 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
Page 54 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
Page 55 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
Page 56 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
Page 57 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
Page 58 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
Page 59 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
Page 60 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
Page 61 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
Page 62 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
Page 63 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
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: James McClendon, Wastewater Finance and Administrative Manager
Dave Breitenstein, Wastewater Division Director
SUBJECT: Mobile Waste Hauler Rate for FY2022-23
ACTION
REQUESTED: Provide direction regarding Mobile Waste Hauler rate
ISSUE
The rate for receiving hauled septage is evaluated annually and adjusted periodically. Staff are
recommending a 5% increase in the mobile waste hauler (MWH) fee based on an updated cost of service
evaluation. The current MWH septage fee is 13.2 cents per gallon and the proposed FY2022-23 rate is
13.9 cents per gallon. A rate adjustment of 5% is expected to generate $35,000 in additional revenue at
current septage volume levels and achieve full cost recovery.
BACKGROUND
MWMC provides waste treatment to mobile waste haulers (‘septage haulers’) as stipulated in the
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). A special permit under the City’s pretreatment program regulates
mobile waste haulers. Under the IGA, septage may be treated at the regional facilities as long as there is
capacity for such treatment over and above what is needed to serve the directly connected customers of
the MWMC. Currently there are thirteen (13) active permitted mobile waste haulers. Two (2) MWH
companies, by volume, account for about 74% of all MWH revenue.
DISCUSSION
The current mobile waste hauler rate of 13.2 cents per gallon is based on a cost-of-service analysis. The
most recent mobile waste hauler rate adjustment became effective on July 1, 2019 (FY2019-20), which
was a 4% adjustment over the previous rate of 12.7 cents per gallon.
Due to cost increases for operations and maintenance (O&M) activity since FY2019-20, the cost-of-
service rate model has been reviewed and adjusted for the FY2022-23 rate evaluation. The rate model
provides a costing methodology based on the relative volume and strength of septage waste to
residential waste. The model takes into account O&M costs, additional wear and tear on equipment,
administration, and capital costs.
Memo: Mobile Waste Hauler Rate for FY2022-23
March 3, 2022
Page 2 of 2
The current septage rate of $0.132 / gallon will be insufficient to achieve full cost recovery in the coming
fiscal year. The model’s projection for FY2022-23 indicates the cost of service will most likely be $0.139
per gallon. Only a significant increase or decrease in expected volume would change the cost of service.
Fiscal Year Cost of Service
FY2019-20 $0.132 / gallon1
FY2022-23 $0.139 / gallon2
FY2022-23 $0.138 / gallon3
FY2022-23 $0.140 / gallon4
1 Projected cost based on previous cost model
2 Projected cost at current septage volume (from 2021 data)
3 Projected cost if septage volume decreased by 25%
4 Projected cost if septage volume increased by 25%
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff welcomes input from the Commission regarding the suggested rate adjustment. Staff requests the
Commission consider adopting the rate of $0.139 / gallon for hauled septage at a Public Hearing during
the upcoming April 8, 2022 meeting. Staff also requests the Commission adopt the rate of $0.139 /
gallon for other hauled waste (non-septage) at the April 8, 2022 meeting.
______________________________________________________________________________
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 3, 2022
TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
FROM: Mark Van Eeckhout, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Operations/Administrative Building Upgrades Alternatives Selection –
Project P80104
ACTION
REQUESTED: Informational and Discussion
ISSUE
This memo provides information on the Operations/Administrative Building Upgrades Project P80104,
which will provide upgrades to the existing Operations Building at the Water Pollution Control Facility
(WPCF). The existing building was constructed in 1982 and is currently used as the central control for
ongoing operations, administration, and Information Technology (IT) support of the MWMC treatment
facility. The details associated with project alternatives reviewed and staff recommendations are
discussed below and will be presented at the March 2022 Commission meeting.
BACKGROUND
This project is a continuation of the deferred Administrative/Operations Building scope from the 2018-
2019 construction of O&M Building Improvements (Project P80085-MWA Architects). The previous work
provided the MWMC with a new laboratory building and expansion of the existing maintenance
building. The scope for upgrades/expansion of the Operations Building designed under the P80095
project were deferred due to limited bidding interest and elevated costs during bidding.
