HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 02/24/2003 UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE - SPEr-IAL MEETING
PUBLIC WORKS CONFERENCE: ROOM
PORT ANG£LE:Sy WA gS362
FEBRUARY 24y 2003
12;00 NOON
AOENDA
I. CALL To ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL DF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 1 1 - DELAYED TO MARCH 5y
"~ n o 3 MEETING
IV. DIBCUBBION ITEMS
A, LOWER I~LWHA TRIBE SEWER SYSTEM rI-ONNECTION TO THE
CITY'S WABTEWATSR TREATMENT PLANT
B, MORSE CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT STATUS REPORT
V, NEXT MEETING DATE ' MARCH 5~ ~20039 3 P,M, (PARKS &
RECREATION CONFERENCE ROOM)
VI. ADJOURNME:NT
W A S H I N G T O N, U, S. A.
UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMO
DATE: February 24, 2003
TO: UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE '
FROM: Stephen Sperr, P.E., Utility Engineer
RE: Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Request for Sewer Connection
Summary: The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (LEKT) has requested the City consider accepting
wastewater from the Reservation for treatment at the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant
'WWTP). The request was discussed at the February 11 UAC meeting. This memo reiterates
ihe issues discussed in the February 11 memo and highlights the changes made as a result of
Jiscussions, incorporating additional information from the LEKT.
Recommendation: Forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve the
concept of the LEKT connecting to the City sewer system and accepting sewage from their
Reservation subject to the conditions listed on the attached revised February 11, 2003 memo.
Background/Analysis: Additional input bas been received from the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
(LEKT) relative to the City considering accepting wastewater from the Reservation. Based upon
discussions at the February 11 UAC meeting, the recommendation has been revised and is
highlighted by strikeout/underline, etc. in the attached February 11, 2003 memo. Attached is an
updated Justification Statement from the LEKT, with supporting documentation.
Below is a summary comparing the monthly costs for a typical residence in the City and on the
Reservation, based upon the staff recommendation.
Monthly Charge I Tribal I City Resident
LEKT Sewer District O&M $23.72 N/A
Basic Charge (comm./ind. rate) $8.45 $36.25
$2.39 per 100 cubic feet $18.16 N/A
Total Cost $50.33 $36.25
Reasons for supporting the concept of a Lower Elwha Klallam
Sewer District as a commercial customer and using the Port
Angeles commercial / industrial rate structure are as follows:
Implementation of this working agreement would exemplify
the 9overnment-to-government relationship between the
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe and the City of Port Angeles.
A. This is a unique relationship between two
government s
B. In the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Lower
Elwha Klallam Tribe and the City of Port Angeles,
(October 3, 2001) Section I Preamble and Guiding
Principles states,
The City of Port Angeles is a municipal government exercising the authorities and
responsibilities provided for under state law. The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe is a federally
recognized Indian Tribe government exercising the authorities and responsibilities identified
in the Constitution and Bylaws of the Lower Elwha Tribal Community and provided for under
federal law.
2. The Elwha force-main from the Reservation would be a
single connection to the Port Angeles sewer system.
3. Construction costs for the collection lift and transport
systems would be the responsibility of the Lower Elwha
Klallam Tribe.
4. All operations, maintenance, administration and related
costs associated with the local wastewater collection
and conveyance system up to the point of connection
with the City of Port Angeles sewer system would be the
responsibility of the Tribe and paid by Sewer District
customers.
5. System construction would include storage capacity
sufficient to prevent contribution to the Combined
Sewer Overflow problems within the City system.
6. The Tribe currently operates a community water system
and has the administrative infrastructure to implement
billing
7. The City would bill the Tribe monthly for actual
wastewater conveyed to the City system as measured by a
flow meter at the point of connection.
8. The commercial / industrial rate structure provides a
real and significant incentive to the Tribe to conserve
water usage. There would be a direct impact on the
amount of each bill because as based on actual metered
water use, and the corresponding impact of conserving
water can be easily determined by each water user.
A. Less water withdrawn from the aquifer results in
higher Elwha River flows and related benefits to
aquatic biota and the fisheries.
B. Less wastewater pumped to the City sewer system
means less capacity used in the Milwaukee Drive
Trunk Sewer and at the City's wastewater treatment
plant, resulting in more capacity to serve future
City residents.
The use of the commercial / industrial rate structure
has a significant financial impact to the Reservation
sewer system users. If the commercial / industrial
rate is adopted, the sewer rates for the Reservation
equivalent family unit are estimated to be $42 per
month. If the flat rate structure of $36.25 per month
paid to the City is used, the Tribe must still add
costs of local operation, maintenance and the sewer
rate increases to $54 per month. This is an increase
of $12 per month.
Revenue to the City of Port Angeles Treatment facility
would increase by approximately $24,500 annually to
start without significant increases to ongoing
treatment plant operation and maintenance costs. In
addition the City could expect a contribution to
capital costs in excess $100,000 in the form of start
up development fees.
February 14, 2003
The City would bill the Tribe monthly for actual
wastewater conveyed to the City system as measured by a
flow meter at the point of connection.
The commercial / industrial rate structure provides a
real and significant incentive to the Tribe to conserve
water usage. There would be a direct impact on the
amount of each bill because as based on actual metered
water use, and the corresponding impact of conserving
water can be easily determined by each water user.
