Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-08-17 Utilities SpU TH U C W rencF �' 1865 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK KAREEMAH FOWLER,CITY CLERK UTILITIES MAY 8, 2017 4:45 P.M. Committee Members Present: Dr. David Varner, Oliver Davis, Randy Kelly, Regina Williams-Preston Other Council Present: Tim Scott, Jo M. Broden, John Voorde, Karen White, Gavin Ferlic Others Present: Aladean DeRose, Kareemah Fowler, Graham Sparks Presenters: Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Kieran Fahey, Eric Horvath Agenda: CSO Update, Dr. Varner(no update given) City Long Term Control Plan, Mayor Pete Buttigieg &Eric Horvath NOTE: Council President Tim Scott entertained a motion to suspend the rules to hear Bill No. 17-20,Bill No. 17-21, and Bill No. 17-22 in the Community Investment Committee and to move the hearing for Bill No. 17-17 from the Community Investment Committee agenda to the Zoning and Annexation Committee agenda.This motion was made by Councihnember Gavin Ferlic and seconded by Councilmember Dr. David Varner.This motion carried unanimously by a voice vote of six(6)ayes. Committee Chair Dr. David Varner called to order the Utilities Committee meeting at 4:40 p.m. He introduced members of the committee and stated the need for more room for the meeting. Committeemember Randy Kelly made a motion to recess and reconvene in the larger Council Chambers. This motion was seconded by Committeemember Regina Williams-Preston and carried unanimously by a voice vote of four(4) ayes. Committee Chair Dr. Varner reconvened the Utilities Committee meeting at 4:45 p.m. He then gave the floor to the presenters of the City Long Term Control Plan. City Long Term Control Plan,Mayor Pete Buttigieg & Eric Horvath Mayor Pete Buttigieg, with offices on the 14t' floor of the County-City building, stated, I'll start with a very brief bit of history on how we got here. Like most American cities with old water infrastructure, South Bend was sued by the Federal Government for not complying with the Clean Water Act. The antiquated design of the sewer system in South Bend led to untreated wastewater going into the river in both dry weather and wet weather conditions. In 2011, a few days before my Administration took office,the previous City Administration completed a lengthy negotiation entering into a Consent Decree with the Department of Justice and the 455 County-City Building•227 W.Jefferson Boulevard•South Bend,Indiana 46601 Phone 574-235-9221 •Fax 574-235-9173•TDD 574-235-5567•www.SouthBendfN.gov JENNIFER M.COFFMAN ALKEYNA M.ALDRIDGE JOSEPH MOLNAR CHIEF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK OPERATIONS Environmental Protection Agency. That Consent Decree laid out a series of steps that the City was compelled to take in order to bring it closer to compliance. That work was already underway by the time my Administration came in and our Administration continued that plan. As you will see in the presentation(which is available in the City Clerk's Office), Phase One (1) included a total of$149 million in investments. The net effect of Phase One (1) has significantly reduced the number of occasions when untreated water enters the river. We also established an office to deal with this Long Term Control Plan Implementation. The longer we did the work, the more it became clear that there were going to be major issues in completing the plan as it was originally laid out. On one (1) hand, the City was required to implement this plan by federal law. On the other hand, the more it was looked at, the more expensive it became. The only way we could pay for this to work was through sewer rates. That means residential, commercial and industrial rate- payers would pick up the tab. There is no funding from the Federal Government for the Federal mandate. So we knew further analysis was required and you will be hearing more about that in detail. One (1)helpful thing was that because South Bend was an early adopter in Smart Sewers, the City was uniquely able to do analysis using real-time data that was gathered from the system. We may have inherited the expensive long-term control plan, but we also inherited some of the best sewer technology in the world which allowed us to use real-time data to see how good the plan was. There are also a number of passionate and committed individuals that came together to make this plan happen and that will be exemplified throughout this presentation. I want to thank and acknowledge those folks. I would also like to thank the Council, as well as the private partners that have all come together to make this plan work. Mayor Buttigieg continued, So the analysis which you are about to see has good news and bad news. The bad news is it was even more expensive than we feared. The ballpark number that was talked about when we took office was around $500 million. The original version of the Long Term Control Plan according to the analysis would be $713 million more than the $149 million that has already gone in. So that comes to $861 million if there are no charges. The even worse news is that it probably wouldn't achieve the goals that were required of us, knowing what we now know. The plan that was agreed upon did, however, represent the best good-faith efforts of the administration at the time,knowing what they knew then. But several things have changed, including our ability to analyze what this plan would actually look like, not to mention the