1a. Approve MCES Grant/Loan Application for Infiltration/Inflow Reduction FundingCITY OF /a
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
'Dwtk
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJ:
Don Ashworth, City Manager
Charles Folch, Director of Public Works qole
June 4, 1996
Endorsor'
Moditfac'
Date submitted to Commias10
Dote c; , . ni'1,Cd to COW4
6 - /a- f(.
Approve MCES Grano oan Application for infiltration/inflow Reduction Funding
for the Residential Sump Pump Inspection Program - PW342
With the approved 1996 City budget, $60,000 w
Fund 710 to conduct an initial phase program to
' City sewer for illegal sump pump discharZine
pump discharge into the sanitary sewer sn
The residential sump pump inspection pras
with an experienced and reputable firm ttr
consisting of public notification, informa d
ated in the Sewer and Water Expansion
the City's residential homes connected to
ry sewer system. Residential sump
on of City Ordinance Section 19 -44.
ated to be carried out by contracting
conduct the inspection program
io hysical inspection of each home
d
connected to city sewer, follow -up ins ons to correct i roper sump pump connections, an
respond to general resident concerns questions.
MEMORANDUM
Don Ashworth
June 4, 1996
Page 2
still of benefit. Each year that the City provides this certification, the repayment of the loan and
any interest for that year will be forgiven.
Communities have until Friday, June 14, 1996 to submit an application for either a project loan or
a study grant for III reduction. Each loan application for a project will be rated based on a list of
criteria consisting of the estimated amount of potential VI reduction as a result of the project, the
benefits to the metropolitan area including near -term and long -term savings, the project area is
located within either Blue Lake, Metro Lake, or Stillwater Water Treatment service areas, the
project targets the immediate reduction of peak rates of inflow as well as long -term average flow
reduction and that the community has been previously identified with the 1992 MWCC study as
potentially having excess rainfall derived inflow (RDI/1) and groundwater inflow (GWI). It is
staff's opinion that the proposed residential sump pump inspection program would meet and/or
exceed all of the criteria established for the loan program.
Without question, there will be some initial problems and challenges which will result from the
sump pump inspection program. Some poorly drained lots may have soggy lawns during the
summer months and possibly icing problems in the winter. On streets with minimal grade, some
icing problems may also occur in the gutter areas. However, many of these problems can be
remedied with some technical advice and a little effort on the homeowner's part. It is believed
that the overall benefits in reducing 1/1 and ultimately sewer payment increases to Metropolitan
Council Waste Water Services Division, more then outweigh some of the secondary localized
problems which may result. At this point, the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services is
providing a financial incentive to communities to reduce VI from the system. It is likely that
disincentive program will be established in the future for communities that have high rates of
inflow and infiltration and have not attempted to correct the problem.
Staff believes it is in the City's best interest to apply for the project loan funding in order to offset
a portion of the cost needed to complete the city-wide residential sump pump inspection program.
As mentioned earlier, some additional dollars (approximately $25,000 to $40,000) will need to be
funded with the 1997 City budget to complete the inspection of the entire city. If funding is
received, the next step will be to solicit requests for proposals from qualified ferns to assist with
the development of and conduct and administrate the inspection program.
It is therefore recommended that the City Council formally approve the grant application
submittal to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services for a matching project loan in the
amount of $40,000 for the City of Chanhassen to conduct a residential sump pump inspection
program as a continued effort to reduce infiltration/inflow from the sanitary sewer system.
FE
Attachment: Grant application submittal
c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
Anita Benson, Project Engineer
Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent
I
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUMP PUMP INSPECTION PROGRAM
' INTRODUCTION
In 1989, the City of Chanhassen completed a study on infiltration and inflow into the sanitary
' sewer system. Since that initial study, the City has invested nearly $1 Million in sanitary sewer
rehabilitation projects ranging from sewer televising, testing and sealing of pipes and manhole
structures to total reconstruction of deteriorated lines. The City is confident that these physical
' VI reduction projects have addressed the majority of the infrastructure- related problems with the
older sewer lines. Additional sewer lines which have been constructed during the last decade have
implemented the latest in sewer line material and construction technology using PVC -type
materials and chimney seals with manhole castings.
' OBJECTIVE
The City believes that the next step in the overall comprehensive program to reduce I/I from the
' sanitary sewer system is to conduct a city -wide residential sump pump inspection of all homes to
verify compliance with the City's newly created ordinance prohibiting certain discharges into the
sanitary sewer system. If Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) program
' funding is approved, the City of Chanhassen would propose to contract with an experienced and
reputable firm to conduct the physical inspection program on a city -wide basis covering nearly
5,000 residential sanitary sewer services connected to the city's system. Based on current
information obtained, it is anticipated that this inspection program could begin this winter and be
completed by late - summer of 1997.
' It is also apparent that the cost to undertake this city-wide residential sump pump inspection
program likely will be more than $100,000. Therefore, the City of Chanhassen is requesting
matching loan funding from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Service (MCES) in the
maximum amount of $40,000 in order to be able to fund the program.
1 BENEFITS
' MCES PROJECT RANKING CRITERIA FOR LOANS,
1. Estimated total of I/I reduction as a result of the project is either greater then 32 MGY,
t between 16 MGY and 32 MGY, or between 5 MGY and 16 MGY.
Response: Since there is very limited quantifying data available to conduct these types of
calculations, the following assumptions have been made.
' - Approximately 5.000 homes are connected to the City's sanitary sewer system.