A. Less water withdrawn from the aquifer results in
higher Elwha River flows and related benefits to
aquatic biota and the fisheries.
Less wastewater pumped to the City sewer system
means less capacity used in the Milwaukee Drive
Trunk Sewer and at the City's wastewater treatment
plant, resulting in more capacity to serve future
City residents.
The use of the commercial / industrial rate structure
has a significant financial impact to the Reservation
sewer system users. If the commercial / industrial
rate is adopted, the sewer rates for the Reservation
equivalent family unit are estimated to be $42 per
month. If the flat rate structure of $36.25 per month
paid to the City is used, the Tribe must still add
costs of local operation, maintenance and the sewer
rate increases to $54 per month. This is an increase
of $12 per month.
Revenue to the City of Port Angeles Treatment facility
would increase by approximately $24,500 annually to
start without significant increases to ongoing
treatment plant operation and maintenance costs. In
addition the City could expect a contribution to
capital costs in excess $100,000 in the form of start
up development fees.
February 14, 2003
Table 9D presents an estimate of monthly sewer charges to LEKT residents, based on City treatment
charges of $ 0.0032 per gallon (see below), and other charges to operate the onsite collection and pump
system (Tables 9A through 9C are for other options to the Port Angeles connection).
The per-gallon rate for Port Angeles treatment is calculated as follows, based on Port Angeles Municpal
Code for industrial and commercial dischargers (Chapter 13.65):
1.Annual Service Charge
12 months x $8.45 = $101
2. Usage Charge = $2.39 per hundred cubic feet
Annual Cost --- 21,000 gpd x 365 days x $2.39
(7.48 gal/cubic foot) (100 cubic Feet)
= $24,491
Total Annual Cost = $101 + 24,491
= $24,592
Cost Per Gallon -- $24,592
21,000 gpd x 365 days
= $0.0032
The financial impact of alternatively using the City's flat rate monthly charge per dwelling urdt
can be determined as follows. The single family residential monthly rate of $36.25 per EDU for
97 Port Angleles EDU's represents an annual cost of $42,195. The corresponding total annual
cost to the reservation would increase to $72,942, which translates to a monthly charge of $56
for the 109 Tribal EDU's (see Table 9F). The difference in monthly cost to the typical tribal
resident would be $14 (--$56 - 42).
720- Third Avenue, Suite 1200 · Seattle, WA 98104-1820 · (206) 505-3400 · FAX (206) 505-3406
TABLE 9D
100 Home Annual Operation, Maintenance and Replacement Costs
Industrial User Basis
Port Angeles
Treatment
Unit
Item Units Price Quantity Cost
1. Power Kwh $ 0.07 6,800 $476
2. Chemicals, supplies Lump Sum 300 300
3. Contract operator of facility Hours 70.00 0 0
4. Tribal employee monitoring Hours 25.00 365 9,125
5. Repairs, service calls
a. Community plant or pump
station Lump Sum 3,000 3,000
b. Grinder pumps @ houses Each 50.00 109 5,450
6. Pump sra. eplacement parts Lump Sum 200
7. Training contract, grinder pumps Lump Sum 2,000
8. Cleaning forcemain every 10 years 1,000
9. Homeowner electricity for grinders 1,300
10. City treatment charge Gallons 0.0032 7,660,000 24,512
11. LEKT billing / administration Note 3 $5,896
12. LEKT Insurance Lump Sum 2,000
Total $55,259
Monthly cost for 109 Connections (to nearest dollar): $42
Notes:
1. Quantities are calculated for initial conditions, at 21,000 gallons per day flow rate.
2. Onsite plant operation requires an assumed one visit per week by a trained operator (8 hours per trfp
3. Rate is 25.8% of all costs except City treatment charges
Table 9D - 100 Homes, Indus.xls
TABLE 9F
100 Home Annual Operation, Maintenance and Replacement Costs
EDU Basis
Port Angeles
Treatment
Unit
Item Units Price Quantity Cost
1. Power Kwh $ 0.07 6,500 $476
2. Chemicals, supplies Lump Sum 300 300
3. Contract operator of facility Hours 70.00 0 0
4. Tribal employee monitoring Hours 25.00 365 9,125
5. Repairs, service calls
a. Community plant or pump
station Lump Sum 3,000 3,000
b. Grinder pumps @ houses Each 50.00 109 5,450
6. Pump sta. eplacement parts Lump Sum 200
7. Training contract, grinder pumps Lump Sum 2,000
8. Cleaning fomemain every 10 years 1,000
9. Homeowner electricity for grinders 1,300
10. City treatment charge EDU's 435.00 97 42,195
11. LEKT billing / administration Note 3 $5,896
12. LEKT Insurance Lump Sum 2,000
Total $72,942
Monthiy cost for 109 Connections (to nearest dollar): $56
Notes:
1. Quantities ara calculated for initial conditions, at 21,000 gallons per day flow rate.
2. Onsite p~ant operation requires an assumed o~e visit per week by a trained operator (8 hours per ~p
3. Rate is 25.8% of all costs except City treatment charges
Table 9F - 100 Homes, EDU B.xls
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMO
DATE: February 11, 2003 (Revised for February 24, 2003 meeting)
TO: UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: Stephen Spen-, P.E., Utility Engineer
RE: Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Request for Sewer Connection
Summary: The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (LEKT) has, requested the City consider accepting
wastewater from the Reservation for treatment at the City s Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP).
