facility plan guide

7/27/2019 Facility Plan Guide

1/35

Guidelines for the Preparation of FacilitiesPlans and Environmental Reports

for

Community Wastewater Projects

Financed by:

The State of Oregon:

Oregon Department of Environmental Qualitys (ODEQ) Clean Water State Revolving Fund

Oregon Economic and Community Development Departments (OECDD) Community

Development Block Grant (CDBG), Water\Wastewater Financing Program (WW) and Special

Public Works Fund Program (SPWF)

The Federal Government:

U.S.D.A - Rural Utilities Services (RUS), Water and Waste Loan and Grant Program

Non-Profit:

Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC)

This document was prepared as a cooperative effort between:

n ODEQ

n Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)

n Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD)

n OECDD

n U.S.D.A. - RUS and

n RCAC

November 12, 1999


2/35

Authority

This guidance document was developed in a cooperative process and is executed as an official

document of each of the following funding agencies:

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Program staff and managers

Oregon Economic and Community Development Departments Block Grant,

Water/Wastewater and Special Public Works Fund Program staff and managers

U.S.D.A. - Rural Utilities Services program staff and management

Rural Community Assistance Corporation staff

This document has been publicly reviewed through the ODEQs Clean Water State RevolvingFund, OECDDs Block Grant, Water/Wastewater and Special Public Works Fund programs and

RUS programs as it is incorporated into the Procedures Manual of those programs.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Date

Name and Title

Oregon Economic and Community Development Department Date

Name and Title

Rural Utilities Services Date

Name and Title

Rural Community Assistance Corporation Date

Name and Title


3/35

Table of Contents

Page

Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1

Review Responsibility........................................................................................................ 2

Consistency with Comprehensive Land Use Plans ............................................................ 2

When is a Facilities Plan and Environmental Documentation Required? ........................ 3

Benefits of the Facilities Planning Process ........................................................................ 4

Determining What Level of Facilities Plan is Needed....................................................... 4

Guidelines for Planning Simple Projects...........................................................................

5

Guidelines for Planning Complex Projects........................................................................ 5

A Nine-Point Scope of Work............................................................................................. 5

Water Quality Regulations for Facilities Planning ............................................................ 8

Review Process for Wastewater Facilities Plans ............................................................... 9

Updating Facilities Plans .................................................................................................... 9

Phased and Incremental Projects ........................................................................................ 9

Definitions......................................................................................................................... 10

Appendices

Appendix A - DEQ Regional Water Quality Engineers and Compliance Staff,Clean Water State

Revolving Loan Fund Project Officers and DLCD staff........................................... 11

Appendix B - State and Federal Funding Staff.......................................................... 13

Appendix C - Facilities Plan Outline ......................................................................... 15

Appendix D - Financial Information Guideline......................................................... 19

Appendix E - Environmental Documentation Outline .............................................. 21

Appendix F - OWRD Registration and Staff............................................................. 25


4/35


5/35

Guidelines for the Preparation of Facilities Plans and Environmental Reports 11/12/99 Page 1

Guidelines for the Preparation of Facilities Plans and Environmental Reports

for

Community Wastewater Projects

Introduction

Oregons cities and public wastewater utility districts often need financial help in the form of grants

and loans to upgrade and maintain services. Publicly owned wastewater utilities in Oregon have

four sources of public funds for grants and loans available to them for the planning, design and

construction of wastewater systems. This document is intended to assist you in the preparation of

facilities plans and environmental reports that meet the requirements of these potential funding and

regulatory agencies. The funding agencies are the ODEQ, OECDD, USDA-RUS, and the RCAC.

The DEQ administers the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) providing low interest

loans to public agencies for planning and environmental studies, design and construction of

wastewater facilities; and for non-point source and estuary water pollution control projects.

The OECDD administers both the Federal Housing and Urban Development Community

Development Block Grant program (grant) and the Oregon Lottery funded Water/Wastewater

Financing and Special Public Works Fund programs (grant/loan). These programs can finance

planning and environmental studies, design and construction of public wastewater systems.

The RUS administers several loan and grant programs focused on constructing and upgrading

needed public and private non-profit utility systems, including wastewater systems in small

rural communities of less than 10,000 in population.

The RCAC is a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) designated by the U.S.

Department of Treasury to provide low interest loan for projects, and provides technical

assistance with USDA Rural Utilities Services and US Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA).

Each of these agencies have similar documentation requirements for facilities planning and

environmental analysis. All programs that use federal funds are required to comply with the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Environmental documentation on projects funded

with federal funds is required. All funding agencies require both planning and engineering reports

of various types, including facilities plans. These reports must be reviewed and approved by the

DEQ and participating agencies before engineering design and construction grant and loan funding

from any agency will proceed.