Sump Pump Inspection Program
June 4, 1996
Page 2
9
KA
Assume an average of 7% the homes are illegallv discharging sump pump drainage
into the City's sanitary sewer system (an informal survey of other communities
indicated a range of 5% to 10% of illegal sump pump connections found).
- Each illegally connected sump pump discharges an average of 250 eallons Der day
into the sanitary sewer system. This is less then one quart of water per minute on
average. This discharge rate is probably conservative considering a sump pump
can pump up to 3,500 gallons per day and that up to 1,400 gallons of discharge
can result from a typical summer rainfall event.
Based on these assumptions (if representative of Chanhassen's sump pump situation), the
potential reduction in sump pump discharge into the sanitary sewer system would be
approximately 32 MGY (million gallons per year).
Benefits metropolitan area and facilities: A) Immediate savings, B) pollution abatement,
C) long -term savings.
Response: The 1992 system -wide infiltration/inflow evaluation study prepared by the
former MWCC indicated that the city of Chanhassen had higher than average peak inflow
rates in both dry weather and wet weather. The potential reduction of peak flow rates will
have a direct cost benefit to the system infrastructure by yielding additional capacity in
existing trunk and interceptor lines and ultimately reducing the size of future trunk lines to
serve the city. In this particular case, as it relates to the Red Rock Interceptor through
Eden Prairie, reducing the peak flow rates will potentially increase the amount of excess
capacity available in this interceptor which would be available to serve future areas in the
region.
The potential long -term system -wide benefits of reducing the average flows would be
realized by the MCES Blue Lake regional treatment facility. Reducing the average daily
flows would not only save on operational and maintenance costs of the treatment facility
but also delay the need for future expansions to provide additional treatment capacity.
Project is located within either the Blue Lake, Metro or Stillwater Waste Water Treatment
Plant service areas.
Response: The City of Chanhassen is served by the Blue Lake Treatment facility.
Therefore, a successful sump pump inspection program would benefit this facility.
4. Targets immediate reduction of peak rates of inflow.
Response: Chanhassen has been identified as having high peak inflow rates during both
dry and wet weather. The successful completion of this proposed project is anticipated to
reduce both the peak and average daily sanitary sewer flow rates from this service area by
the elimination of sump pump inflow.
Sump Pump Inspection Program
June 4, 1996
Page 3
' S. Community is identified as having potentially excessive Rainflow Derived Inflow (RDI/I)
and Groundwater Inflow (GWI).
Response: The 1992 system -wide infiltration /inflow (VI) evaluation study conducted by
' the former Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) has indicated that the city
of Chanhassen is a community identified as having potentially excess RDI/I and GWI.
' 6. Community is identified as having potentially excessive RDI/I.
Response: Yes, see 1992 MWCC system -wide infiltration /inflow evaluation study.
' 7. Targets the reduction of long -term average /continuous infiltration.
Response: This program would identify and document illegal sump pump connections
and implement a procedure for verifying that corrective action has been taken. The overall
' long -term benefit of eliminating illegal sump pump discharge will decrease the average
daily sewer flows and reduce the annual operational and maintenance costs associated with
treatment plant costs and delay the need for capital improvement programs to increase
' treatment plant capacity.
Attached please find a completed MCES loan application form for the proposed Chanhassen
' residential sump pump inspection program, a preliminary project schedule, a copy of the city
ordinance related to sump pump discharge, the City Council resolution approving this loan
application, and a city map showing the sanitary sewer infrastructure. I have also attached
location maps displaying the five sanitary sewer rehabilitation projects previously undertaken by
the City which have totaled more than $750,000 in construction contracts.
' CONCLUSION
' Since 1989, the City of Chanhassen has been proactive and committed to the reduction of
infiltration /inflow into the sanitary sewer system by making a substantial investment to rehabilitate
and/or repair problem areas within the City's sanitary sewer infrastructure. It is believed that the
next step of this overall comprehensive program is to eliminate any illegal residential sump pump
connections from the sanitary sewer system by conducting a city -wide inspection program. This
proposed project will also involve significant dollars (approximately $125,000 to $140,000).
The City of Chanhassen respectfully request approval of the MCES loan funding in the maximum
amount of $40,000 to financially support the City's ability to conduct and complete this
potentially very beneficial program.
' g:Wft- 1w1es\cc\sumppwnp.doe
CITY OF CHANHASSEN AND PROPOSED
RESIDENTIAL SUMP PUMP PROGRAM SCHEDULE
Mid- to Late -July: Receive MCES Grant approval notice
August 1, 1996: Begin selection process for sump pump inspection contractor
August, 1996: Develop, draft, and execute loan agreement with MCES
September 15, 1996: Select sump pump inspection contractor
September /October, 1996: Develop inspection program details
November, 1996: Begin information and education campaign:
- Send out mailings
- Article in city newspaper
- Conduct public information meetings
December, 1996: Conduct Area 1 inspections
January, 1997: Conduct Area 2 inspections
February, 1997: Conduct Area 3 inspections
March, 1997: Conduct Area 4 inspections
April - June, 1997: Conduct follow -ups and reinspections '
July, 1997: Conduct overall program evaluation and final project ,
July, 2000: Visually reinspect external residential sump pump discharge points
from previously documented illegal connections '
July, 2002: Visually reinspect external residential sump pump discharge points
from previously documented illegal connections ,
g:'wg*,charksNs=psch.doc
I
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
OFFER OF MATCHING LOANS FOR INFILTRATION/INFLOW CONTROL PROJECTS
LOAN APPLICATION FORM
' NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: Read the attached "Metropolitan Council Environmental Services - Description of Offer of
matching Loan and Grant monies to Communities for Infiltratiowlaflow Controls" for guidance on how this Loan Offer will
be conducted. Prior to award of a Loan, the Applicant Community must enter into an agreement with the MCES. The
' complete terms of the agreement will be furnished to those Applicants to whom a Loan Offer is made.