Recommendation: Forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve the
concept of the LEKT connecting to the City sewer system and accepting sewage from their
Reservation subject to the following conditions:
1. Negotiating an acceptable agreement which shall be reviewed by the UAC and approved
by the City Council.
2. A sewer force main connection from the Reservation would be routed over Kaycee Road
and the Milwaukee Drive right of way to a ,~,~t,~h basin manhole near 18th street.
3. Construct facilities to result in no-impact and no-contribution to the City's ongoing CSO.
4. LEKT and/or Clallam County designating the Reservation as a more intense rural
development area where the future land use is not planned to remain rural.
5. LEKT will own, operate and maintain all facilities from the Reservation to thc Ig~ -,,n~
1~ ..... ~ ~,,v~ ,.,~.,, where the force main crosses Lower Elwha Road. Also property
owners inside the City and UGA be permitted to connect into the line now or in the future
for a reasonable fee. After installation, the City will own and operate that portion of the
force main from the UGA/Cit¥ bounda-w at Lower Elwha Road to the Milwaukee Drive
and 18th Street intertie.
6. Payment of the System Development Charge of $745/ERU.
7. Payment of the Milwaukee Drive latecomer fee of $240/ERU.
thly harg b d p --' ..... ' .............. : ............... ~'- ~' '
........... , ,.-..T. ' ' ' it lus
~J ,.,.,.o,.,.,.,.~, ~,~..o the commerc~alhndustnal rate of $8.45 per un ,p $2.39 per one
hundred cubic feet, metered at the City/UGA boundary.
9. Not imposing a 150% surcharge on the monthly sewer charge.
February -H- 24, 2003 Utility Advisory Council
RE: LEKT Request for Sewer Connection
Page 3
Background/Analysis: The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (LEKT) has requested the City consider
accepting wastewater from the Reservation for treatment at the City's Wastewater Treatment
Plant (WWTP), and a reduction in the established fees listed in the Port Angeles Municipal Code
(PAMC). The LEKT is considering alternatives to the current use of on-site septic systems in the
lower Elwha Valley on the Reservation due to anticipated rising groundwater following removal
of the Elwha River dams. The LEKT is currently evaluating three options, including formation of
a sewer district that would connect to the City's sewer collection system at 18th Street via the
Milwaukee Drive Right-of-Way (ROW). They are also seeking the elimination of the 150%
surcharge on connections from outside of the City.
The LEKT has indicated that for their 20-year planning period, a wastewater treatment facility
would need to have the capacity to treat sewage from the equivalent of 400+/- family units and
commercial facilities. The wastewater would only be for family units and facilities on the
Reservation such as the Tribal Center, Housing Office, etc.
Representatives including the Tribal Chairman, Executive Director and project personnel of the
LEKT, and Councilman Campbell, Michael Quinn, Glenn Cutler and other City staffmet on
January 13, 2003 to discuss the findings of a feasibility study for the LEKT options available for
wastewater disposal. The options, in th~ initial ranked order, were as follows:
1. Community treatment plant with disposal to a constructed wetland.
2. Treatment at the WWTP delivered through a force main connection to the Port Angeles
wastewater collection system.
3. Community drain field with individual septic tanks.
During the value engineering process treatment at the WWTP was chosen as the preferred
alternative. The treatment at the WWTP option was found to have the most balanced solution
to all of the project criteria. This was based upon factors such as the level of environmental
health protection, operations and maintenance, and the ability to support long term ~owth.
In the next two months the LEKT will discuss the various options with their community and then
select a preferred alternative. The LEKT desires an indication from the City concerning
acceptance of the wastewater and the costs associated with treatment at the WWTP prior to their
community meetings. The decision, in part, will be based upon the City Council's determination
if treatment at the WWTP is still the preferred solution.
City staff has reviewed the request from the LEKT and summarized below the issues that should
be considered in addressing their request:
Issue #1: What is the impact on the WWTP capacity and collection system?
Discussion: A wastewater force main connection from the Reservation would be routed over
Kaycee Road and the Milwaukee Drive right of way to a manhole near 18th Street. Based on their
current and projected design flows, it would increase average flows to the WWTP by 1% at first,
and 4% within 20 years to final build out. Currently, the WWTP operates at about 31% of design
capacity at average flows.
February q-l- 24, 2003 Utility Advisory Council
RE: LEKT Request for Sewer Connection
Page 4
During wet weather flows during the beginning of the rainy season, the WWTP exceed 85% of
the design loading for total suspended solids (TSS). These events are occurring when there are
heavy rains that flush accumulated solids out of the sewer system (first flush), along with higher
infiltration and inflow (I/I) flows. The City is working with Washington State Department of
Ecology (DOE) in ensuring that its ongoing commitment to reduce I/I and thus get that number
down. This is an entirely different loading than the wastewater from the Reservation that should
have little or no I/I. Additional TSS loading from the Reservation's wastewater will be kept to a
minimum because of this and actions that must be made to address combined sewer overflows
(CSOs) as described in Issue #2 below.
The 10 inch Milwaukee collection line is adequately sized to connect additional city property
owners in the west end if the area is built out in the future. This line was installed to
accommodate the leachate ponds at the Port Angeles Landfill and service property owners along
its route.
Issue #2: What is the impact on sewer pump stations 1, 3 & 4 and the potential for
increased combined sewer overflow (CSO) incidents?
