A presentation about comprehensive wastewater planning at the town level. Presented by Dr. Robert Duncanson, Chatham Health & Environment Director, during the Buzzards Bay Coalition's 2013 Decision Makers Workshop series. Learn more at www.savebuzzardsbay.org/DecisionMakers

1. Comprehensive Wastewater
Planning in Your Town
Buzzards Bay Coalition
2013 Decisions Makers Workshop
April 3, 2013
Robert A. Duncanson, Ph.D.
CWMP Program Manager
Director of Health & Environment
Town of Chatham

2. 2

3. New Breach 2007
3

4. Background
• 1966 Report recommends limited central sewer system, 2
phases
• 1971 1st phase and WWTP on-line, 2nd phase deferred
• 1987 DEP Administrative Consent Order
– “Town shall take all necessary steps to plan, design and construct
a wastewater treatment and disposal facility to serve the Town’s
wastewater needs…”
• 1991 Town Meeting rejects 1982 & 1988 Facility Plan
Updates
• 1997 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Planning
begins
4

5. Background continued
• 2003 (2007)/2006 MEP Reports
• 2006-2007 Alternatives (by watersheds)
• 2007 Draft EIR/Draft CWMP
• 2009 Final EIR/Final CWMP
– July MEPA Certificate
– October DRI Approval
• 2010 Construction commences
5

6. Wastewater Planning: Critical Components
• Who
Wastewater Planning is a
• What complicated scientific and
engineering process – it needs to
• How be simplified for public acceptance.
• Where Repetition – Repetition –
• When Repetition
• How Much?
6

7. Who:
A cooperative, team effort:
•Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
•Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
•MEP
•Consultant
•Regulators (MassDEP, Cape Cod
Commission/USEPA
•Water & Sewer Advisory Committee
•Citizens
7

8. Citizens Advisory Committee
“…pro-actively
• Established at the onset of the project. develop, village by
village, public
• Geographically diverse membership. involvement and
• Integrated into all aspects of the project. support for a plan
• Meetings televised. of action.”
• Minutes provided on town’s website.
• Regular updates to the Board of Selectmen.
• Sponsors public outreach activities: educational
workshops, flyers, speakers bureau, etc. “We want citizens to
study why we’re doing
what we’re doing, we
want them to question us
as we go along and
“We need this to be supported by maybe lead us in another
the taxpayers, because it’s going to direction.”
cost us one way or another.” 8

9. Technical Advisory Group
• Town Manager
• Finance Director (as needed)
• Community Development Director
• Director of Health & Environment
• Water & Sewer Manager
• Health Agent
Responsible for direction to the
Consultant.
9

10. What: • What is the problem – not always
evident/may not always be
agreement/may be multiple problems.
• Develop the data – some may
exist/some may have to be
developed.
• Identify goal(s)
10

11. MEP Process
Data Collection Linked Model & Report:
Nitrogen Loading
Watershed Hydrodynamic
Delineation Model
Water Quality Model
Land Use Data
Thresholds Analysis
CWMP & TMDL
more Development
model
runs
Implementation!
Slide Courtesy of MEP

12. Watershed Evaluations
12

13. How:
• Plan a town-wide
response to a town-wide
problem.
– More efficient.
– More cost-effective.
– More environmentally-
sound.
– Cost control through
phasing.
• Don’t lose sight of the
forest for the trees.
13

14. Summary of Typical Nitrogen Removals for the
Wastewater Management Options
Wastewater Typical
Nitrogen Typical
Concentration Percent
Technology in the Effluent Removal
Title 5 Septic
System 20 to 40 mg/l 23%
Individual Nitrogen
Removal Septic
System 15 to 25 mg/l 50%
Community/Cluster
System 5 to 15 mg/l 75%
BAT WWTF 3 mg/l 93%
Ecotoilets?
14

15. Non-wastewater
– Hydrodynamic Modifications
– Boat/Pet Waste Management
– Fertilizer Management
– Freshwater Attenuation
– Shellfish/Macroalgal Harvesting
– Stormwater Management 15

16. Site Evaluations
16

17. Hydrogeologic and Site
Evaluations
• Hydraulic load testing
and groundwater
modeling
• Where
• How much
• Mounding
17

18. Watershed Evaluations
(sewersheds)
18

19. • Plan wastewater management to
meet Town goals:
– Nitrogen TMDLs
– Other TMDLs
– Low cost
– Fiscal fairness
– Fewer raised systems
– Address needs in
other Areas of
Concern
19

20. Alternative Plan Formation and
Evaluation
Plan No. 1: No Action Alternative
Plan No. 2: Combination of Sewers and
I/A Technology in Selected Watersheds
Plan No. 3: I/A Technology
Plan No. 4: Sewer Extension to Meet
Nitrogen TMDLs
Plan No. 5: Town-Wide Sewer
Extension
20

21. Recommended Plan
21

22. When:
Everything
takes longer
than you
expect or
plan for.
22

23. Schedule
•Start?
•Year-round construction?
•SRF Funding Cycle
•Local Fiscal Impacts
•Community Impacts
•Business Impacts!!
23

24. Where: • Environmental
Sensitivity
• Project Coordination
• Maximize Impact
• Community Input
• Funding
• Nimby
• Banana
24

25. 25

26. How Much?:
The preverbal moving target.
Must be addressed as early as realistically
possible (level of confidence).
Simplicity.
The only thing anyone really cares about.
26

27. Fiscal Planning
• Town-wide approach “To demonstrate the fiscal impact
of the implementation of the
• Affordability Wastewater Plan, and thereby
the affordability of the balance of
• Fiscal Credibility the capital facility plan.”
• Identify All Costs
– Connection Fees
Demonstrate the worst
– Annual User Charges case fiscal impact to
homeowners.
– Betterment Discuss betterment
– Tax Rate versus property tax
payment options.
27

28. Total Phase 1 and 2 Cost Summary (in Millions of Dollars)
Component Capital Capital Capital
Costs Costs Costs
Phase 1(1) Phase 2 Total (1)
(1)
WWTF upgrade and expansion
Construction Costs $25 $6.0 $31
Contingencies $5.0 $1.2 $6.2
Fiscal, Legal, and Engineering $4.9 $1.6 $6.5
Total $35 $8.8 $44
Collection System Expansion
Construction Costs $110 $60 $170
Contingencies $28 $14 $42
Fiscal, Legal, and Engineering $28 $14 $42
Total $170 $88 $250
(1)
All costs are rounded to two significant digits and are referenced to a date of June 2007 . 28

29. Property Tax Impact
29

30. Total Cost ($600,000 Valuation)
(yearly/monthly)
30

31. Multiple Funding Sources
• Debt Dropoff
• Targeted Tax Surcharge
(Real Estate Transfer, Meals, Stable Tax rate
Hotel/Motel)
DROP OFF
• Property Tax
– Deductible
• Betterment DEBT
– Improves value to Homeowner
(some vs all)
– Payment may be banked by town
– Not Deductible

32. Federal and State Funding Sources
•State Revolving Fund (SRF)
• O’Leary Legislation
• SRF funds targeted to nutrient projects
• Eligible towns able to borrow @ 0%
interest
• 2009-2019
•USDA, Rural Development, Rural Utilities
Service
• Low interest loans
• Grants
• Population/Income based
32

33. Other Considerations
• Growth Implications
• Shared Watersheds
• Point of Compliance
• Monitoring
• Watershed Permitting
• Adaptive Management
33

34. Questions?
“How many times must I tell you, the sea is
not one vast, inexhaustible refuse dump.”
For more info: http://www.chatham-ma.gov/public_documents/ChathamMa_CWMPlan/CWMP