' COMMUNITY NAME: CHANHASSEN
Correspondence regarding this Application should be mailed to:
NAME: CHARLES FOLCH
' T=: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
STREET: 690 COULTER DRIVE
CITY, ZIP: CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LOAN AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM MCES: $ 40, 000.00
(Enter a value up to $40,000.00. An equal amount is required to be contributed by the Community to be eligible
' for a Loan).
PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING ON SEPARATE SHEETS OF PAPER:
' Describe the objectives of the project. Highlight any benefits that the project is intended to provide to the
Metropolitan System of wastewater interceptor sewers and treatment plants. Does the project eliminate a
' historic sanitary sewer bypass? If so provide MPCA reporting form on incidence(s).
Provide a complete description of the proposed project. Include a map showing the limits of the project area and
the wastewater collection system in the vicinity of the project. You may attach any engineering reports, plans or
other pertinent documents that provide useful background for MCES evaluation of the proposed project.
' What is the proposed schedule for the project completion, assuming a Loan is offered? If possible, identify key
steps and intermediate dates. Would the project be performed by contracted services or by City staff? Will a
competitive bid process be required?
What is the estimated amount of UI expected to be removed from system after completion of the project?
' (MGY)
Provide copy of official minutes of governing body which authorizes a t to a y for to
' CHARLES FOLCH
' Print Name of Preparer Signature of Preparer
Telephone Number. 937 -190 EXT. 114
Date of An licatione JUNE 10 1996
Title of Preparer: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
F
'APPLICATIONS MUST BE POSTMARKED NO LATER THAN JUNE I4, 1996. APPLICATIONS WILL
(E REVIEWED AND OFFERS EXTENDED TO QUALIFIED SUBMITTALS IN JULY.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 205
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 19-44 PROHIBITING
DISCHARGES INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS, AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
Section 1 : Section 19-44 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended to mad:
PROHIBITED DISCHARGES INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
(A) No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any substance not requiring treatment or any
substance not acceptable for discharge, as determined by the city or the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, into the sanitary sewer system. Only sanitary sewage from approved plumbing
fixtures may be discharged into the sanitary sewer system.
(B) No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged, directly or indirectly, any storm water, surface
water, ground water, roof runoff, subsurface drainage, or cooling water to any sanitary sewer. Any
person having a roof drain, sump pump, unauthorized swimming pool discharge, cistern overflow
pipe or surface drain connected and /or discharging into the sanitary sewer shall disconnect and
remove any piping or system conveying such water to the sanitary sewer system by May 1, 1994.
(C) All construction involving the installation of clear water sump pits shall include a sump pump with
minimum size Ph" diameter discharge pipe. The pipe attachment must be a rigid permanent type
plumbing such as PVC or ABS plastic pipe with glued fittings, copper or galvanized pipe. All
discharge piping shall be installed in accordance with the plumbing code. Discharge piping shall
start at the sump pit and extend thru the exterior of the building and terminate with not less than
six (6) inches of exposed pipe. The discharge pipe shall be provided for all clearwater sump
installations with no regard as to whether the pump is actually installed Sump pump discharge
location and flow shall be consistent with the approved development drainage plan for the lot. The
discharge may not be pumped directly onto any public right -of -way unless approved by the City
Engineer or his designee. Any disconnects or openings in the sanitary sewer shall be closed and
repaired in compliance with applicable coaes.
(D) Every person owning improved real estate that discharges into the City's sanitary sewer system
shall allow inspection by authorized City employees or its agents of all properties or structtues
connected to the sanitary sewer system to confirm there is no sump pump or other prohibited
discharge into the sanitary sewer system. Any persons refusing to allow their property to be
inspected shall immediately become subject to the surcharge as described in Subdivision (G)
hereinafter.
(E) Any owner of any property found to be in violation of this section shall make the necessary
changes to comply with this ordinance and such change shall be verified by authorized City
employees or its agents. Any property or structure not inspected or not in compliance by May 1,
1994 shall, following notification from the City, comply within fourteen (14) calendar days or be
subject to the surcharge as provided in Subdivision (G) hereinafter.
(F) Upon verified compliance with this section, the City reserves the right to reinspect such property
or structure at least annually to confirm continued compliance. Any property found not to be in
compliance upon reinspection or any person refusing to allow their property to be reinspected shall,
I
following notification from the City, comply within fourteen (14) calendar days or be subject to
the surcharge hereinafter provided for.
(G) A surcharge of (3100.00) dollars per month is hereby imposed and shall be added to every sewer
billing , to property owners who are found not in compliance with this Section. The surcharge
' shall be added every month until the property is verified to be in compliance through the City's
inspection program.
(I) The City Council, upon recommendation of the City Engineer, shall hear and decide requests for
' temporary waivers from the provisions of this ordinance where strict enforcement would cause a
threat to public safety because of circumstances unique to the individual property under
consideration. Any request for a temporary waiver shall be submitted to the City Engineer in
writing. Upon approval of a temporary waiver from the provisions of this ordinance, the property
' owner shall agree to pay an additional fee for sanitary sewer services based on the number of
gallons discharged into the sanitary sewer system as estimated by the City Engineer.