These guidelines are intended to provide the community with a set of instructions that, when

followed, will result in a facilities plan and the associated environmental documentation that meet

all funding agencies administrative requirements. The development and approval of a facilities

plan and the associated environmental documentation are the first steps of a process to complete a

wastewater project.


6/35

Page 2 Guidelines for the Preparation of Facilities Plans and Environmental Reports

Review Responsibility

DEQ is responsible for final review and approval of all facilities plans and engineering documents.

Each participating agency will review and approve those portions of the facilities plans specific to

their needs. However, prior to commencing construction on any waste collection, treatment,

disposal, or discharge facilities for which a permit is required by OAR 340-045-0015, detailed

plans and specifications must be submitted to and approved in writing by the DEQ as required byORS 468B.055 and OAR, Division 052, Review of Plans and Specifications.

A Wastewater Facilities Plan is a comprehensive document that examines the existing system,

identifies all problems and describes viable alternatives. It evaluates all viable alternatives and

describes the selected alternative for implementation. It addresses the entire wastewater system

from collection to discharge. The DEQ relies on these documents to write wastewater facilities

permits, and to review proposed sewage works engineering designs. Simple projects may require as

little as a pre-design report or feasibility study and may require little time to complete. Complex

projects will require a comprehensive facilities plan with several engineering evaluations and may

take a year or longer to complete. When the source of construction funding is federal, an

environmental report is required.

A list of applicable regulations and a description of the DEQs review process is included following

the facility planning guidelines. It is recommended that any local community considering a

wastewater project contact the DEQ regional office CWSRF staff and potential funding agencies

during the initial steps of project identification to determine what level of study will be appropriate

for the project. Appendix A lists the DEQ engineering, compliance and Clean Water State

Revolving Fund staff and their phone numbers. Refer to Appendix A and B for lists of agency

contact persons.

Consistency with Comprehensive Land Use Plans

Facilities plans and decisions to fund projects must be consistent with locally adopted

comprehensive land use plans and development regulations in compliance with State wide planning

goals acknowledged by the Oregon DLCD. Urban levels of wastewater collection and treatment

services are permitted within the following areas:

Urban growth boundaries,

Urban unincorporated community boundaries,

Areas for which an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 11 has been taken, and

Areas with a documented health hazard which require urban services.

Also, wastewater treatment and transmission facilities may be allowed outside of these areas if they

do not allow service connections to adjacent properties (see OAR 660-033-0130(16)).

When more than one provider exists in an area, plans will include a policy or an intergovernmental

agreement which designates the service area of each provider.


7/35


For areas within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries with a

population greater than 2,500, comprehensive land use plans include a list of significant public

facility projects. For large projects such as treatment plant expansions or primary sewer lines

which are not on the adopted list in the comprehensive land use plan, the comprehensive land use

plan, should be amended before the new project can be approved (see OAR 660-011-0045).

In addition, local plans include 20-year forecasts of population, housing and employment. Theseforecasts are the fundamental assumptions for projecting future development and the need for

public facilities. Updates to the 20-year forecasts must be coordinated with the applicable city,

county and state agencies.

Please contact DLCD Regional Representatives (listed in Appendix A) for more information about

consistency with local comprehensive plans and compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals.

When is a Facilities Plan and the Associated Environmental Documentation Required?

Projects that are financed through state or federal agencies may require a facilities plan and

environmental report as a condition of the funding. The complexity of a project will affect the levelof facilities plan and environmental analysis necessary. A project for a major upgrade to the

wastewater treatment plant should always include a facilities plan. Minor modifications may only

need an engineering pre-design report. Each financing agency requires specific elements in the

planning and environmental documents. Appendices A and B list many of the state and federal

funding agencies with the contact persons who can provide information on the specific

requirements of that program. In some instances, a facilities plan may also be required as a

condition in a wastewater discharge permit, a Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO) or a similar

regulatory document between the community and DEQ.

Whenever a public wastewater facility is built, enlarged, repaired or changed the DEQ needs to

issue a new or modified pollution discharge permit for that facility if it results in an increased

discharge of waste or changes the character of the waste being discharged. When discharge permits

are revised or new discharge permits issued, the documentation necessary for DEQ to review the

design and determine how the wastewater facilities permit should be modified usually comes from

the wastewater facilities plan.


8/35


Benefits of the Facilities Planning Process

A Facilities Plan . . .

Serves as an educational tool for the public, community decision makers, state and federal funding

and regulatory agencies.

Demonstrates how the proposed project is a cost effective and environmentally sound alternative.

Can serve as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)-like decision document to meet

environmental review requirements.

Documents, investigates and addresses environmental and regulatory issues associated with the

specific project.

Serves as a guide for the design engineer by presenting engineering design criteria, process type and

extent, potential site locations, and budget.

Provides the research, data collection, and analysis necessary for DEQ to develop the necessary

NPDES/WPCF permit.

Shows how the cost of facility improvements, maintenance and operations will be paid, examines

current user rates for adequacy, and projects when and where rate increases are necessary.

