HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/05/94COUNCIL WORK SESSION
December 5, 1994
3:30 p.m.
Large Conference Room
Members present: Mayor Rooff, Jordan, Krizek, Mollenhoff, Anders,
Murphy, Getty. Members absent: Collier.
Moved by Krizek, seconded by Anders that the Agenda, as proposed,
be approved. Ayes: Four. Absent: Murphy, Getty, Collier.
Motion carried.
Mayor Rooff distributed and reviewed correspondence from Eagle
Tanning Company expressing their reservations and concerns about
the proposed expansion plan and funding requirements.
Representatives from Eagle Tanning informed the members of the
council that they have been involved in the design process but feel
that the City needs to identify cost allocation formulas for the
major industries before proceeding any further. James Walsh, City
Attorney, identified three problems that are affecting the
expansion plans. The problems encompass political problems in
providing the best system for the taxpayers, engineering problems
in attaining the best design and legal problems in assuring
compliance with EPA guidelines and timelines. The cost allocation
factor has been affected by a new set of standards that EPA has
implemented and the City is basing the allocation factor on costs
being shared equitably.
Representatives from Eagle Tanning stated that their company needs
to expand globally and one option is to increase the production at
the Waterloo site. This could be a two step process with the first
step increasing dry jobs and the second step causing a small
increase to the wastewater treatment process. ETC needs some
indication of cost allocation to enable their main office to
analyze the profitability of increasing production in Waterloo.
Councilperson Anders asked if the pretreatment process on site at
ETC had been settled. ETC stated that pretreatment is still a
negotiable item and they are willing to discuss the issue in
conjunction with cost allocation; however, no settlement has been
reached on who will be paying for the process. Jim Walsh stated
that cost estimates should be available after the first of the
year.
Bob Bamsey, RUST Environment and Infrastructure, reviewed the
priority list that had been created for the improvements to the
Water Pollution Control Plant. The priority list hasn't been
endorsed formally and the cost estimates include contingencies for
legal and engineering services. Councilperson Anders expressed his
concern with the estimated cost for completion of all items on the
list exceeding 87 Million dollars. Jim Hagley, RUST, explained
that cost savings in Phase I, that have been accomplished through
the partnering process and engineering changes, are not reflected
at this time so the list needs to be updated to be more
representative of the proposed improvements.
Schematic charts of the existing flow system, initial Phase I and
Phase II designs and the proposed Expanded Phase I design were
presented. Expanded Phase I will provide the same industrial
capacity as the combination of Phase I and Phase II when completed.
After completion of expanded Phase I the current industrial users
will be using 60% of the maximum wastestream capacity.
Councilperson Anders reported that the partnering group has
committed to building a state of the art facility and the group
aggressively evaluates and recommends changes to help the project
proceed more cost effectively. The advantages of using the
expanded phase I design include the improved economic impact on the
total operation, a more flexible system to operate and potential
use of the excess capacity as a revenue source through the
transportation of excess waste from other facilities.
Councilperson Krizek asked for a clarification of the impact of the
Council Work Session
December 5, 1994
Page 2
design change on meeting the required timelines for the EPA. Bob
Bamsey, RUST, concluded that the required timelines in 1998 could
be met and savings realized if the decision for the design of
expanded phase I can be confirmed.
Bob Bamsey, RUST, identified the items in Phase I which have been
let, those items that have been designed and those items which have
been approved for study. Staff provided the opinion that the DNR
would support the design of expanded phase I to increase capacity
otherwise permits for additional loadings would be difficult to get
from the DNR. Councilperson Anders inquired which items in phase
I are critical to compliance with the DNR orders. It was reported
to the council that in the summary of Phase I projects, the
completion of the satellite facility and the force main are
critical on the industrial side and the flow equalization basin is
critical to the domestic side. The gas main and co -generation are
not required for compliance but are money saving units that are
intended to provide power for operation of the plant. An Exxon
grant has been received to study the cost effectiveness of co-
generation. There is a possibility of additional funding for the
design and construction of this project also.
Further discussion of the flow equalization basin concerned the
need to allow flow to be held during peak times in wet weather.
Contributing factors to peak periods are the number of combined
sanitary and storm sewer systems and the number of footing drains
infiltrating the system. The construction of a flow equalization
basin will allow the flow rate to be stabilized and prevent
bypassing of the system. It was recommended that the partnering
group discuss the design of the flow equalization basin and bring
a recommendation back to the council for action.
With no further discussion, it was moved by Krizek, seconded by
Murphy that the meeting be adjourned at 5:20 p.m. Ayes: Six.
Absent: Collier. Motion carried.
Susan Fangman
City Clerk