' (I) Violation of this ordinance is a misdemeanor and each day that the violation continues is a
separately prosecuteable offense. The imposition of the surcharge shall not limit the City's
authority to prosecute the criminal violations, seek an injunction in District Court ordering the
person to disconnect the non - conforming connection to the sanitary sewer, or for the city to correct
the violation and certify the costs of connection as an assessment against the property on which
the connection was made.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of May, 1994, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen.
ATTEST:
' Don Ashworth, Cle gar Donald J. C�i Mayor
(Summary Ordinance published in the Chanhassen Villager on
I
Metropolitan Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
Environmental Services
May 2, 1996
SUBJECT: MCES Offer of Matching Loans & Grants
Infiltration /Inflow Control Projects & Studies
Dear Public Works Director:
UiE .ii
- IQs6
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) invites your community to
apply for a loan of up to $40,000 to fund projects, or a grant of up to $10,000 to
fund studies to reduce infiltration and inflow (1 /1) of clear water into the
Metropolitan Disposal System. To be eligible, a matching dollar commitment is
required from the community for each loan and grant offered. A unique feature of
the loan is that if the 1/1 project is annually certified as being effective for a period
of five years after completion, annual repayment of the loan will be forgiven.
As part of the 1996 budget process, the Metropolitan Council has allocated a total
of $400,000 to this loan and grant offering. The objective of the loans is to
promote and fund, in -part, 1/1 projects at the local level which will benefit both the
community and the metropolitan wastewater system. The objective of the grants is
to promote and fund, in -part, studies that identify sources of 1/1 and develop
projects at the local level which will also benefit both the community and the
metropolitan wastewater system. A description of the loan and grant offer is
enclosed which identifies the criteria MCES staff will use in evaluating and ranking
the proposed projects and studies.
To apply for either a loan or grant, you will need your council or board to pass a
resolution authorizing you or another appropriate staff member to submit the
application and to serve as your subject matter contact. Please attach a copy of the
official minutes of this action to the enclosed application form and complete the
application form according to the instructions enclosed. Then, attach a complete
description of your proposal for an 1/1 control project or study. Your description can
be as brief or lengthy as you like, but be aware that the applications will be
competitively evaluated. Provide sufficient information to justify the priority of your
proposal.
After consideration of applications is completed, the Metropolitan Council will
determine which applicants will be offered loans and grants. The offers will be
made in writing to the applicants, along with the terms of the legal agreement
- over -
between the community and MCES. To be awarded a loan or grant, the community
' council or board will need to ratify the legal agreement by official action. The 1/1
project or study must be completed within a period of 18 months of the date of the
' agreement.
Submit the application to:
' William G. Moore
General Manager, Wastewater Services
' Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Informational meetings will be held on Thursday, May 16, 1996, at Woodbury City
Hall, 8301 Valley Creek Road, Woodbury, and Friday, May 17, 1996, at
' Minnetonka Community Center, 14600 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka. Both
meetings will begin at 9:00 a.m. A formal presentation of the Loan /Grant Program
' will be given, after which questions and comments from the audience will be taken.
For registration to attend one of these meetings, please call Kyle Colvin, MCES
Senior Staff Engineer, at 229 -2151.
' If you have any questions or require additional information regarding the application
procedure, please don't hesitate to call Kyle Colvin at 229 -2151.
' Sincerely,
Helen A. Boyer
Environmental Services Division Director
Enclosures
' HAB:WGM:KLC
' cc: City Manager (w /enclosure)
City Engineer
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
OFFER OF MATCHING LOANS FOR UUMTRATION/INFLOW CONTROL PROJECTS
LOAN APPLICATION FORM
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: Read the attached "Metropolitan Council Environmental Services - Description of Offer of
matching Loan and Grant monies to Communities for Infiltration/Inflow Controls" for guidance on how this Loan Offer will
be conducted. Prior to award of a Loan, the Applicant Community must enter into an agreement with the MCES. The
complete terms of the agreement will be furnished to those Applicants to whom a Loan Offer is made.
CON 4UNII Y NAME:
Correspondence regarding this Application should be mailed to:
NAME:
TITLE:
STREET:
CITY, ZIP:
LOAN AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM MCES: $
(Enter a value up to $40,000.00. An equal amount is required to be contributed by the Community to be eligible '
for a Loan).
PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING ON SEPARATE SHEETS OF PAPER:
Describe the objectives of the project. I- Eghlight any benefits that the project is intended to provide to the '
Metropolitan System of wastewater interceptor sewers and treatment plants. Does the project eliminate a
historic sanitary sewer bypass? If so provide MPCA reporting form on incidence(s).
Provide a complete description of the proposed project. Include a map showing the limits of the project area and
the wastewater collection system in the vicinity of the project. You may attach any engineering reports, plans or
other pertinent documents that provide useful background for MCES evaluation of the proposed project. '
What is the proposed schedule for the project completion, assuming a Loan is offered? If possible, identify key
steps and intermediate dates. Would the project be performed by contracted services or by City staff? Will a '
competitive bid process be required?
What is the estunated amount of M expected to be removed from system after completion of the project? '
(MGY)
Provide copy of official minutes of governing body which authorizes applicant to apply for loan.
Print Name of Preparer
Signature of Preparer
Telephone Number.