A Facilities Plan Is Not . . .

A guide for sizing the gross hydraulic capacity of sewers and pump stations in relation to zoning

and ultimate land use density build out, as would be found in a wastewater management master

plan portion of the jurisdictions comprehensive land use plan.

A wastewater management master plan, defining organizational arrangements or the division of

jurisdictions or responsibilities among various wastewater systems or agencies.

An operations and maintenance manual (O&M) for the system.

Part of a master plan, as may be prepared for identifying, prioritizing and scheduling the

communities infrastructure needs.

A term generally used for non-wastewater facilities.

Determining What Level of Facilities Plan Is Needed

Guidance concerning the degree of detail in preparation of a Wastewater Facilities plan should, in

all cases, be obtained from the proposed funding agencies and DEQ prior to beginning preparation

of the document. To assist with this process, a joint meeting at the project site involving the


9/35


applicant, the proposed funding agencies and DEQ is highly recommended.


10/35


Guidelines for Planning Simple Projects

Projects of extremely limited scope do not need facilities planning and generally qualify for a

Categorical Exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Projects having no

significant impact on the environment, either individually, cumulatively over time, or in

conjunction with other actions; and would generate no change on the upstream or downstream

function of the wastewater treatment facilities or the receiving waters can be defined ascategorically excluded from NEPA review. These projects include minor rehabilitation of existing

facilities, replacement of equipment, and construction of related facilities that do not affect the

degree of treatment or the capacity of the system. Some examples are: changing from chlorine gas

disinfection to hypochlorite solution; adding de-chlorination, odor controls, a sludge thickener, and

inflow and infiltration correction. You should consult with funding agency staff to make this

determination.

A reduced level of planning is adequate in most of these situations to analyze the permitting issues

and for technical review of the design. A copy of the engineers feasibility study or pre-design

report, along with a photocopy of rough calculations and equipment cut-sheets, will usually suffice

to provide information for DEQs review.

Guidelines for Planning Complex Projects

Complex projects for new or significantly expanded or modified wastewater facilities require a

comprehensive facilities plan whether they are completed in a single step or phased over several

years. A community wastewater facilities plan (usually called a facilities plan or engineering

evaluation) is defined in the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR Division 52) as a systematic

evaluation of environmental factors, engineering alternatives and financial considerations affecting

a proposed project area. Details of a comprehensive facilities plan are described in the next

section. See the section on Phased and Incremental Projects for additional requirements if a

complex project will be built in phases.

The Facilities Plan and Environmental Documentation - A Nine-Point Scope of Work

A basic nine-point scope of work for development of a comprehensive wastewater facilities plan is

described in this section. If all nine points are adequately addressed, the funding agencies will be

able to endorse the plan. A sample outline of a comprehensive wastewater facilities plan is

provided in Appendix C. Within the facilities plan, use a consistent format in order to provide ease

in locating the information and to assure that all of the minimum requirements are included.

1. A statement of purpose, background, and need for the wastewater facilities planning being

undertaken. Also demonstration of consistency with the applicable city and/or county

comprehensive land use plan.

2. A definition of the planning study area. The study area should include the entire service area,

such as an urban growth boundary or service district boundary.


11/35


3. A technical description and evaluation of all wastewater collection, treatment and disposal

facilities in the study area. This section should identify all known problems in the system along

with the data, research and analysis techniques used to identify the extent, location and type of

problem. This inventory of problems may include many items that are unrelated to the

proposed project. Completing this inventory may require studies and tests and may take a

considerable period of time to complete depending upon the type of problems identified, and

the operation and maintenance records available.

With respect to pump stations and treatment works, descriptions and evaluations should be

sufficiently detailed to meet current DEQ guidelines for design reports. Contact the DEQ

Regional Staff for assistance or to obtain these guidelines.

With respect to effluent discharges to surface waters, a computer model is often necessary

to document dilution and toxicity impacts downstream from the outfall. Supporting

information and analysis on the receiving stream should be included to insure that the

selected alternative can be permitted. A complete analysis with diagrams and selected

photographs may be warranted.

Accurate flow data must be collected and included in sufficient detail to support an

informed choice of alternatives, and to provide enough data for the development of a

discharge permit. A discussion of overflows must be detailed. Flow meters should be

calibrated and all flows to and from the plant and from overflow points should be monitored

for a minimum of one year.

4. A projection of the future wastewater flows and waste loads is required. The planning period is

normally twenty (20) years from completion of construction. Flow projections need to include

a probability analysis of peak flows based on DEQ flow-projection guidelines. Projections need

to be consistent with applicable city and/or county comprehensive plans; if such plans are out of

date they may need to be amended to incorporate the new information.