technologies and the alternatives that exist. The bottom line is that the analysis shows the plan's unaffordability,to which many in the community are expressing fear. The analysis suggested that some families could be paying up to ten percent (10%) of their income just for this project. So the good news is the analysis has pointed the way toward a better alternative. We believe there is a way to do this for about$200 million. That's about half a billion dollars less than the price tag that was initially set for the original plan. However,that still only exists on paper. In other words, as of today we are still required as a matter of federal law to pursue the older,more expensive, inferior plan. So in order to change that, we are going to need permission. We are going to have to go to the table and meet with the Department of Justice,the Environmental Protection Agency and the State to ask them to allow us to pursue this better way. Part of that will be showing the environmental benefits because this includes green-infrastructure solutions. Part of this is also showing that the community is united and is rallying around the sense of urgency in finding a better and more affordable way. We are continuing to engage policymakers on the bigger picture. There are three (3)tracks going on here. The first is the technical track. That includes finding out what it is going to take, what it is going to cost and whether there is a 2 better way. The culmination of that technical work is about to be presented. The second track is the negotiation track. We have been talking about it all along but now that we have the technical information, the negotiations really go into high-gear. The third track is the policy track. It is also the case that federal law and federal practice could change. It could change in a way that makes it easier for us to comply. We are continuing on this track. Under the prior Federal Administration, I often raised this issue with former EPA officials and our congressional representation. I've already discussed this with our newly elected senator and the senior senator. I will also be testifying in congress on this issue in about two (2) weeks in front the sub- committee on Water, Resources and Environment, which is part of the committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in the House of Representatives. We are developing that testimony in concert with the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the focus is on this question of affordability and integrated planning. I've also notified the acting administrator for the EPA for our region. There hasn't been a Presidential appointment yet so one (1) of the career employees there is acting as the administrator there and I've provided him with a heads up. This is the first time since I've been Mayor that a mayor has testified in Congress on a policy matter. This shows the centrality of this issue to our City's long-term future and how important it is on our priority list. Committeemember Oliver Davis asked, You said there are three (3) phases. At what point do you bring that matter to the Council for any type of vote on this kind of issue? To my knowledge, your predecessor never brought this issue before Council. At what point will we entertain public discussion? Mayor Buttigieg replied, So I can't speak to the prior process of course but since we've been in office,there has been an understanding that we all need to be engaged with the Council. Procedurally, it's a negotiation between the Federal Government and the City. I would suggest there may come a point when some sort of action,possibly a resolution,would be in order once we are all on the same page. Today is intended to be just a step in that direction so that we are having a dialogue. It's also the case that all of this will have to be paid for. While on one (1) hand we are required to do it, on the other hand we can't do it without the authority from Council. So that is all the more reason why I think it's a healthy thing to be having this dialogue now rather than presenting something to Council that has already happened. Kieran Fahey, Director of the Long Term Control Plan with offices on the 13`h floor of the County-City Building, stated, This is the largest Public Works project that will come across your desk and is the largest Public Works project in the history of South Bend. It has the ability to shape the future of South Bend in many ways. As the Mayor mentioned, our approach has been a multi-tracked approach. We realize the engineering approach will get us so far but subsequent and concurrent to that are the political implications. It is important that this project benefits South Bend in as many ways as possible. It should not just be spending a lot of money toward one (1) issue. We feel through green-infrastructure and socially and environmentally engaging with the community,the economy and vibrancy of South Bend will benefit in many ways. We are very excited. It has been very challenging over the past few years being faced with this daunting task. The first task was to do a full re-assessment of where we were. That made us realize that not only were we in a bad situation,but things were worse than we anticipated. The Long Term Control Plan has two (2)phases. Phase One (1)included wastewater treatment plant 3 upgrades as well as collection system controls. Mr. Fahey then referenced the presentation which listed projects having checks by