Date of Application:
Title of Preparer:
APPLICATIONS MUST BE POSTMARKED NO LATER THAN JUNE 14, 1996. APPLICATIONS WILL '
BE REVIEWED AND OFFERS EXTENDED TO OT.TAT,TFTRD RTTRMTTTAT,R TN TTTT.V
I
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
' DESCRIPTION OF OFFER OF MATCHING LOAN AND GRANT MONIES TO
COMMUNITIES
FOR INFILTRATION /INFLOW CONTROL PROGRAMS
APRIL 1996
' I. DESCRIPTION
The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) is
offering a limited number of loans up to $40,000 to communities
served by the MCES for sponsored projects to reduce
excessive infiltration and inflow (I /I) from entering the
' Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS) . Each loan will require that
a matching dollar expenditure on the project be made from the
recipient community. The first distribution of the loan money
' will occur upon start up of the project and will consist of 50%
of the total loan amount. The remaining 50% of the loan money
will be given to the community upon satisfactory completion of
the project and 30 days after receipt of documentation of
' reimbursable project expenses of not less than 200% of the loan
amount. The loan eligible work must be completed within 18
months after the date of the agreement.
After the completion of the work by the community, the community
must provide annual documentation for a period of five years
' following completion of the I/I project, certifying that the I/I
has not returned to the system. For each year that documentation
is provided that shows the project to be effective in the
reduction of I /I, repayment of the loan for that year (based on a
' fixed, short term interest rate) will be forgiven.
The designated interest rate for any loan repayments will be
based on one percent above the Five Year Treasury Bond market
rate at closing on the date the agreement is signed by the loan
recipient. Interest for any loan repayments will computed from
the date of project completion.
The MCES will accept as documentation that the project has
performed as intended, a certificate from an Engineer licensed in
' the State of Minnesota, for the first, second and fourth year
after project completion. For the third and fifth year, the MCES
will require that some type of physical documentation accompany
' the certification.
The MCES is also offering a limited number of grants up to
' $10,000 to communities served by the MCES for community sponsored
studies to identify, locate, quantify and develop an action plan
to eliminate excessive I/I sources from entering the MDS. Each
Grant will require that a matching dollar expenditure toward the
' study be made from the recipient community. The grant eligible
work must be completed 18 months after the agreement has been
signed.
The first distribution of the grant money will occur upon start
up of the study and will consist of 50% of the total grant
amount. The remaining 50% of the grant will be given to the
community upon satisfactory completion of the study.
The total amount allocated for loans and grants is a minimum of
$400,000. There are currently no funds allocated for
continuation of these offers once the $400,000 has been
committed. If the number of applications received through the
initial offer is insufficient to encumber $400,000, the MCES
reserves the right to offer to raise the $40,000 loan and $10,000
grant ceilings to the initial qualifying applicants.
The $400,000 will be allocated into two separate funds in which
communities can apply for monies for qualifying projects or
studies. Of the $400,000, $80,000 will be made available for
matching dollar grants up to $10,000 for studies and reports
aimed at identifying, locating and proposing solutions to
existing I/I problems within the community. Those applicants who
receive a grant will be required to submit to the MCES a final
report summarizing the findings of the study and outlining the
action plan to address identified sources of I /I.
The balance of the $400,000, or $320,000, will be reserved for
matching dollar loans up to $40,000 for projects aimed at
eliminating sources of I/I from the MDS.
Each community can submit applications for a maximum of two
project loans and a maximum of 1 grant.
All communities that are billed for their wastewater directly by
the MCES are eligible to apply. Local and regional agencies such
as the Metropolitan Airports Commission, University of Minnesota
and the State Fairground may apply for either a loan or a grant
but must do so by applying thru the local government in which
sanitary sewer service is provided. Applications will be
reviewed by MCES staff who will make a recommendation to the
members of the Metropolitan Council on the priority of the
community's proposed project(s) or study. The application
procedure and the staff's criteria for priority ranking for I/I
Control Projects are outlined herein. The Metropolitan Council
will review the staff's recommendations and establish the final
list of loan and grant recipients through official member action.
Recipient communities will be required to enter into an
agreement, with the Council, authorized by resolution of their
City Council or Township Board. (The word "City" used hereafter
includes eligible Townships.) The City's requirements, under the
agreement, will include that the City provide assurances that the
funds are applied to the stated purpose, that the project is
cost - effective, that costs be accurately accounted, and that a
written report be submitted to the MCES upon completion of the
work. The agreement will also provide the MCES the right to
audit City records pertaining to the loan and grant funds and
matching local share.
Each community that receives a loan will be required on the
anniversary date of the project completion to provide to the MCES
' a certification stating that the project has continued to be
successful in reducing I/I from the system. For each year that
the project can be certified as performing in its intended
' purpose of I/I reduction, repayment of the loan funds will be
forgiven. In the event that during the first five -year period
after the completion of the project, the community cannot certify
that the project has continued its intended purpose of I/I
' reduction, then the community has to either; 1. immediately
(within 3 months upon discovery) initiate a follow -up project
using community funds to repair the original project or, 2. repay
' a portion of the loan distribution plus interest, until either
the original project is repaired and the I/I eliminated, or
continue to repay the loan distribution amount plus interest
annually until the end of the 5 year period after the original
project completion date. Exact terms of loan repayment schedules
and amounts will be included in each individual agreement between
the MCES and loan recipient
The goal of this loan offer is to assist communities to implement
I/I control improvements which provide a metropolitan benefit in
' addition to a local benefit. Because the funds are limited for
this loan offer, the MCES places a greater priority on physical
improvements over desk -top studies. Studies to identify,
' quantify and locate sources of I/I can receive monetary
assistance under the grant portion of this program offer.