The proposed building changes designed by MWA Architects in 2016 were designed to basic seismic
code requirements of Risk Category III under the building code. Subsequently in 2019, the MWMC
conducted a comprehensive resiliency plan under the Resiliency Planning Study P80096 lead by Carollo
Engineers. This work culminated in the creation of the MWMC’s Disaster Mitigation and Recovery Plan. In
this plan, Carollo Engineers recommended constructing an MWMC Administrative/Operations Building
for immediate occupancy/use after a major natural disaster, or to upgrade the existing building for
immediate occupancy post-earthquake. This level of resiliency relates to a Risk Category (RC) IV under
the Oregon building code.
AGENDA ITEM VII
Memo: Operations/Administrative Building Upgrades Alternatives Selection P80104
March 3, 2022
Page 2 of 4
At the MWMC meeting on July 9, 2021, the Commission approved Resolution 21-06 to execute a
planning/design contract with Jacobs Engineering. Since this approval, staff has worked with Jacobs
Engineering to look at different alternatives with sub-options to meet MWMC space and resiliency
needs.
After the July 2021 meeting, staff worked with Jacobs Engineering on the first phase of the planning
contract (through the 30% design phase). The early planning work was to develop alternatives to meet
project goals for the MWMC and bring those alternatives forward with a recommendation prior to
entering full scale design. Following the selection of the leading design alternative, staff plans to amend
the contract with Jacobs to include design and construction support services. The consultant fees for the
beginning phase of this project totaled $305,000. To date, approximately $100,000 of these fees have
been spent in the planning phase.
DISCUSSION
In late December 2021 Jacobs provided a Technical Memo reviewing past work and investigating
different alternatives for the project. Three alternatives were specifically investigated as part of the
planning and included Alternative #1: renovation of the existing building, Alternative #2: removal and
rebuilding of the facility in the current location, and Alternative #3: relocating the facility to another
location onsite at the WPCF. These alternatives, and sub-options with differing seismic resiliencies, were
evaluated and ranked based on qualitative criteria.
In January 2022, the P80104 project team conducted a workshop to discuss the Technical Memo, review
of the alternatives presented, and scored the different alternative/options. The qualitative scoring matric
and planning level costs are included in Attachment #2. Within the three high-level alternatives, sub-
options were developed to look at varying levels of seismic resiliency to help guide the next step of
design development. The six Alternatives/Options and their high-level cost estimates are as follows:
1. Alternative 1 (Option 1): Renovate and expand the existing building. The existing 15,230 SF
building would be expanded to 20,560 SF and seismically upgraded to meet RC III requirements.
A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+. (~$11.1M)
2. Alternative 1 (Option 2): Renovate and expand the existing building. The existing 15,230 SF
building would be expanded to 20,560 SF and seismically upgraded to meet RC IV requirements.
A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+. (~$13.6M)
3. Alternative 2 (Option 1): Rebuild to RC IV Demolish the existing building and rebuild a 20,560 SF
building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+. (~$17.5M)
4. Alternative 2 (Option 2): Rebuild to RC IV+ Demolish the existing building and rebuild a 20,560 SF
building designed to RC IV+. (~$18.4M)
5. Alternative 3 (Option 1): Relocate 1 (Parking Lot)- In the existing maintenance parking lot, build a
new 20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+
(~$19.6M)
6. Alternative 3 (Option 2): Relocate 2 (Contractor Laydown)- In the existing contractor courtyard,
build a new 20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+
(~$19M)
Memo: Operations/Administrative Building Upgrades Alternatives Selection P80104
March 3, 2022
Page 3 of 4
All alternatives/sub-options are within seismic code, at or above Risk Category III, but most of the
options are shown to be more seismically resilient than local building code (RC III). The Carollo report
recommended building for immediate occupancy/use, which is interpreted to equate to a Risk Category
IV within the building code and is above the minimum code for our facility/industry. Within Risk
Category IV additional hardening of the facility can be proposed to strengthen systems such as
communications, electrical, and mechanical systems etc. These hardened systems are being referred to
as a Risk Category IV+ and are being reviewed for building locations such as the central operations
center. It is not believed that the entirety of the structure is needed immediately following an
earthquake, but portions of the MWMC building is needed to maintain operations/coordination at a
limited level. For this reason, we looked specifically at hardening the operations center and a few key
areas such as bathrooms.
Additional seismic resiliency improvements come with increased costs, and no design can account for
every eventuality and specific earthquake. However, we expect through this project to build a more
functional and resilient structure that will provide the workspace needed well into the future.