5. A discussion of the regulatory requirements that must be met by all viable alternatives is

necessary. These include regulations pertaining to surface and storm water discharges, erosion

control, effluent reuse, groundwater, sludge management, and wetland or waterway impacts.

Specific regulations are cited below under Water Quality Regulations for Facilities Planning.

Also, this discussion needs to include a determination of whether each alternative is permitted

by the local comprehensive plan and development regulations (zoning) and what, if any

conditions or limitations are required.

6. A general description of all viable alternatives and a description of the alternative selection

process is key to the planning process. A description of the recommended alternative in detail

is necessary. Effectiveness and reliability in meeting the regulatory requirements discussed in

step five above needs to be documented. A detailed technical description and cost estimate

needs to be included. If the recommended alternative is a significant project which is not

included in the list of public facility projects in the applicable city and/or county comprehensive

plan, an amendment to the comprehensive plan may be necessary. This requirement applies to


12/35


urban growth boundaries or unincorporated communities with a population greater than 2,500.


13/35


7. Technical descriptions in facilities plans should meet DEQ guidelines for pre-design

engineering reports. Adequate details about individual components and processes must be

presented for all proposed facilities. The level of detail must be sufficient for an engineer who

was not involved in the report to produce plans and specifications for the construction of the

same facility that was envisioned by the report writers, without changes to process sizing or

arrangement Any major decisions on equipment, layout, sizing, or process that are being

deferred to a separate pre-design report or which are being postponed until the preliminarydesign phase should be identified.

8. Analysis of financing options for the preferred alternative and competitive alternatives, and a

viable financing plan for construction, long-term operations and maintenance, and replacement

is a necessity. Operational financing plans should include a projection of sewer use charges for

residential, commercial and industrial users of the system. DEQ relies on this information to

verify adequacy of the financing plan. A guideline for the financing analysis is included in

Appendix D. All projects with estimated costs in excess of ten (10) million dollars will be

required to perform a value engineering study after engineering design and prior to starting

construction.

9. Documentation of environmental concerns involves the identification of any factors of special

significance at the construction site (particularly if it is undisturbed), including historic, cultural,

archeological, socio-economic or biological factors. If the site is of special significance, the

responsible agency should be identified, and any avoidance, mitigation or protection actions

that have been planned or implemented should be discussed. This information is required to

assure compliance with goals five, seven and eleven of Oregons Statewide Planning Goals and

Guidelines of the DLCD, and is required to assure compliance with the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA). An in-depth outline of an environmental report that will meet the

requirements of all financing agencies is presented in Appendix E.


14/35


Water Quality Regulations for Facilities Planning

Wastewater facilities planning needs to be performed with reference to the following water quality

regulations:

Non-discharging alternatives (alternatives that do not discharge to waters of the state) have

priority pursuant to OAR 340-41-026(5). If an existing surface water discharge is proposed tobe expanded, or a new one is proposed, the facilities plan should demonstrate why non-

discharging alternatives are unreasonable.

New sources of wastewater discharge must meet specific criteria outlined in OAR 340-41-

026(3)(a). These criteria should be addressed in the facilities plan.

The facilities plan advocating a new or expanded discharge must demonstrate that in-stream

water quality standards will not be violated as a result of the proposed discharge. These

standards have been established in OAR 340-41.

Effluent quality must be consistent with the minimum design criteria listed in OAR 340-41

and the federal secondary treatment standards listed in 40 CFR, Part 133.

Components of existing or proposed sewage works must be evaluated to determine their

impacts on groundwater quality. Examples include sludge storage ponds, wastewater

treatment lagoons, constructed wetlands, irrigation disposal systems, and drainfields. If the

evaluation indicates that there is potential for adverse impact, a groundwater protection program

is required by OAR 340-40.

Re-use of treated effluents must conform with the reclaimed water standards presented in

OAR 340-55. If re-use of treated effluent is anticipated for irrigation purposes an OWRD

registration must be completed. A copy of the form is included in Appendix F. The community

or District needs to contact the Oregon Water Resources Department about any additional

requirements their Department may have. Staff contact names and telephone numbers are

included in Appendix B.

Biosolids management must comply with the provisions of OAR 340-50 and the current

federal sludge management regulations.


15/35


Review Process for Wastewater Facilities Plans

A draft facilities plan should be submitted for review and comment by DEQ and participating

funding agencies. Allow 30-90 days for comment. Ongoing agency involvement and review

throughout the process greatly expedites subsequent approval of project plans and specifications, so

this is not lost time. Past experience in the review of facilities plans and engineering reports in draft

form indicates project completion is not usually delayed as a result of these reviews. Depending onthe number of agencies involved and the complexity of the project 3 to 15 copies of the

documentation may be needed for concurrent review. For ease in reviewing and amending the

document and to conserve resources, use of a three ring binder system with printing on both sides is

adviseable.