them, signifying the completion of the projects (the presentation can be found in the City Clerk's Office). Mr. Fahey continued, We are one (1)project completion away from being done with Phase One (1). Phase Two (2) includes the construction of seven(7) large storage tanks. Financially,the large projects represent eighty to eighty-five percent(80%-85%) of the budget. We are talking very serious money at this stage. The enormity of Phase One (1) is exemplified in the many lists provided in the presentation. They have all been a large community effort. There were fifty-eight (58)major CSO (Combined Sewer Overflow) collection systems projects totaling roughly$114 million. Phase One (1)projects totaled $34 million which brings us to $148 million already spent. The success is exemplified by the graph in the presentation. The graph shows the amount of annual overflow into the river, and the significant reduction of overflow since starting the project. Four-hundred and thirty-one (43 1) million gallons of overflow happened in 2016. Eight (8) years before that there were two (2)billion gallons of overflow in the river. The CSO real- time monitoring system implemented in 2008 significantly helped immediately the following year. Real-time control is how we started to divert overflow to different areas. The CSO is divided into basins. There may be one (1)basin that is full and another that still has capacity but until we had real-time control, there was no way to divert the overflow into basins that have capacity. There are two (2) data sets we have collected. The first data set is from 2004-2006 and the second is from 2014-2016. The E. Coli levels for the City are significantly lower. There's an average reduction of twenty-eight percent (28%) on the median E. Coli level at each monitoring point. There are four (4) main monitoring points. The water quality is going in the right direction. What we are meant to do next is change from the tactics that we've had so far in relation to the successes of Smart Sewer Networks and commence this large project. The plan as it stands is expensive and doesn't include any Smart Technology. Smart Technology is what has got us to where we are today with regard to our successes. The plan doesn't have any green- infrastructure either and not only does it benefit us in terms of the efficiency, but it will also help beautify parts of the City. This all goes full-circle with the biology and the aquatic life in the river. We do a fish survey in cooperation with the City of Elkhart by going out and sampling the aquatic life in the river. For the last twenty-seven (27) months, we realized that Phase Two (2) didn't include the same practices that have provided the previous successes. The way the project was structured allowed us to take a little bit of time, review where we were going, recalibrate the direction, and the results of that are being presented today. The Long Term Control Plan has many private and local companies that help through cooperation. The main finding after we commenced the work was the extent of the flaws with the current plan. The first thing we did was understand how the proposed expenditure of the $509 million became $861 million, based on having spent $148 million with$713 million to go. We have ten(10) years of data due to Smart Sewers and that data has been key to the success and savings. Mr. Fahey went through the slides of the presentation highlighting projects that have already been accomplished. 'Mr. Fahey then went on, We have considered every option to make the plan as lean and as valuable as possible. The Down-Spout Disconnection Program and the Basement Value Program were two (2) side projects that evolved from this, both of which were successful. Sewer systems can overflow into the river, but they can also go into somebody's basement. This plan is a holistic approach to solving that problem. The disconnection is very important. The Wastewater 4 Treatment Plant Expansion challenge is proving to be very difficult. The flaw with the current plan is there is no CSO storage tank at the wastewater treatment plant. However, our studies have revealed that the outfall closest to the treatment plant is the most significant in the system. The first finding was the sense to build a large CSO storage tank at the treatment plant because we are doing a really good job of getting a lot of flow to the treatment plant. Four (4) small tanks were listed as having very small capacities but it is still very expensive to build small tanks. Those tanks were at the point that through smart and green-infrastructure,they could be eliminated from the plan. The storage conduit is basically a tunnel. Costs in relation to that escalated dramatically. The essential thing to realize is the need to build these. The greatest flaw with the initial project was it was designed for four(4) overflows. Our data revealed the plan would come back with thirteen (13)total overflow CSOs, which would not meet our objectives even after spending all the money. That is the key takeaway. This Smarter Alternative for a Greener Environment (SAGE) Plan that we are presenting will only have nine (9) CSO basins that include green-infrastructure. The financial capability analysis gives a ratio of the old plan and the financial burden on the resident. The ratio of the old plan is a three point six nine (3.69). Greater than two (2) is denoted as `high' by the EPA. We are almost double that with