Staff and the MWMC consultant have evaluated the alternatives based on the following: Location,
Seismic Complexity, Fiber System Renovation, Space Programming, Exterior Design, Temporary Facilities
During Construction, Building Sustainability, Long Term Operability, HVAC, and Cost Estimating. A
recommendation based on the P80104 project team evaluation is below in the “Action Requested”
section for MWMC consideration.
The following schedule shows some history and anticipated P80104 project timeframe:
SCHEDULE DATE
Release of RFP March, 2021 (completed)
Deadline for submission of Proposals April, 2021 (completed)
Evaluation and scoring of Proposals May, 2021 (completed)
Contract Negotiation (Professional Services) May-June 2021 (completed)
Commission Approval of MWMC Consultant Contract July 2021 (completed)
PLANNING SCHEDULE
Assume 6 months & update the Commission Estimate:
Jul. 2021 to Mar. 2022
DESIGN SCHEDULE
Assume 10 -12 months Estimate:
Feb. 2022 to Feb. 2023
BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Assume 18 months Estimate:
Mar. 2023 to Sept. 2024
Memo: Operations/Administrative Building Upgrades Alternatives Selection P80104
March 3, 2022
Page 4 of 4
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff is seeking to move forward with the design phase of Alternative 2 Rebuild (Option 1):
Demolish the existing building and rebuild a 20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF
core would be designed to RC IV+.
This option is being recommended because it scored as one of the highest alternative options on the
qualitative matrix (Attachment #2) and balances the overall needs with the understanding of increasing
construction costs. Alterative 2 is in an ideal location at the WPCF entrance, can provide a layout that
meets the programming needs and desired adjacencies, provides for less seismic retrofit complexity
than a building remodel and thus has lower cost risk.
The project team believes that there are many alternatives and sub-options to meet the project key
goals. Through our planning research, staff believes that it is in the best interest of the MWMC to move
forward with the design phase of the Rebuild solution with the bulk of the building at a Risk Category IV
and continue to provide P80104 updates to the MWMC.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Jacobs Engineering Admin/Ops Building Technical Memo Executive Summary (dated 2/24/22)
2. Admin/Ops Building Upgrades P80104 - Alternatives Matrix
Subject: Development Alternatives for Replacement of the Administrative and Operations Building
To: Mark Van Eeckhout PE, Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Project Manager (PM),
David Breitenstein PM
From: Alan Chang PE, Jacobs PM
Prepared by: Mark Sharp, RA, Jacobs
Reviewed by: Alan Chang PE, Jacobs PM
Date: February 24, 2022
Project No.: P80104 (Jacobs D3564000)
Executive Summary
The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) is evaluating an upgrade to
the existing Administrative and Operations Building (Admin/Ops Building) at the Water Pollution
Control Facility (WPCF) located at 410 River Avenue, Eugene, Oregon. The existing Admin/Ops
Building was originally constructed in the early 1980’s and expanded to include additional
laboratory space in 2002. Building functions include City of Eugene administrative services and
WPCF operations center.
Evaluation of upgrade alternatives for the building in 2014 produced a building remodel design
package by MWA Architects. These proposed design renovations included building expansion
and seismic retrofit to meet seismic code Risk Category (RC) III. The renovations to the
Admin/Ops Building were descoped after bids were received and the decision was made to
complete the construction of a new Laboratory Building and additions to the Maintenance
Building.
Subsequently a multiple facility Disaster Mitigation and Recovery Plan was produced by Carollo
Engineering in 2020. This plan identified resiliency concerns, that would result in the building
not being immediately occupiable following a Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake. This
plan recommended upgrades to the Admin/Ops Building that would result in a Risk Category IV
Building.
Following the Disaster Mitigation Plan, the MWMC developed a capital project to look at
renovating and/or rebuilding the Admin/Ops Building P80104. Key project goals include
improving the seismic resiliency of the facility, designing for future use, providing space for a
wastewater incident command post, and maintaining plant operations during construction.
Based on past and current planning for the existing Admin/Ops Building there is a need for
larger meeting spaces, updated open workspaces, offices, control room and server room,
rearrangement of various functions to meet current operation needs, and reassignment of
vacant laboratory space. MWMC is re-evaluating alternatives for the facility because the existing
Admin/Ops Building is not meeting the functional needs of its users, the building’s age, and
building resiliency concerns.