Discussion: The LEKT has indicated that they would agree to construct their facilities to result
in no-impact and no-contribution to the ongoing CSOs. This would likely include adequate
storage capacity in the LEKT's collection system and the capability to regulate flows into the
City's wastewater system. Approval from DOE would be needed for any changes to the
collection system that would impact CSOs.
Issue #3: Do existing regulations and/or laws permit acceptance of wastewater from outside
the City's Urban Growth Area (UGA)?
Discussion: City services are normally not permitted to extend beyond their UGAs. The Growth
Management Act [RCW 36.70A. 110(4)] prohibits governments from extending or expanding
urban governmental services (especially sanitary sewer systems per RCW 36.70A030(19)) into
rural areas outside an urban growth area with some exceptions. Those exceptions are (1) when it
is necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the environment and (2) where the
County has designated the area for more intense rural development and/or where future land use
of the area is not planned to remain rural. In the opinion of the Director of Community
Development, the LEKT and/or Clallam County could designate the Reservation as a more
intense rural development area where the future land use is not planned to remain rural, and this
would allow acceptance ofwastewater.
Issue #4: Which organization will operate and maintain the transmission line between the
LEKT Reservation and the connection point?
Discussion: It is proposed that the pressured sewer line from the Reservation to the -I-8t~ r.n~
Mil~a~,kc¢ Driv,. ii,tc,~ic where the force main crosses lower Elwha Road be owned, operated
and maintained by the LEKT. That portion of the sewer line from Lower Elwha Road to the 18th
and Milwaukee Drive intertie (all within the City and UGA boundary) would be transferred to
the City for ownership and operation. It is recommended that any agreement reached permit the
City to authorize connection into the line for properties inside the City/UGA, now or in the
future. Fees should be established such that the LEKT could be repaid in a fashion similar to the
Connection Charges-Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sanitary Sewer, PAMC 13.67.
Issue #5: What fees should be assessed to the LEKT?
February +t- 24, 2003 Utility Advisory Council
RE: LEKT Request for Sewer Connection
Page 5
Discussion: Fees that may be assessed by the City for sewer connection (from the Port Angeles
Municipal Code):
a. System Development Charge (currently $745/connection), per PAMC 13.69.040 should
be assessed. This rate is reevaluated from time to time to reflect increased infrastructure
costs.
b. Milwaukee Drive latecomer fee, including 10 years of interest ($240/Equivalent
Residential Unit (ERU)), per PAMC 13.67.020 and 13.67.060 should be assessed.
c. The LEKT has requested they be charged rates as a commercial/industrial customer. The
LEKT justification is in the attached document (as revised on February 14) provided by
the LEKT. In summary they are basing the request upon the following:
i. LEKT will construct, operate, maintain and be a single point of contact for
issues and payment.
ii. LEKT will have a single connection point.
iii. LEKT will ensure that they will not add to the City's CSO challenges.
iv. There is a unique, established relationship between the two governments
v. The commercial/industrial rate structure provides a real and significant
incentive to conserve water.
vi. Based on the cost to maintain the sewer infrastructure owned and operated by
the LEKT (as calculated by their consultant), each residential customer's
monthly bill on the Reservation would have about $24 more added to their bill
beyond what the City would charge per residential unit.
Monthly per unit wastewater charge would be $32.60 or $36.25 (less than 430 cubic feet
of metered water consumed, or greater than 430 cubic feet, respectively) if residential
rates are charged per PAMC 13.65.010. Commercial/industrial rates are $8.45 per month
plus $2.39 per 100 cubic feet for the amount of metered water consumed by the user, per
PAMC 13.65.020. Using an estimated average residential water use ofg?0 760 cubic feet
per month, the charge would be approximately $31.5,3 $26.61 per ERU. These rates are
reviewed every three years. It is recommended that the nioiithly f~ ,,f $3(,.25
commercial/industrial rate be assessed, including $8.45 per ERU.
d. 150% surcharge for connections from outside of the City per PAMC 13.65.040. The
LEKT has requested that the City not impose a 150% surcharge on the monthly sewer
fees. See item c above and attached LEKT justification. It is recommend that the
surcharge not be imposed. This is because the LEKT will operate, maintain and
administer the system as well as not contribute to the City's CSO situation. The City
overhead cost is reduced by not performing the multiple billing function, dealing with
only one entity and not performing maintenance on additional infrastructure.
The LEKT is seeking a response from the City not later than F~b,~,o~y 19 March 5, 2003 that
would indicate the City is willing to accept the wastewater, that the sumharge would be reduced
or eliminated, and that the commercial rate would be utilized for cost compensation. If approved
by the City Council, it would be proposed to enter into negotiations and return to the UAC and
City Council with a proposed agreement within a few months.
February ,H- 24, 2003 Utility Advisory Council
RE: LEKT Request for Sewer Connection
Page 6
The staff supports connection of the LEKT sewer district. The connection would have minimal
impact on the capacity of the WWTP. The system development charge and Milwaukee
connection fee would be paid upon hook up to the Sewer District at the prevailing rates at the
time of hook up. It would provide additional revenue in the amount of approximately $7,9,0,9,9
$34~500 per year initially for 150, 108 ERUs, and eventually $175,`900 $128,000 per year for 400
ERUs upon build out. Also, it would contribute initially approximately $15`9,00,0 $106,000
($1,000 x 15,9 $985 x 108 ERUs) to our capital fund for fees collected, and eventually total
$40`9,0,90 $394,000 ($ I,`9`90 $985 x 400 ERUs) in today's dollars. This would contribute to our
infrastructure fund and help to minimize rate increases.