Updating Facilities Plans

Facilities plans should be updated every fifteen to twenty years as a community grows and

treatment equipment wears out or reaches design capacity. Updates need not re-examine or re-

analyze collection system facility planning that was approved by DEQ within the previous five

years unless there have been sewer overflows. However, an update is necessary if the stormseverity causing summer-time overflows is less than a five-year storm, or if the severity causing

winter-time overflows is less than a ten-year storm.

The update should include pump station inflow and infiltration aspects. Inflow should be

distinguished from infiltration and separately quantified. The study phase of all treatment plant

expansion projects should involve some re-evaluation of pump station and interceptor reliability

and conveyance capacity, with particular attention to updating overflows and alarms upstream from

the plant headworks.

Phased and Incremental Projects

Projects that are completed as a series of incremental wastewater treatment system expansion

projects, shall be described in a wastewater facilities plan. A phased facilities plan will address the

wastewater needs of the larger community area over a 20 or more year planning period, and

describe a implementation program to meet those needs as they develop. DEQs review of phased

or incremental projects attempts to verify consistency with the approved facilities plan; and

adequacy, effectiveness, reliability, and operational aspects with reference to the overall plan and

the existing facilities. Such reviews generally require no more than a copy of the relevant parts of

the overall plan, an engineering report on the project, and an updated description of existing

facilities, particularly with respect to design data. Proposed projects that are not within the scope of

the original or amended phased facilities plan, will require the development of an amendment to the

plan and associated environmental documentation.


16/35


Definitions

CDFI - Community Development Financial Institution

CWSRF - Clean Water State Revolving Fund

ODEQ - Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

DLCD - Department of Land Conservation and Development

EA - Environmental Assessment

EDU - Equivalent Dwelling Unit

ER - Environmental Report

EPA - Environmental Protection Agency

NEPA - National Environmental Protect Act

NPDES - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits

OAR - Oregon Administrative Rule

OECDD - Oregon Economic and Community Development Department

O&M - Operation and Maintenance

OMR - Operation, Maintenance and Replacement

ORS - Oregon Revised Statutes

OWRD - Oregon Water Resources Department

RCAC - Rural Community Assistance Corporation

RUS - Rural Utilities Service

STP - Sewage Treatment Plant

USDA - United States Department of Agriculture

WPCF - Water Pollution Control Facility permit


17/35

Appendix A

Guidelines for the Preparation of Facilities Plans and Environmental Reports Page 13

DEQ Regional Water Quality Engineers and Compliance Staff

and

Clean Water State Revolving Fund Project Officers and Engineers

Eastern RegionBakerCounty Gilliam

County

Hood River

County

LakeCounty Sherman

County

Wallowa

County

CrookCounty GrantCounty Jefferson

County

Malheur

County

Umatilla

County

WascoCounty

Deschutes

County

Harney

County

Klamath

County

Morrow

County

UnionCounty Wheeler

County

Water Quality Engineer Walt West..................... (541) 388-6146 ext. 232

CWSRF Staff:

Project Officer Al Murrey..................... (541) 889-7553 ext. 267

Project Engineer Walt West..................... (541) 388-6146 ext. 232

Northwest Region

Clackamas

County

Clatsop

County

Columbia

County

Multnomah

County

Tillamook

County

Washington

County

Water Quality Sr. Engineer David Mann.................. (503) 229-5310

WQ Compliance Staff Lyle Christensen........... (503) 229-5295

Ron Chaitoff................. (503) 229-6041

CWSRF Staff

Project Officer Richard Santner ............ (503) 229-5219Project Engineer Garry Sage.................... (503) 229-5690

Western Region

Benton

County

CurryCounty Jackson

County

LaneCounty LinnCounty PolkCounty

CoosCounty Douglas

County

Josephine

County

Lincoln

County

Marion

County

Yamhill

County

Water Quality Sr. Engineer Tim McFetridge ........... (503) 378-8240 ext. 235

WQ Compliance Staff Julie Berndt..................

(541) 686-7838 ext. 234

Robert Dicksa............... (503) 378-8240 ext. 246

Mark Hamlin ................ (503) 378-8240 ext. 239

Paul Kennedy ............... (541) 440-3338 ext. 228

Nick McKibbin ............ (541) 440-3338 ext. 229

CWSRF Staff

Project Officer Joseph Edney................ (541) 686-7838 ext. 237


18/35

Appendix A


Project Officer Jaime Isaza ................... (541) 686-7838 ext. 233

Project Engineer Francis Dzata................ (541) 686-7838 ext. 238

Project Engineer Jon Gasik ...................... (541) 776-6010 ext. 230


19/35

Appendix A


DLCD Field Offices and Regional Representatives

Portland

Meg Fernekees ........................................................... (503) 731-4065

Bend

Laren Woolley (Urban areas).....................................(541) 388-6424

Jon Jinings (Rural areas)............................................(541) 388-6424