ATT 1 - Jacobs Engineering Admin/Ops Building Technical Memo Executive Summary
Seismic code requirements are documented in the International Building Code (IBC) and in the
American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE 7 Standard. These codes assign Risk Categories (RC)
from I to IV to various types of buildings depending on their size and purpose. Wastewater
treatment facilities are typically designed to meet the requirements of RC III. Essential facilities
that need to be operational and immediately occupiable following the code- defined design
event earthquake (not the CSZ event) is typically designed to RC IV. A more robust structural
design (for purposes of this evaluation called RC IV+) than that required by RC IV standards may
be needed to provide a higher likelihood of immediate occupancy following an CSZ earthquake.
Other non-structural improvement options for RC IV+ may include but are not limited to
equipment that has seismic certification and higher performing seismic capability, as well as
additional hardening of the support equipment.
The following Renovation, Rebuild, and Relocate alternatives were evaluated to provide a
general range of comparable total project costs:
1. Alternative 1 Renovate (Option 1): Renovate and expand the existing building. The
existing 15,230 SF building would be expanded to 20,560 SF and seismically upgraded
to meet RC III requirements. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+.
2. Alternative 1 Renovate (Option 2): Renovate and expand the existing building. The
existing 15,230 SF building would be expanded to 21,360 SF and seismically upgraded
to meet RC IV requirements. This is 800 SF larger than all other alternatives to replace
lost usable space associated with the seismic retrofit of the existing building. A 2,800
SF core would be designed to RC IV+.
3. Alternative 2 Rebuild (Option 1): Demolish the existing building and rebuild a 20,560
SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+.
4. Alternative 2 Rebuild (Option 2): Demolish the existing building and rebuild a 20,560
SF building designed to RC IV+.
5. Alternative 3 Relocate (Option 1): In the existing maintenance parking lot, build a new
20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+.
6. Alternative 3 Relocate (Option 2): In the existing contractor courtyard, build a new
20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+.
The six alternative/options were qualitatively evaluated and scored based on the following
categories and are summarized in the Alternatives Matrix.
Evaluation score for Relocate, Rebuild and Renovate alternatives ranged from 34.6 to 49.2 out
of a maximum of 56 with Alternative 1 Rebuild options having lowest scores near 35 and
Alternative 2 Rebuild options having the highest scores near 49.
The project cost estimates based on Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering
(AACE) Class 5 level (including construction, engineering, administration, and contingency)
range between $11.1 million and $19.6 million with Renovate alternatives being the lowest
costs option and Relocate options being the highest cost.
ATT 1 - Jacobs Engineering Admin/Ops Building Technical Memo Executive Summary
While Renovate alternatives are estimated to be $5-7 million less costly than the highest scoring
Rebuild options, there is a high risk of cost escalation during design and construction. Building
layout including the core function area will be more constrained and desired adjacency goals
more difficult to achieve because of existing and new seismic structural elements, which are
some of the reasons the Renovate alternatives ranked lower on the overall evaluation.
The Rebuild Alternative 2 (Option 1) includes demolition of the existing building and rebuilding
a 20,560 SF building designed to RC IV. A 2,800 SF core would be designed to RC IV+ is being
recommended because it is ideally located at the entrance of the facility; a layout that meets the
programming needs and desired adjacencies is less difficult to achieve; there is no seismic
retrofit complexity; and there is a lower cost risk associated with Renovate alternatives. The
AACE Class 5 cost for this Rebuild alternatives is $17.5 million, which is less than the other
Rebuild Alternative 2 (Option 1) with more seismic resiliency at $18.4 million.