The City's General Fund would also benefit from this revenue stream. The Wastewater Utility
will pay 8% of this revenue to the City's General Fund Account. This is projected to be $11,240
initially, and $32,300 annually upon build out.
It is recommended that the UAC forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to
support the sewer connection request contingent on reaching agreements on the issues outlined
above.
Attachments: LEKT Justification Statement dated February 3, 2003
PAMC Code 13.65
PAMC Code 13.67
PA/vIC Code 13.69
Chapter t3.65
SEWER SERVICE - RATES
Sections:
13.65.010 Single Residential Unit Monthly Rate.
13.65.020 Commercial and Industrial Rate.
13.65.030 Commercial and Industrial Equivalent Plumbing Fixture Rate.
13.65.040 Rate for User Outside City Limits.
13.65.010 Single Residential Unit Monthly Rate.
A. Each residential unit and each living unit connected with the City water system
shall be charged a monthly customer charge during months in which water is consumed.
B. The rate for customers whose monthly water consumption equals or exceeds 430
cubic feet shall be as follows:
1. $30.00 per month on bills beginning July 1, 1996.
2. $32.40 on bills beginning January 1, 2000.
3. $ 34.65 on bills beginning January 1, 2001.
4. $36.25 on bills beginning January 1, 2002.
C. The rate for customers whose monthly water consumption falls below 430 cubic feet
shall be as follows:
1. $27.00 on bills begirming July 1, 1996.
2. $29.15 on bills beginning January 1, 2000.
3. $31.20 on bills beginning January 1, 2001.
4. $32.60 on bills beginning January 1, 2002. (Ord. 3065, 12/06/2000; Ord. 3030 §1
(part), 11/26/99; Ord. 2872 §1 (part), 6/30/95; Ord. 2819 §1, 7/6/94; Ord. 2685 §1, 4/19/92; Ord.
2643 §1, 7/15/91; Ord. 2571 §1, 4/1/90; Ord. 2526 §1, 4/1/89; Ord. 2482 §1, 4/1/88; Ord. 2437
§1, 3/1/87; Ord. 2394 Ch. VI §1, 6/2/86)
13.65.020 Commemial and Industrial Rate. Each commercial and industrial discharger
connected with the City water system shall be charged monthly as follows:
1. A customer charge of $7.00 per month plus $1.98 per 100 cubic feet for the
amount of metered water consumed by the user in the billing period on bills beginning July 1,
1996.
2. A customer charge of $7.55 per month plus $2.14 per 100 cubic feet for the
amount of metered water consumed by the user in the billing period on bills beginning January 1,
2000.
3. A customer charge of $8.10 per month plus $2.29 per 100 cubic feet for the
amount of metered water consumed by the user in the billing period on bills beginning January 1,
2001.
4. A customer charge of $8.45 per month plus $2.39 per 100 cubic feet for the
amount of metered water consumed by the user in the billing period on bills beginning January 1,
2002.
(Ord. 3065, 12/06/2000; Ord. 3030 §1 (part), 11/26/99; Ord. 2872 §1 (part), 6/30/95; Ord. 2643
§1, 7/15/91; Ord. 2571 §1, 4/1/90; Ord. 2482 §2, 4/1/88; Ord. 2437 §1, 3/1/87; Ord. 2394 Ch. VI
§2, 6/2/86)
Justification Statement
Utility Rate Review: Lower Elwha Valley Sewer District
The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe proposes the creation of the Lower Elwha
Sewer District. (Please, refer to background information January 13,
2003).
Due to rising groundwater expected on the Lower Elwha Reservation
following removal of the Elwha Dams, the Tribe must consider
alternatives to the current use of on-site septic systems in the lower
Elwha Valley. The Tribe is currently considering three options,
including connection to the City of Port Angeles sewer system.
Connection to the City of Port Angeles sewer system, similar to the
other alternatives being considered by the Tribe, would improve and
protect water quality of the lower Elwha River groundwater and
estuarine environment for public health and aquatic biota. In Value
Engineering review sponsored by the Tribe in November 2002, this
option was chosen as the preferred alternative. In the next two
months the tribal community will consider the preferred option. Due
to the low income status of many community members monthly rates will
be a primary concern. Prior to community meetings, the Tribe requests
preliminary discussions on the whether the City wants to have the
additional customers and if there is room to negotiate some existing
rate premiums.
The Tribe requests that the City consider the following approach to
the rates as designated in the Port Angeles Municipal code:
o Charge the sewer district as a single commercial connection
with a per gallon rate equal to other commercial customers
Suspend the 1.5 multiplier rate for this connection from
outside the city limits due to the Tribe's ongoing
responsibility for operation, maintenance and billing.
Justification for reduction of sewer surcharges found in the Port
Angeles Municipal Code:
Construction, operation, maintenance, and general administration
of the sewer district will be the responsibility of the Tribe.
The sewer district will have a single service connection to the
City of Port Angeles collection system located at the intersection of
the Milwaukee Rail Road right-of-way and 18th Street.
Washington State Department of Ecology will require an amendment
to the Port Angeles General Sewer Management Plan to implement this
service connection. The Tribe agrees to implement design and
construction specifications that result in no-impact and no-
contribution to the ongoing Combined Sewer Overflow problem.