Communities that already have an understanding of where problems
exist and how they can be corrected will be in a better position
to justify their proposal for the loan offered under this
program. The MCES also intends that the administration of these
loan agreements be streamlined to coincide in nature with the
limited loan amount and the infrequent offering of loan and grant
monies.
' Loan and Grant money will not be made available for projects or
studies that have been started prior to the date of the
agreement.
' Projects pertaining to the separation of sewers (Storm vs
Sanitary) will not be eligible for either the loan or grant
monies. The intent of this loan /grant offer is to help
' communities initiate projects which are not funded by other
outside sources.
' SI. GENERAL CRITERIA FOR FUNDING PRIORITIES (LOANS)
Proposed projects will be evaluated by MCES staff who will make a
recommendation on the priority classification of the project.
MCES staff will prepare a recommended priority list for
consideration by the members of the Metropolitan Council.
Projects targeted to produce a metropolitan benefit will receive
higher priority than those where a metropolitan benefit is
unlikely. Removal of I/I which previously resulted in sewage
bypasses would be an example of a project with metropolitan
benefit, in that loading to the conveyance and treatment
facilities would be lessened and a potential public health hazard
would be eliminated. A project to increase the capacity of the
local system for the above example would not however be
considered an example of a metropolitan benefit. If a project is
submitted that cites an elimination of historic bypasses, the
application must include a copy of a "MPCA Report Form(s)" which
documents the bypass(es). Another example of metropolitan
benefit is a project designed to reduce high peak flow rates,
resulting from I /I. The 1992 "Systemwide Infiltration / Inflow
Evaluation" by the former MWCC is one source of information on
communities where peak flow rates are estimated to be above
average.
Since the aforementioned report did not include information
regarding estimated Rain Derived I/I (RDI /I) or Groundwater
Infiltration (GWI) for the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul or
South St. Paul, applications from these communities will need to
include documentation of their RDI /I and GWI. Other communities
may also submit their own information demonstrating high peak
flow rates and groundwater infiltration rates for specific
project areas.
Priority ranking will be given for those communities which were
characterized in the "Systemwide Infiltration /Inflow Evaluation"
report has having both potentially excessive rain dependent I/I
(RDI /I) and groundwater infiltration (GWI). Attached is Exhibit
A. a copy of communities identified as having potentially
excessive RDI /I and GWI in the 1992 Systemwide I/I Study.
Priority ranking will also be given for those communities located
within the service areas of the Blue Lake, Metropolitan, and
Stillwater wastewater treatment facilities. These treatment
facilities were identified in the "Systemwide Infiltration /Inflow
Evaluation" study, as benefiting most from I/I removal.
Loan recipients will need to demonstrate that they already have
an understanding of the source of the I/I and how it can be
effectively reduced. Peak rates of inflow have a greater impact
on metropolitan wastewater facilities than the long term effect
from average rates of groundwater infiltration. Therefore,
projects designed to immediately reduce peak rates of inflow will
receive higher priority than those designed to eliminate the
average rate of groundwater infiltration.
After completion of the project, the Community will be
responsible for certifying that the project has maintained its
intended purpose of I/I reduction. As part of the loan
application, the Community is requested to propose the method for
certifying the project. The method of certification will be
reviewed, negotiated and included in the agreement. Two such
I
methods of certification would be to document the condition of
the project by means of televised inspections or by visual
inspections. The certification shall be signed by an Engineer
registered in the state of Minnesota.
The general criteria are summarized below. Higher priority
rankings will be assigned for projects characterized by items
' from the top of this list. Lower priority rankings will be
associated with items from the bottom of the list.
Proposed Project Rankina Criteria for Loans,
(Descending Order of Priority)
Estimated total of I/1 reduction as result of project is
' either greater than 32 MGY, between 16 MGY and 32 MGY, or
between 5 MGY and 16 MGY
Benefits Metropolitan Area and Facilities
a. Immediate Savings
c. Pollution Abatement
b. Long Term Savings
Project is located within either the Blue Lake, Metro or
Stillwater WWTP service area
Targets Immediate Reduction of Peak Rates of Inflow
' Community is identified as having potentially excessive
RDI /I and GWI
Community is identified as having potentially excessive
RDI /I
Targets the Reduction of long term average /continuous
infiltration
' 111110 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR FUNDING PRIORITIES (GRANTS)
Proposed studies will be evaluated by MCES staff who will make a
recommendation on the priority classification of the study. MCES
' staff will prepare a recommended priority list for consideration
by the members of the Metropolitan Council.
' At a minimum, applications for a grant shall contain the
following:
1. Description.and scope of the study.
2. Time schedule for completion (identify key steps and
intermediate dates.)
3. Objectives of study.
' 4_ Who will be responsible for preparing the report (city
staff vs consultant). If contractecj Will project be
competitively bid?
5. Map of study area and wastewater collection system in the
vicinity of the study area.
6. List of anticipated benefits to Metropolitan System if work
proposed by study is carried out.
7. Estimate of potential I/I removed if project initiated(MGY)
B. Cost Effectiveness of proposed project.
9. Identifies any historic sanitary sewer bypasses.
As a minimum for consideration for a grant, studies need to
result in projects targeted to produce a metropolitan benefit.