The project believes that there are many alternatives and options to meet the key goal of the
project, but through our planning research believe that it is in the best interest of the MWMC to
move forward with the design of the Rebuild Options with the bulk of the facility at a Risk
Category I
ATT 1 - Jacobs Engineering Admin/Ops Building Technical Memo Executive Summary
MWMC Ops Building Development Alternatives Matrix
Description
Qualities/Features Weight Raw Score Wtd Score Raw Score Wtd Score Raw Score Wtd Score Raw Score Wtd Score Raw Score Wtd Score Raw Score Wtd Score
Location
1.5 4 6 4 6 5 7.5 5 7.5 1 1.5 2 3
Seismic Retrofit & Project
Complexity 1.5 2 3 3 4.5 5 7.5 5 7.5 4 6 4 6
Fiber system renovation and
SCADA/Network operations 1.4 3 4.2 3 4.2 4 5.6 4 5.6 3 4.2 3 4.2
Space Programming and
Design Flexibility 1.3 3 3.9 2 2.6 5 6.5 5 6.5 5 6.5 5 6.5
Exterior Design Options
1.1 3 3.3 2 2.2 5 5.5 4 4.4 5 5.5 5 5.5
Temporary Facilities during
construction 0.7 4 2.8 4 2.8 4 2.8 4 2.8 5 3.5 5 3.5
Building Sustainability
1.2 5 6 4 4.8 3 3.6 3 3.6 3 3.6 3 3.6
Long Term vs Short Term
1.3 2 2.6 3 3.9 4 5.2 5 6.5 4 5.2 4 5.2
HVAC Upgrade
1.2 3 3.6 3 3.6 4 4.8 4 4.8 4 4.8 4 4.8
TOTAL SCORE RENOVATE TO RC III 35.4 RENOVATE TO RC IV 34.6 REBUILD TO RC IV 49.0 REBUILD TO RC IV+49.2 RELOCATE (RC IV)40.8 RELOCATE (RC IV)42.3
MID-RANGE ROM
CONSTR COST
TOTAL MID-RANGE
ROM COST
$12,800,000
$18,600,000
$13,600,000
$19,700,000
$13,200,000
$19,200,000
$7,600,000
$11,000,000 $12,700,000
$8,800,000 $12,100,000
$17,500,000
RENOVATE 2
Risk Cat IV with Cat IV+ Core
Total SF = ~20,560 (~15,230 SF existing building w/5,330 SF
program expansion)
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat IV remainder of building
Core consists of operations center, SCADA/Network room,
multi-purpose conference room with refrigerator and sink,
restroom, electrical room.
Relocate Electrical, Mechanical, SCADA/Network rooms to
new addition
Separate core HVAC (ductless system) on roof
Some changes to visitor and staff parking. New electric
vehicle parking/bike racks.
Existing backup generator used to power core functions.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
Total SF = ~20,560
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat IV remainder of building
Core consists of operations center, SCADA/Network room,
multi-purpose conference room with refrigerator and sink,
restroom, electrical room.
Building HVAC seismically rated. Possible independent core
HVAC.
Changes to visitor and staff parking. New electric vehicle
parking/bike racks.
Existing backup generator used to power core functions.
Generator connection point for to power remainder of the
building.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
Demolition of existing building
Total SF = ~20,560 SF building
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat IV remainder of building
Core consists of operations center, SCADA/Network room,
multi-purpose conference room with refrigerator and sink,
restroom, electrical room.
Building HVAC seismicly rated. No independent core HVAC.
Changes to visitor and staff parking. New electric vehicle
parking/bike racks.
Existing backup generator used to power core functions.
Generator connection point for to power remainder of the
building.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
Demolition of existing building
Total SF = ~20,560
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat IV remainder of buildingCore consists of
operations center, SCADA/Network room, multi-purpose
conference room with refrigerator and sink, restroom,
electrical room.
Building HVAC seismically rated. Possible independent core
HVAC.
New electric vehicle parking/bike racks.
New backup generator for full facility in service.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
Demolition of existing building.
Total SF = ~20,560
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat IV remainder of building
Core consists of operations center, SCADA/Network room,
multi-purpose conference room with refrigerator and sink,
restroom, electrical room.
Building HVAC seismically rated. Possible independent core
HVAC.
New staff parking lot to replace existing capacity.
New electric vehicle parking/bike racks.
New backup generator size for full facility in service.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
Demolition of existing building.
RENOVATE 1
Risk Cat III with Cat IV+ Core
Total SF = ~20,560 (~15,230 SF existing building w/5,330 SF
program expansion)
2,800 SF Risk Cat IV+ Core
17,760 SF Risk Cat III remainder of building
Core consists of operations center, SCADA/Network room,
multi-purpose conference room with refrigerator and sink,
restroom, electrical room.
Relocate Electrical, Mechanical, SCADA/Network rooms to
new addition
Separate core HVAC (ductless system) on roof
Some changes to visitor and staff parking. New electric
vehicle parking/bike racks.
Existing backup generator used to power core functions.
Rain gardens for stormwater management
RELOCATE 2 (Contractor Laydown)
Risk Cat IV and Cat IV+ Core
RELOCATE 1 (Parking Lot)
Risk Cat IV and Cat IV+ Core
REBUILD TO RC IV+
Entire building Risk Cat IV+
REBUILD TO RC IV
Risk Cat IV with Cat IV+ Core
ATT 2 - Admin/Ops Building Upgrades P80104-Alternatives Matrix