13.65.030 Commercial and Industrial Equivalent Plumbing Fixture Rate. Commercial
and industrial dischargers which have a lower water or wastewater discharge into the public
sewers than is reflected by their water consumption may apply in writing to the Department of
Public Works to have their sewer charges calculated at the following rate:
1. $2.30 times the total number of equivalent plumbing fixtures on bills beginning
July 1, 1996.
2. $2.48 times the total number of equivalent plumbing fixtures on bills beginning
January 1, 2000.
3. $2.66 times the total number of equivalent plumbing fixtures on bills beginning
January 1, 2001.
4. $2.78 times the total number of equivalent plumbing fixtures on bills beginning
January 1, 2002.
The total number of Equivalent Plumbing Fixtures shall be calculated, based upon the
following table, which is hereby adopted from the United States of America Standards Institute
National Plumbing Code, USASI, A40.8-1955:
EQUIVALENT PLUMBING FIXTURE UNITS
EQUIVALENT PLUMBING
FIXTURE TYPE FIXTURE UNITS
One bathroom group consisting of
tank-operated water closet, lavatory,
and bathtub or shower stall 6
Bathtub (with or without overhead shower) 2
Bidet 3
Combination sink-and-tray 3
Combination sink-and-tray with
food-disposal unit 4
Dental unit or cuspidor 1
Dental lavatory 1
Drinking fountain ½
Dishwasher, domestic 2
Floor drains 1
Kitchen sink, domestic 2
EQUIVALENT PLUMBING
FIXTURE TYPE FIXTURE UNITS
Kitchen sink, domestic, with food
waste grinder 3
Lavatory 1
Lavatory 2
Lavatory, barber, beauty parlor 2
Lavatory, surgeon's 2
Laundry tray (1 or 2 compartments) 2
Shower stall, domestic 2
Showers (group) per head 3
Sinks
Surgeon's 3
Flushing rim (with valve) 8
Service (trap standard) 3
Service (P trap) 2
Pot, scullery, etc. 4
Urinal, pedestal, syphon jet, blowout 8
Urinal, wall lip 4
Urinal stall, washout 4
Urinal trough (each 2-ft. section) 2
Wash sink (circular or multiple) each set
of faucets 2
Water closet, tank-operated 4
Water closet, valve-operated 8
In addition to the above units, the following fixture types shall be assigned equivalent
plumbing fixture units as follows:
EQUIVALENT PLUMBING
FIXTURE TYPE FIXTURE UNITS
400-lb. commercial washer 89.6
200-lb. commercial washer 44.8
50-lb. commercial washer 11.2
35-1b. commercial washer 7.8
25-1b. commercial washer 5.6
18 lbs and under commercial washer 4.0
(Ord. 3065, 12/06/2000; Ord. 3030, 81 (part), 11/26/99; Ord. 2872 §1 (part), 6/30/95; Ord. 2819
81, 7/6/94; Ord 2643 81, 7/15/91; Ord. 2571 81, 4/1/90; Ord. 2482 83, 4/1/88; Ord. 2526 81,
4/1/89; Ord. 2437 §1, 3/1/87; Ord. 2394 Ch. VI 83, 6/2/86)
13.65.040 Rate for User Outside City Limits. All sanitary sewage disposal furnished to a
user outside the City limits shall be charged at the rate of 150% of the schedule for rates and
charges as set forth herein or as amended. Ord. 2571 81, 4/1/90; Ord. 2437 §1, 3/1/87; Ord.
2394 Ch. VI 84, 6/2/86)
CHAPTER 13.67
CONNECTION CHARGES - MILWAUKEE DRIVE
TRUNK SANITARY SEWER
Sections:
13.67.010 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge Established.
13.67.020 Milwaukee Drive Tnmk Sewer Connection Charge - Amount.
13.67.030 Addition to Other Charges.
13.67.040 Milwaukee Drive Tnmk Sewer Connection Charge - When Collected.
13.67.050 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge - Distribution of Funds
Received.