Salem

Dale Jordan (North Coast) ......................................... (503) 373-0050 ext. 262Dave Perry (South Coast) .......................................... (503) 373-0050 ext. 267

Mel Lucas (Willamette Valley rural areas)................ (503) 373-0050 ext. 256

Mark Radabaugh (Willamette Valley urban areas) ...(503) 373-0050 ext. 224

Medford

Jeff Griffin ................................................................. (541) 858-3152


20/35

Appendix B

State and Federal Funding Staff


Oregon Economic and Community Development Department

Community Development Block Grant ProgramWater/Wastewater Financing Program

Special Public Works Fund Program

and

Oregon Bond Bank

Northwest Region

Clackamas

County

Clatsop

County

Columbia

County

Hood River

County

Multnomah

County

Tillamook

County

Washington

County

Janet Hillock............................................................. (503) 229-5625 ext. 226

David Kim................................................................. (503) 229-5625 ext. 229

Valley/Mid-Coast Region

Benton

County

LaneCounty LinnCounty Marion

County

PolkCounty Yamhill

County

Mary Baker................................................................ (503) 986-0132

LincolnCounty

Mike Shadbolt ........................................................... (503) 986-0191

Southwest Region

CoosCounty CurryCounty DouglasCounty JacksonCounty JosephineCounty

Ed Wait ..................................................................... (503) 986-0242

Central Region

Crook

County

Deschutes

County

Klamath

County

Lake

County

Jefferson

County

Gilliam

County

Sherman

County

Wasco

County

Wheeler

County

Laird Bryan ............................................................... (503) 986-0138

Eastern Region

Baker

County

Grant

County

Harney

County

Malheur

County

Morrow

County

Umatilla

County

Union

County

Wallowa

County


21/35

Appendix B



Del Little ................................................................... (503) 986-0133

Vicki Goodman ......................................................... (503) 986-0261


22/35

Appendix B



USDA - Rural Utilities Service, Water and Waste Loan and Grant Program

Portland Office

Clatsop

County

Columbia

County

Hood River

County

Sherman

County

Tillamook

County

Washington

County

Wasco

County

David Force............................................................... (503) 414-3327

Suzanne Fitzgerald.................................................... (503) 414-3330

Pendleton Office

Baker

County

Grant

County

Gilliam

County

Harney

County

Malheur

County

Morrow

County

Umatilla

County

Union

County

Wallowa

County

Paul Kershisnik......................................................... (541) 278-8049

Collen Hewes ............................................................ (541) 278-8049

Salem Office

Marion

County

Clackamas

County

Multnomah

County

PolkCounty Lincoln

County

Yamhill

County

Forrest Peck............................................................... (503) 399-5751

Eugene Office

Lane

County

Linn

County

Benton

County

Crook

County

Deschutes

County

Klamath

County

Lake

County

Ken Durrell ............................................................... (541) 465-6850

Pamela Swires ........................................................... (541) 465-6850

Roseburg Office

CoosCounty CurryCounty DouglasCount

y

JacksonCount

y

Jefferson

County

JosephineCou

nty

Clem Singer............................................................... (541) 673-0136


23/35

Appendix C

Facilities Plan Outline


Wastewater Facilities Plan Outline

1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction, Purpose and Need

3. Study Area Characteristics (Incorporation of Appendix E Environmental Document

Outline will meet the requirements of all financial assistance programs for funding)