the old plan, hence,the motivation is there for the SAGE Plan. Eric Horvath, Public Works Director with offices on the 13th floor of the County-City Building, stated, I think you've seen we've had tremendous success to date with the initial parts of this plan. We've come a long way from where we started by rethinking the current plan. We have a great team of folks who have put together a wonderful solution. I want to thank the Council for their patience. One (1) of the first things we did was put in one-hundred and fifty (150) sensors. We have the most censored sewer network in the entire world. This gives us critical data to come up with real results. We have over 15.8 million data points from the system that come in every year. That tells us, at any given time and any given day, exactly what level the sewer should be at. We have been monitoring the sewers every single day. This has helped us eliminate dry- weather overflows. It also provides operational optimization, essentially preventing back-ups. We knew which sewers to clean, fix and help. It also helped us look at the system as a whole and look at where the most capacity was. The sensors communicate with one another to figure out capacity and redirection of overflow. We also built the second throttle-line. The initial throttle- line would overflow to the river, so we built the second one with real-time control. There is a value and sensor on it to tell it when to open up when there is capacity. In certain cases we had CSO basins have durations of twenty (20) hours of overflow that, after we did this,became only two (2) hours. In the previous plan we were underestimating and overestimating overflow. Compared to the LTCP,the SAGE Plan improves the accuracy of estimation and gives a more precise recommendation for the number of CSO basins and their respective sizes. We need to know how much overflow there will be in order to create the perfect model. Using the data we had, we try to predict each drop of water and where it goes. We previously had only fifty (50) miles modeled but are now modeling one-hundred twenty (120) miles. We took three-hundred and sixty-four (364) nodes and we modeled two-thousand two—hundred(2200) nodes. We then took sub-catchments, which are the contribution areas of each of these nodes, and made them smaller so we could have a more accurate representation of where the flow was going and how and where it was getting into the sewer system. Mr. Horvath then referenced a chart in the presentation in regard to the existing 2013 model that showed flow-to-capacity ratios. 5 Mr. Horvath continued, We have built a new system that uses a cognitive-hydraulic response system which takes all the data we have and uses it to inform the whole model. This is something that no one else in the world has done and something we are very proud of It makes sure that the solution in front of us is the right solution. This all runs parallel to meeting water quality criteria and standards. We took these models and optimized all the different possibilities to reduce overflow. The old Long Term Control Plan functioned on a bunch of engineers sitting down with ten(10) possibilities. They would then reduce it to four(4), and eventually get down to their preferred alternative. The problem with that is we lost certain opportunities and it didn't compensate for how one (1) solution could impact the other. We feel like the SAGE Plan is the most cost-effective way to reduce overflows. Mr. Fahey stated, The plan is called the SAGE Plan which stands for a Smarter Alternative to a Greener Environment. We've talked about the need to add a CSO tank at our wastewater treatment plant; that will happen. The plan also adds green storm water infrastructure to nine (9) CSO basins. Most importantly, it is going to reduce the impact on the resident's pocketbook. Mr. Fahey then referred to a slide in the presentation that compared and contrasted the current LCTP with the SAGE Plan with regard to the number of CSO basins, the amount of green infrastructure, the EPA criteria met, capacity, and the cost. He stated, The current LTCP has $713 million that remains to be spent. The SAGE Plan will only cost $200 million. That is a massive savings. A lot of engineering has gone into this and has had a lot of success. I have met with IDEM already this year, and there will be additional regulation meetings into the summer and fall as the negotiation strategy plays out. We are talking about a more efficient, less expensive, greener and smarter plan. Committee Chair Dr. Varner opened the floor to questions from the Committee and Council. Councilmember-John Voorde asked, We monitor the quality of the water from upstream? Mr. Fahey responded, Yes and the statistics we have only refers to what the City of South Bend contributes to. We aren't concerned with what comes from the other communities. These are only our statistics and what we contribute to the river. Councilmember Voorde followed up, So we are not getting penalized for an overflow upstream? Mr. Fahey confirmed, Correct, we are not. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic asked, In the SAGE Plan, what is the estimated number of overflows per year? Mr. Fahey responded, Well, water management comes down to two (2)main criteria. It comes down to water quantity and water quality. The water quantity metric -how much water that actually flows into the river- is not highlighted in any way by an overflow. Water quality is not something that is highlighted by the number of overflows either. The number of overflows metric is not a metric that has driven this project. This is a water quality project. So regardless of the number of overflows, this plan focuses on the overall quality. 