13.67.060 Interest Charge.
13.67.070 Notice.
13.67.010 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge Established. There is
hereby established a charge for connection to the Milwaukee Drive trunk sanitary sewer, which
will be charged for all new sewer service connections to the sanitary sewer trunk line constructed
by the City in Milwaukee Drive between 10th Street and 18th Street. (Ord. 2618 § 1, 11/16/90)
13.67.020 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge - Amount. The
Milwaukee Drive trunk sewer connection charge shall be $150, multiplied by the equivalent
water meter factor as defined in PAMC 13.69.050. (Ord. 3008 §2, 1/29/99; Ord. 2618 §2,
11/16/90)
13.67.030 Addition to Other Charges. The Milwaukee Drive trunk sewer connection
charge imposed pursuant to this Chapter shall be in addition to the connection charge for the
actual cost of connecting to the City's sewer system, the tapping fee, the secondary sewer
assessment, and to all other charges imposed by ordinance. (Ord. 2618 §3, 11/16/90)
13.67.040 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge - When Collected. The
Milwaukee Drive trunk sewer connection charge shall be paid upon application for a sewer
permit. Connection to the system shall not be made until the Milwaukee Drive trunk sewer
connection charge, standard connection charges, the tapping fee, the secondary sewer assessment,
and any other charges imposed by ordinance have been paid. (Ord. 2618 §4, 11/16/90)
13.67.050 Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Connection Charge - Distribution of Fund~
Received. The proceeds from the Milwaukee Drive trunk sewer connection charge shall be
deposited in the Solid Waste Utility Fund until the sum of $125,000 has been deposited;
thereafter, such charges shall be deposited in the Water/Sewer Utility Fund. (Ord. 2618 {}5,
11/16/90)
13.67.060 Interest Charge. Pursuant to RCW 35.92.025, there shall be added to the
amount of trunk sewer connection charge provided for in this Chapter, a charge for interest on
the amount of each charge, from the date of construction of the trunk sewer line until payment of
the trunk sewer connection charge, not to exceed ten years. The interest charged shall be
calculated at a rate determined by the Finance Director. The interest charged shall be calculated
at a rate which is commensurate with the rate of interest applicable to borrowing by the City at
the time of construction of said trunk sewer line. The interest rate shall not exceed ten percent
per year unless authorized by amendment of applicable State law. The total interest charge shall
not exceed the amount of the trunk sewer connection charge unless authorized by amendment of
applicable State law. (Ord. 2618 §6, 11/16/90)
13.67.070 Notice. The City shall record appropriate notice with the County Auditor
concerning real property which has been specifically identified by the City Engineer and
approved by the City Council as property for which the Milwaukee Drive Trunk Sewer Line has
been constructed, for which a special connection charge will be levied upon connection of such
property to the City sewer system, pursuant to the requirements o£RCW 65.08.170 and RCW
65.08.180. Such notice shall be effective until there is recorded with the County Auditor a
certificate of payment and release executed by the City, which certificate shall be recorded by the
owner at the owner's expense within thirty days of full payment of such special connection
charge. (Ord. 2618 §7, 11/16/90)
CHAPTER 13.69
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
Sections:
13.69.010 Purpose.
13.69.020 Definition.
13.69.030 Water System Development Charge.
13.69.040 Sewer System Development Charge.
13.69.050 Equivalent Water meter Factors.
13.69.060 Addition to Other Charges.
13.60.070 Collection of System Development Charges.
13.69.080 Exemption.
13.69.090 Credit for Inclusion of Property in Local Improvement District.
13.69.100 Review of System Development Charge Rates
13.69.110 Penalty.
13.69.010 Purpose. The City Council has determined that it is reasonable and in the
public interest to enact and impose a "system development charge" pursuant to RCW 35.92.025
for the purpose of recovering a proportionate share of the actual capital costs of water and sewer
facilities from those properties within the utility service area which, as a part of their
development and use, create needs for those facilities. (Ord. 2746 §1, 2/12/93)
13.69.020 Definition. "Equivalent water meter" shall mean a water service connection to
a residential unit, commercial use, or industrial use, consisting ora 3/4" diameter service line
with a 5/8" or 3/4" meter. (Ord. 2746 §2, 2/12/93)
13.69.030 Water System Development Charge.
A. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the capital cost of the City's water
system including pumps, well, distribution and transmission lines, reservoirs, fights of ways and
easements, has been borne by the City and its water system users. Pursuant to RCW 35.92.025,
since such water system will be utilized by newly connecting properties, it is appropriate to
establish a reasonable connection charge in order that such property owners bear their equitable
share of the capital cost of the system.
B. The City Council further determines that $1,025.00 per equivalent water meter
represents a reasonable basis for a fair water system development charge that property owners
newly connecting to the City's water system should bear as their equitable share of the capital
cost of the system.
C. In addition to other fees imposed by ordinance or pursuant to agreements, there is
hereby imposed, upon the owners of property seeking to provide water service to their property
by connecting to the City's water system, a water system development charge determined by
multiplying the total number of equivalent water meter factors for the service(s) to be installed by
$1,025.00. (Ord. 3068, 12/06/2000; Ord. 3035 §1 (part), 11/26/99; Ord. 2888 §1, 9/29/95; Ord.
2746 §3, 2/12/93)
13.69.040 Sewer System Development Charge.
A. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the capital cost of the City's sewer
system including the treatment plant, collection lines, pump stations, rights of ways and
easements, has been borne by the City and its sewer system users. Pursuant to RCW 35.92.025,
since such sewer system will be utilized by newly connecting properties, it is appropriate to
establish a reasonable connection charge in order that such property owners bear their equitable
share of the capital cost of the system.
B. The City Council further determines that $745.00 per equivalent water meter
represents a reasonable basis for a fair sewer system development charge that property owners
newly connecting to the City's sewer system should bear as their equitable share of the capital
cost of the system.
C. In addition to other fees imposed, by ordinance or pursuant to agreements, there is
hereby imposed upon the owners of property seeking to provide sewer service to their property
by connecting to the City's sewer system, a sewer system development charge determined by
multiplying the total number of equivalent water meter factors for the water service, which
contributes to sewer system loadings, to be installed by $745.00. (Ord. 3068, 12/06/2000; Ord.