3.1 Study Area

3.2 Physical Environment

0.1 Climate

0.2 Soils

0.3 Geologic Hazards0.4 Public Health Hazards

0.5 Energy Production and Consumption

0.6 Water Resources

0.7 Flora and Fauna

0.8 Air Quality and Noise

0.9 Environmentally Sensitive Areas

0.10 Land Use Issues

3.3 Socio-Economic Environment

0.1 Economic Conditions and Trends

0.2 Population

0.3 Population growth projections3.4 Land Use Regulations

0.1 City or County Comprehensive Plan

0.2 City or County Zoning Ordinance

0.3 Intergovernmental Agreements

4. Existing Wastewater Facilities

4.1 Wastewater Conveyance System

0.1 Wastewater Plant, Influent Pump Station

0.2 Conveyance System Pump Stations or Lift Stations

0.3 Status of Conveyance System

4.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant0.1 Plant History

0.2 Plant Design

0.3 Plant Operations

0.4 Unit Performance and Deficiencies


24/35

Appendix C



5. Wastewater Characteristics

5.1 Wastewater Volume0.1 Dry Weather Flow

0.2 Wet Weather Flow

0.3 Infiltration and Inflow

0.4 Summary of Existing Flows

5.2 Wastewater Composition

0.1 Analysis of Plant Records

5.3 Unit Design Factors

0.1 Wastewater Flows

0.2 Wastewater Composition

5.4 Projected Wastewater Characteristics

6. Basis of Planning

6.1 Basis for Design

0.1 Regulatory Requirements

0.2 Effluent Quality

0.3 Treatment Effectiveness

0.4 Plant Reliability Criteria

0.5 Design Concepts and Constraints

6.2 Basis for Cost Estimate

0.1 Construction Costs

0.2 Contingencies

0.3 Engineering0.4 Legal and Administrative

6.3 Water Quality Impact

0.1 Background Data on the receiving stream

6.4 Water Balance Analysis of any Wastewater Treatment Impoundments

6.5 Design Capacity of Conveyance System and Wastewater Treatment Plant

0.1 Conveyance System

0.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Facilities

0.3 Seasonal Land Irrigation


25/35

Appendix C



7. Development and Evaluation of Alternatives

7.1 Conveyance System Alternatives0.1 Basic Alternatives

0.2 Selection

7.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Liquid Stream Treatment Alternatives

0.1 Basic Alternatives

0.2 Selection

7.3 Disinfection Alternatives

0.1 Basic Alternatives

0.2 Selection

7.4 Effluent Disposal Alternatives

0.1 Wet Season Alternatives

0.2 Selection0.3 Dry Season Alternatives

0.4 Selection

7.5 Biosolids Management

0.1 Biosolids Stabilization Alternatives

0.2 Selection

0.3 Ultimate Use and Disposal Alternatives

0.4 Selection

7.6 Development and Evaluation of Complete Alternatives

0.1 Common Parameters

0.2 Development of at least three complete alternatives

0.3 Matrix Evaluation

8. Rate Study (Incorporation of Appendix D, entitled Financial Information Guideline will

meet the requirements of the funding agencies)

8.1 Estimated annual Operation, Maintenance and Replacement Costs of the proposed

system

8.2 Evaluation of Local Funding Resources (municipal bonds, tax base, user fees, etc.)

8.3 Evaluation of Federal and State Funding Resources (grants, loans, state bond pool,

etc)

8.4 Recommended Rate Structure and Financing Strategy

9. Recommended Plan9.1 Introduction

0.1 Project Selection

0.2 Projected Design Flows

0.3 Project Cost Summary

9.2 Financing Strategy

9.3 Implementation Schedule


26/35

Appendix C



10. Environmental Report - A stand-alone environmental report may be included as the finalchapter. Refer to Appendix E for information concerning this report.


27/35


28/35

Appendix C



Financial Information Guideline

1. Calculate the total number of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) in the system and identifythe number of which are residential, commercial and industrial.

2. Identify the number of residential, commercial and industrial connections in the system.

3. Prepare an annual budget for the Operation, Maintenance (OM) costs and the capitol long

term system Replacement (R) funds for all the preferred alternatives (OMR). Also calculate

what the user rate needs to be per EDU to adequately cover the proposed annual OMR.

4. Prepare a table that compares the monthly OMR costs per EDU for each alternative.

5. Show the current monthly residential user rate structure.

6. Identify any existing debt service that is being paid for the system whether through property

taxes or user rates and when it will be paid off.

7. Calculate the monthly rate per EDU for the chosen alternative using the estimated OMR

budget, and assuming the project is funded entirely with a loan.

8. Propose a rate structure for the community.

9. Propose a rate implementation schedule and identify what steps the community needs to

undertake to adopt and implement a new rate structure.


29/35


30/35

Appendix E

Environmental Documentation Outline


Environmental Report Outline/Format

The USDA, Rural Utilities Service (RUS), has developed a comprehensive environmental report

guidance document (RUS Bulletin 1974A-602, Guide for Preparing the Environmental Report ForWater and Waste Projects.) This document can be obtained by calling your agency contact and be

used in preparing the Environmental Report required for a proposed project.

An environmental report should include: 1) a summary of findings of the environmental

conditions, 2) an analysis of a no action alternative, in addition to other alternatives considered,

3) a description of any additional studies that were performed, and 4) any mitigation measures

needed to minimize the impact of the proposed project on the natural and human environments.

E.1 Example of the Table of Contents for an Environmental Report

(For a more detailed description of the Table of Contents of an ER see paragraph E.2)

1.0 Purpose and Need of Project

1.1 Project Description (Proposed Action or Proposed Project)


2.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action

3.0 Affected Environment/Environmental Consequences

3.1 Land Use/Important Farmland/Formally Classified Lands3.1.1 Affected Environment *

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences *

3.1.3 Mitigation *

3.2 Floodplains

3.3 Wetlands

3.4 Cultural Resources

3.5 Biological Resources

3.6 Water Quality Issues

3.7 Coastal Resources

3.8 Socio-Economic/Environmental Justice Issues

3.9 Miscellaneous Issues

* Repeated through all Section 3.0 subsections.

4.0 Summary of Mitigation

5.0 Correspondence


31/35

Appendix E



6.0 Exhibits/Maps


32/35

Appendix E



E.2 Format of Environmental Report

1.0 Purpose and Need for Project

This section will succinctly describe the proposed project and establish the underlying purpose and

need. This section has two subsections.