6 Councilmember Ferlic followed up, Wasn't the original plan using a metric that allowed for four (4) overflows? So are we hoping there will be a shift in the EPA's approach to what is actually clean water and not focusing on the number of overflows? Mr. Fahey replied, As an environmental scientist,you can't just look at something that is insignificant. You've got to look at the ultimate impact in the environment and this is a water- quality plan. Councilmember Karen White asked, Could you send copies of the PowerPoint to the Council members? (The City Clerk's Office did send all Council members a copy of the presentation thereafter. The presentation is also available for members of the public in the City Clerk's Office.) Committeemember Oliver Davis asked, So basically this is a$500 million savings?And with that, we are still able to reach all of our goals? Mr. Horvath replied, We will put this presentation on the web as well. But yes, it is a$500 million savings. We are really focusing on the water quality. We feel like we have a plan that gets us to a level of water quality that is affordable and meets human-health and environmental standards. We will take this to the EPA, DOJ and IDEM and hope they will see the same. We know this is a negotiation process, but that's why it's important for us to have really good data backing this up. Committeemember Davis followed up, If you were talking to an average-Joe, what does this do for them in terms of how it helps their life and how it makes their water system better? Mr. Horvath replied, We get calls from constituents but typically the calls we get are related to a big storm and rain water flooding. We've done a really good job of cleaning up the river and we've noticed a significant decrease in calls saying the river stinks. We have found a balance of affordability and meeting significant environmental improvements. We could show what kind of impact that would be had if we stuck with the old plan. It will be most noticeable on our water- bill. Councilmember Davis stated, It would be nice to have a graph to show the effect on each individual household,the difference between the two (2)plans. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, When is the actual deadline on this decision? Mr. Horvath replied, There isn't an actual deadline. There was a deadline for a five (5) year plan and this has helped us meet that requirement. This is also a good opportunity for us to tell IDEM a new story and tell them what is really going on with the previous plan, as well as with the new plan. The next deadline we have in the Consent Decree isn't in effect until 2020. Councilmember Broden followed up, When you're looking at the environmental impact, how are we isolated from what precedes us in the water flow? It seems like our success is dependent on their success. Who sorts all of that out? 7 Mr. Horvath replied, Just to be clear. When we talk about meeting the water quality criteria, we're talking about doing so from the point of only our CSO contributions to that stream. We created a model through Elkhart, Mishawaka, South Bend and all the way up to Lake Michigan that looks at all the inputs of E. Coli into the system. We can isolate the South Bend CSO-related issues on that model, but when we are talking about meeting that water quality criteria, we are talking about only our contribution our CSOs have into that system. It is as if Mishawaka and Elkhart don't have an impact and we are only looking at our impact. Councilmember Broden then asked, Are the other communities on similar timeframes? Mr. Fahey answered, Generally each Consent Decree was created and signed at different times and thus, all communities are operating on different schedules. Unfortunately,there isn't any history of any community actually completing a CSO Consent Decree so it is really hard to see a success rate. All communities are on different schedules and have different models. Committeemember Regina Williams-Preston asked, I noticed in the presentation there were slides of completed projects. When you last closed off Diamond Avenue, was that related to your work? Moreover, is there a schedule available to the public of when these projects are going on? Mr. Horvath replied,No, Diamond Avenue was not closed because of our work. Mr. Fahey stated, Right now, we have the data back and are currently creating the master plan and schedule. We are working out the specifics and the timeline right now. So as for the specific plans, we only have some of the big dates and events scheduled. Keeping the community engaged throughout the process is very important. Input, feedback and transparency will all help with the general understanding. Mr. Horvath added, We do have to do a better job of getting to you all the schedule of the year for all the projects. Diamond Avenue was a break so we didn't have a plan for that. With no further business, Committee Chair Dr. Varner adjourned the Utilities Committee meeting at 6:02 p.m. Council President Tim Scott suspended the Informal Meeting of the Council. The Informal Meeting did not take place on 05/08/2017. Respectfully Submitted, 1 Dr. David Varner, Committee Chair 8