Applications for grants which are received by communities which
have been identified in the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commissions study "Systemwide Infiltration /Inflow Evaluation"
dated April 1992, as having high "Wet Whether Peak Ratios" will
receive a higher priority ranking than those communities which
were identified with lower "Wet Weather Peak Ratios ". A listing
of "Wet Weather Peak Ratios" as given in the 1992 "Systemwide
Infiltration /Inflow Evaluation" report is attached, as Exhibit B,
for informational purposes only.
Since peak flow conditions are the main cause for most capital
improvements to the MDS, studies aimed at identifying projects to
reduce these types flows will be given a higher priority.
IV. APPLICATION PROCEDURE
To apply for a loan, a grant, or both, the Application Form(s)
must be completed and signed by the City Administrator or
equivalent staff authorized to submit the application by a
resolution of the City Council. Attach a copy of the official
minutes authorizing the submittal of the Loan /Grant Application
to the application form.
Attach supplemental information to describe the I/I problem, the
details of the proposed project, and how the project(s) meets the
priority criteria of the loan or grant offer and other pertinent
information as requested on the application form.
Applications must be post- marked no later than June 14, 1996.
IV- EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS
After the submittal deadline, copies of the loan and grant
applications will be made and distributed to a panel consisting
of between 3 to 5 members of Metropolitan Council staff. Each
member will independently review and evaluate every loan and
grant application using the criteria outlined herein. Each panel
member will assign a point value to the application. Upon
completion of the application evaluation, the point values will
be averaged and all the applications will be ranked in descending
order. Each member will be notified as to the ranking of the
I
' applications and will be given the opportunity to comment. Once
the final ranking is accepted by the panel, a list of the
recipient loan and grant applicants with the highest rankings
will be given to the Metropolitan Council for final approval.
After the Council has approved the rankings and the list of
recipients, loan and grant offers will be made and negotiations
for the agreements will commence.
V. OFFERS
' Offers will be made approximately in the third week in July,
1996. A written offer will be sent to each qualifying community
that will contain the loan or grant language. Actual
award of the loan or grant will be contingent upon City Council
action authorizing the agreement between the MCES and City.
L!
1
1
' .: \pv"w�\pzeya..e_a..
x
w
a
�3
u
T 4
U�
W O
U
z
s
lu
:�Pb
cc
z
w
�ZS
z
OW
«�az
� Ux ra
Q
x
0
a
w
d
ELI
a
tzt A
� 3
H
y
U
a
a
A
m
a
0
a
a
A
z
z Cy
0
a
U
O
U
O
a ll
1�
W �
O
R
R
w
0
z °
a
a
u
E
0
0
V
d
w °
A o
e
G V
v (�' }'
c�
2 -�
ev C C
A G•
. EYE V W
d 4 6
V V V
cc cc
000
0555
H 3
g 0 O °
.0 r •
! \ N N N
I
0
u
E
k
c0
fQ
E
a
V
M
N
S
N
N
C
cc
p C
4
v
C
td
y
90
�
V
• N W
F.
Ct.
_
a
.......777
u
d
u`
r 3
N
O C
C
cc
'a
H
A c
�
G
c xx
Q
-
ri
e
G V
v (�' }'
c�
2 -�
ev C C
A G•
. EYE V W
d 4 6
V V V
cc cc
000
0555
H 3
g 0 O °
.0 r •
! \ N N N
I
0
u
E
k
c0
fQ
E
a
V
M
N
S
Community
Chanhassen
Circle Pines
Crystal
Deephaven
Eden Prairie
Edina
Farmington
Forest Lake Township
Fridley '
Little Canada
Long Lake
Maple Plain
Mendota Heights
Mound
Mounds View
Newport
Orono
Osseo
Rosemount
I St. Paul
Shorewood
Stillwater
Waconia
Wayzata
West St. Paul
'See Figures 3 -2 and 3 -3.
"See Figures 3-4 and 3 -5.
`Combined Sewer Area.
EXHIBIT A
Table 3 -2
Assessment of Potentially Excessive I/I
Wet
Soil/ Weather
Potentially
Dry Weather
Potentially
Groundwater Peak Ratio
Excessive
Peak Ratio
Excessive
Condition (WWPR)
RD1(1'
(DWPR)
GW1'
Wet 2.81
X I
1.62
X
Dry 232
X I
1.48
X
Dry
I 1.97
X
Wet
I
I
I
1.74 I
X
Wet
2.69
X
Wet
1.60 I
X
Wet
I
I
I
1.65 I
X
Wet
I 2.85
X I
1.77 I
X
Dry
I
I
1.49
X
Wet..