3035 §1 (part), 11/26/99; Ord. 2888 §2, 9/29/95; Ord. 2746 §4, 2/12/93)
13.69.050 Equivalent Water Meter Factors. The equivalent water meter factors for
determining the proportional equivalent of various sizes of water meters to a 3/4" diameter
service line with a 5/8" meter shall be in accordance with:the following data provided in AWWA
Standard C700-77:
Meter Size Operating Equivalent Water
(inches) Canacitv(eom) Meter Factor
5/8 20 1.00
3/4 30 1.50
1 50 2.50
1-1/2 100 5.00
2 160 8.00
3 300 15.00
4 500 25.00
6 1,000 50.00
8 1,600 80.00
If the actual water meter size installed is increased to provide for fire sprinkler installation, then
the Director of Public Works shall determine the appropriate equivalent water meter factor based
upon a standard installation for the use without fire sprinklers. (Ord. 2746 §5, 2/12/93)
13.69.060 Addition to Other Charges. The system development charge for water and
sewer imposed pursuant to this Ordinance shall be in addition to any permits and the connection
charge or tap charge for the actual cost of cormecting to the City's water and/or sewer systems
and to all other charges imposed by ordinance. (Ord. 2746 §6, 2/12/93)
13.69.070 Collection of System Development Charges. The system development charges
imposed in this Ordinance shall be payable at the time application for a sanitary sewer service
and/or water service connection is made. Charges so collected shall be considered revenue of the
water/wastewater utility to be used solely for capital improvements. The connection shall not be
made until all charges have been paid. (Ord. 2746 §7, 2/12/93)
13.69.080 Exemption. No such charge shall be made where the owner or previous owner
of the property paid for the water main or sewer line giving service to the property by special
assessment or lump sum payment. (Ord. 2746 §8, 2/12/93)
13.69.090 Credit for Inclusion of Property in Local Improvement District. If the property
for which a system development charge has been paid is subsequently included in a local
improvement district for the construction of sewers and/or water mains of a similar nature, the
amount so paid shall be credited to the assessment against such property and such amount shall
be paid from the water/sewer fund to such improvement district fund. (Ord. 2746 §9, 2/12/93)
13.69.100 Review of System Development Charge Rates. The system development
charge for water and sewer imposed by this Ordinance shall be periodically reviewed by the City
Council and the rates charged shall be revised to reflect changes in the capital cost of the systems
occurring since the preceding review. (Ord. 2746 §10, 2/12/93)
13.69.110 Penalty. In the event any connection to the City water or sewer system is made
without paying the fees required by this Ordinance, the owners of the property to which the
connection is made shall be required to pay a fine in the amount of two hundred dollars. Utility
service shall be tenminated until all fees and penalties owing have been paid. (Ord. 2746 §11,
2/12/93)
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMO
DATE: February 24, 2003
To: UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: Scott McLain, Deputy Director for Power Systems
RE: Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project Status Report
Summary: The Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project discontinued operation in 1997 due to an
extensive leak that had developed in an area that was difficult to access of the water transmission
pipeline, coupled with extremely low power prices during that time. Higher wholesale power
rates present today, along with interest from private operators, makes operation of the plant
feasible again. This report summarizes the actions taken to date, and the remaining steps to be
accomplished to reactivate the facility.
Recommendation: No recommendation, information only.
Background/Analysis: The Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project has be~n on hold since last
summer when the City Council decided to fast track the fiber optics project. Now that the fiber
optics fast track project is nearly complete, more time is being devoted to reactivating the project.
The Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project discontinued operation late in 1997 after a substantial
leak developed in the water transmission pipeline that carries water to the powerhouse. The leak
was at a point where the pipeline crossed under a tributary stream to Morse Creek, with a steep
slope at the point of the break, along with being buried twelve feet deep at that point. Due to the
low power prices at the time, along with the Bonneville Power Administration's promise of low
prices in the future (two cents in 2000), it was decided to discontinue generating power from the
project.
Power prices have increased considerably in the past few years, and the plant can again be
operated profitably. The City was approached a few years ago by a private company that was
interested in either leasing or purchasing the facility from the City. The City also contracted with
Kleinschmidt and Associates to determine a reasonable value for the project. Nine prospective
companies have come forward or have been identified as being interested in operating the hydro
project since the Kleinschmidt evaluation.
Several items must be completed before the project can begin operations again. The major break
Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project Status Report
February 11, 2003
Page 2
in the pipeline was repaired last fall, so the water transmission pipeline is intact and ready for
operation. A permanent tailrace barrier is required and must be constructed prior to operation.
Preliminary plans for a barrier have been submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife for approval. The Fish and Wildlife engineer reviewing the plans visited the site on
January 28th and indicated our tailrace design would work very well for the Morse Creek project.
With this preliminary approval, final drawings will be prepared for the approval of the WDF&W.
The Endangered Species Act applies to two species of fishes in Morse Creek, Chinook salmon
and Bull trout. The Endangered Species Act requires the City to consult with the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, and other agencies
to identify any possible project related impacts to listed species. Several meetings with the
agencies have taken place, the last on May 10, 2002, to discuss possible impacts. The main focus
of the agencies has been on establishing higher minimum stream flows for all months of the year.
We have not been able to come to agreement on new flow levels with the agencies yet, as the
proposals that have been forwarded by the agencies would have an adverse affect on the
economics of the project.
The City has requested that FERC become involved in the informal consultations with the
agencies to come to agreement on changes to project operation that are acceptable to the agencies
and the City.
The current plan is to continue to consult with the agencies while we get the project operational.
A punch list of small items has been prepared, along with the main project of construction of the
tailrace barrier to bring the project back on line.
Once the project is running, the City can consider the various options for operating the project.
These options include selling the facility, leasing the facilities, or continuing operation of the
project by the City.