1.1 Project Description (Proposed Action or Proposed Project)

Provide a description of the proposed project summarizing all proposed facility improvements and

construction activities. Commonly referred to in NEPA and the federal Council for Environmental

Quality (CEQ) regulations as the proposed action.


This subsection shall establish the underlying purpose of the proposed project and the need.

Therefore it is necessary to clearly and definitively demonstrate the purpose and establish a need for

the project. The information will also be used to determine what reasonable or practicable

alternatives need to be evaluated in the ER. In addition this section should state what would be the

consequences of not implementing the proposed project, which is referred to in NEPA as the No

Action alternative.

2.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action

In planning and developing a proposed project, applicants shall explore all reasonable alternatives

that could satisfy and are consistent with the purpose and need of the project. Alternatives mayinclude:

Engineering design alternatives,

Siting locations of facilities,

System capacities, etc.

As the engineering planning and design and environmental review is developed, various

alternatives may be evaluated and ultimately determined to be unreasonable for various technical or

financial reasons. In this section of the ER, outline the reasonable alternatives considered and

present the evaluation factors considered in judging each alternatives ability to met the described

purpose and need of the proposed project.

All relevant factors that contribute to the decision making process shall be included, for example,

technical and economic feasibility issues, environmental considerations, or mitigation measures.

The evaluation and weighting criteria assigned in analyzing the proposed project and the

alternatives considered should be summarized and presented in a comparative table.


33/35

Appendix E



3.0 Affected Environment/Environmental Consequences

This section of the ER will:

Describe and document the environmental resources of the area to be affected by the proposed

project and each alternative considered.

Discuss the environmental consequences of each affected resource.

Establish and discuss any mitigation measure(s) necessary to avoid or minimize any adverse

impacts to a specific environmental resource.

Only alternatives determined to be reasonable need to be analyzed in this section.

The typical process to document and consider effects to environmental resources is:

Describe the area(s) to be affected by the proposed project and each alternative

considered. Affected areas may correspond to the service area of the proposed project.

Alternatives may have different affected areas. Include maps outlining the affected

area(s) showing the location of all proposed construction.

Identify the environmental resources in the described affected area(s). Applicants, as

necessary, will be required to consult with appropriate environmental regulatory agencies

to identify the environmental resources in the affected areas and, in addition, to review

any conclusions drawn from an analysis of the proposed projects potential effect to these

resources. Agency contacts or websites where preliminary information can be found isdiscussed in Section 4.0 of RUS Bulletin 1794A-602.

Discuss the environmental effects or consequences of the proposed project and each

alternative considered. All direct, indirect and, if applicable, cumulative effects need to

be identified and discussed. Some of the impacts may be viewed as adverse, while others

may be viewed as beneficial. For some actions, data may be unavailable or insufficient to

make a determination of an effect to an environmental resource. If so, clearly state the

situation. Otherwise clearly describe all effects or consequences to all environmental

resources whatever they may be. For specific guidance of the extent to which effects

(direct, indirect and cumulative) need to be discussed, applicants should contact the Rural

Development State Environmental Coordinator or Processing Office.

Identify potential mitigation measures that may be necessary to avoid or minimize any

adverse effects caused by the proposed project and each alternative considered. Any and

all mitigation measures need to be developed with an applicable environmental regulatory

agency and be developed so as to be enforceable.


34/35

Appendix E



Section 3.0 of RUS Bulletin 1794A-602 provides more detail on the following environmental

resources to be evaluated.

Land Use/Important Farmland/

Formally Classified Land

Floodplains

Wetlands

Cultural Resources

Biological Resources

Water Quality Issues

Coastal Resources

Socio-Economic/

Environmental Justice Issues

Miscellaneous Issues

Each of the above environmental resources shall have its own subchapter in the ER listing the

affected environment, environmental consequences and mitigation measures for each resource. For

example:

3.1 Land Use/Important Farmland/Formally Classified Lands

3.1.1 Affected Environment

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences

3.1.3 Mitigation

4.0 Summary of Mitigation

This section of the ER shall summarize proposed mitigation measures described in Section 3.0 of

RUS Bulletin 1794A-602. Describe implementing criteria of mitigation measures and how each

measure will be enforced. A table format is useful in presenting the evaluation.

5.0 Correspondence and Coordination

As specified in Section 3.0 of RUS Bulletin 1794A-602, many of the environmental issues

evaluated require coordination with State or Federal environmental regulatory agencies. All

correspondence that is related to this coordination should be included in this section of the ER.

6.0 Exhibits

Attach supporting documents, maps, photographs, etc.


35/35

Appendix F

Oregon Water Resources Registration of Reclaimed Municipal Water Use

and

Staff Contacts