I
I
I
1.72 I
X
Wet
I 3.03
I
X
Wet
I 3.61
I
X I
1.85 I
X
Dry
(
I
I
1.45 I
X
Wet I
2.68
I
X
Dry I
I
I
1.36 I
X
Dry I
2.17 I
X I
1.39 I
X
Wet I
I
I
1.60 I
X
Dry I
I
I
136 I
X
Dry I
I
I
1.34 I
X
1.63
X
Wet
2.92 I
X I
2.02 I
X
Wet I
I
I
1.91 I
X
Wet I
3.56 l
X
Wet +
3.00 - II
X
Dry
2.03 I
X
1.45
X
GL7291/007.51
TA1>6ns T-P 199. S�sti wide_ Th l�r 9Tirn�Lnilew G Vglve.rie�' fE)�t%r_
EXHIBIT B
COMMUNITY I/I INFORMATION
(Ranked in Decending Order of "Wet Weather Peak Ratio ")
From 1992 "Systemwide Infiltration/Inflow Evaluation Report
by CH2M Hill
j
,
DRY WEATHER
WET WEATHER
RANK
COMMUNITY I
PEAK RATIOS
I PEAK RATIOS
1
"Independence
1.76
6.44
2
Greenfield
1.76
6,13
' 3
Medina
1.75
5.28
4
Maple Plain
1.85'
3.61
5
Waconia
1.58
3.56
' 5
Victoria
1.47
3.10
7
Tonka Bay
2.12
3.07
8
Long Lake
1.53
3.03
9
Wayzata
1.56
3.00
i 10
Shorewood
2.02
2.92
' 11
St. Paul
1.63
2.88
12
Forest Lake Township
1.77
2,85
13
Centerville
1,42
284
14
Chanhassen
1.62
2.81
15
Eden Prairie
b
2.69
16
Mound
1.47
2.68
17
Minnetrista
1.61
2.66
18
Medicine Lake
1,86
264
19
Orono
1.60
2.56
20
Chaska
1.46
2.50
21
Excelsior
1.33
2.49
22
Hugo
1.66
2.40
23
Columbia Heights
1.22
2.40
24
St. Bonifacius
1,36
2.39
25
Laketown Township
1.64
2
26
St. Anthony
1.31
2.35
' 27
North Oaks
1.66
2.33
28
Hilltop
1.36
2.33
29
Circle Pines
1.48
2.32
30
Greenwood
1.37
2.32
31
Amen Hills
1.25
2.24
32
Minneapolis
1.45
2,22
33
White Bear Township
1,53
2.20
' 34
Vadnais Heights
1.41
2.20
i 35
Minnetonka Beach
1.53
2,19
! 36
Lilydale
1.90
217
37
Newport
1,39
2.17
I 38
Gem Lake
1,36
2.17
39
North St. Paul
1,26
2.17
: 40
Prior Lake
1.48
2.09
41
Deephaven
1.74
2.07
j
C
S
EXHIBIT B
DRY WEATHER
WET WEATHER
RANK
COMMUNITY
PEAK RATIOS
PEAK RATIOS
42
Plymouth
1.30
2.06
43
West St. Paul
1.45
2.03
44
New Hope
1.27
2.01
'
45
Little Canada
1.72
2.00
46
South SL Paul
1.38
1.99
47
Lauderdale
1.37
1.99
48
Crystal
1.30
1.97
49
Forest Lake
1.48
1.93
50
Mendota Heights
1.45
1.90
'
51
Farmington
1.65
1.87
52
Maple Grove
1.23
1.87
53
Lexington
1.28
1.82
'
54
Lakeville
1.25
1.80
55
Shoreview
1.19
1.80
56
Rosemount
1.34
1.77
57
Mahtomedi
1.19
1.76
'
58
Lino Lakes
1.31
1.71
59
Willemie
1.19
1.69
60
Cottage Grove
1.13
1.68
'
61
St. Paul Park
1.19
1.67
62
Andover
1.25
1.66
'
63
64
Bayport
Oakdale
1.48
1.43
1.64
1.64
65
Maplewood
1.40
1.64
66
Roseville
1.35
1.64
'
67
Richfield
1.22
1.64
68
Savage
1.31
1.62
69
Fridley
1.49
1.61
70
Mendota
1.21
1.59
71
Golden Valley
1.29
1.58
72
Burnsville
1.21
1.57
73
Spring Park
1.40
1.56
74
Brooklyn Paris
1.24
1.56
75
Coon Rapids
1.21
1.55
'
76
77
Minnetonka
Brooklyn Center
1.36
1.32
1.54
1.53
78
Inver Grove Heights
1.21
1.53
79
Birchwood
1.38
1.52
'
80
Woodbury
1.33
1.51
81
Mounds View
1.36
1.47
82
Falcon Heights
1.14
1.46
'
83
Edina
1.60
1.44
84
Bloomington
1.17
1.44
85
Eagan
1.27
1.43
86
Spring Lake Park
1.16
1.41
'
87
New Brighton
1.30
1.40
88
Hopkins
1.14
1.40
89
Stillwater
1.91
1.38
'
90
Robbinsdale
1.23
1.37
S
C t
a
t
I
DRY WEATH
WET WEATHER
RANK
1 COMMUNITY
PEAK RAT OS I
PEAK RATIOS
91
- Hastings
1.17
1.37
92
Apple Valley
1.11
1.36
93
Champlin
1.23
1.35
94
Stillwater Township
1.10
1.35
95
Anoka
1.13
1.34
96
Blaine
1.12
1,34
97
Osseo
1.36
1.33
98
White Bear Lake
1.11
1.33
99
Ramsey
1.13
1.32
100
Oak Park Heights
1.16
1.26
101
St. Louis Park
128
1.25
102
Shakopee
1,17
117
103
Landfall
1,58
1 104
Empire Township
1,33
a
Notes: See original 1992 "Systemwide Infiltration/inflow Evaluation" report by CH2M Hill for
specific information on how peak ratios were developed for individual communities.
a - No Wet Weather Peak
Ratio was developed in CH2M Hill report due to insufficient
data.
b- No Dry Weather Peak
Ratio was developed in CH2M Hill report due to unreliable
meter data.
a
t