5A - Recommendation to City Council concerning the Wastewater Utility Master Plan & Approval of Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Wastewater Utility Master Plan Summary
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEE'T'ING DATE: December 17, 2009
AGENDA TITLE:
Public Hearing and consideration of:
1. A recommendation to City Council concerning the Wastewater Utility Master Plan
and;
2. Approval of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Wastewater Utility
Master Plan Summary.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENTS:
Community Planning and Sustainability
David Driskell, Executive Director
Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Chris Meschuk, Planner
Public Works Utilities Division
Ned Williams, Director
Bob IIarberg, Utilities Planning and Project Management Coordinator
Douglas Sullivan, Utilities Project Manager
OBJECTIVE.:
1. Hear staff presentation
2. Hold public hearing
3. Planning Board discussion and Recommendation to City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this meeting is to review the Wastewater Utility Master Plan (W W UMP), provide
a recommendation to City Council prior to acceptance of the plan and consider approval the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Wastewater Utility Master Plan Summary.
The WWUMP is a comprehensive analysis of the city's wastewater collection and treatment
system, and associated water quality programs and facilities. It is intended to guide future
wastewater utility decisions. The W WUMP serves as the overarching planning document for the
wastewater utility, and is supported by three primary planning documents: The Wastewater
Collection System Master Plan, Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan, and the Water Quality
Strategic Plan. The WWUMP provides updated information on the wastewater utility system,
AGENDA I` EM # 5A Page I
analysis of alternatives, and a recommended improvements plan including costs and pro}ect
prioritization. The document summarizes the three primary planning documents, to provide a
clear overall understanding of the wastewater utility and future plans and programs. Each of the
individual planning documents has additional detail and analysis to be used in the ongoing
decision making of the utility.
The W WUMP identifies a recommended Capital Improvements Program (CIP) project list for
wastewater utility improvements for the next twenty years. These projects are divided into
wastewater treatment plant improvements, and wastewater collection system improvements. The
treatment plant improvements are prioritized to address new Federal and State effluent discharge
permit requirements, and also to replace aging infrastructure. The wastewater collection system
improvements are organized into three categories (Priority 1, Priority 2, and Priority 3) to address
hydraulic capacity and rehabilitation and replacement issues. The wastewater utility fund does
not have adequate funding to construct all the improvements identified in the recommended
projects list, but the improvements are coded according to the city's business plan model of
fiscally constrained plan, action plan, and vision plan. While funding priorities are identified in
the plan, changes and opportunities arise over time which influences the priority ofprojects.
Therefore, the list of identified projects is reviewed annually as part of the city's budget process
related to priorities and availability of funding. Under the fiscally constrained investment
strategy, it is assumed a 3% annual rate increase (2% in 2010) is needed to just keep up with the
annual rate of inflation. The Action flan investment strategy, which is recommended in the
master plan, assumes a stepped rate increase from 2% in 2010 to 6% in 2014 and 2015, before
leveling out at a 4% annual increase in 2016-2030. One two-year period of 9% annual increases
is identified to fund the nutrient removal project. The Vision Plan investment strategy assumes
an annual rate increase of 4% from 2010-2030 with three two-year periods of 8% annual
increases.
KEY ISSUES:
The Planning Board's role in reviewing master plans is to look for consistency with the BVCP
goals and policies before the plans are accepted by the City Council. Because of its role in
reviewing the Capital Improvements Program (CIP), the Planning Board also reviews master
plans to ensure that they identify needed improvements and financial strategies to meet adopted
service standards. Master plans provide a bridge between the Comprehensive Plan, service
delivery, future capital needs, and the CTP. The questions that are the focus of the Board's
review are:
1. Is the master plan consistent with the goals, policies, and growth projections of the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan?
2. Does the Master Plan outline the BVCP Service Standards and a plan to meet them into
the future?
3. Does the plan describe and assess capital needs and a funding plan for them?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Board:
1. Recommend to City Council acceptance of the Wastewater Utility Master Plan and
2. Approve the revisions to the BVCP Wastewater Utility Master Plan Summary.
AGENDA ITEM # 5A Page 2
After the Planning Board's review of the Wastewater Utility Master Plan, the document will be
forwarded to City Council for acceptance. The Planning Board's recommendations will be
included in the staff memorandum. The City Council will consider acceptance of the plan and
approval of the BVCP Master Plan Summary in early 2010. Revisions to the BVCP Master Plan
and Program Summaries are included in the BVCP following acceptance of plans by City
Council.
Attachment A contains the Wastewater Utility Master Plan. Attachment B contains revisions to
the BVCP Wastewater Utility Master Plan Summary.
BACKGROUND AND WASTEWATER UTILITY MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW
Boulder's wastewater collection system and the 75`x' Street WWTP serve residences and businesses
within the 26 square-mile Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA). Areas outside the WUSA
boundary are served by other utility districts or septic systems. Boulder's wastewater collection
system currently serves a population of approximately 110,000 people and 101,000 employees
associated with commercial and industrial business. Projected growth is anticipated to occur
primarily through infill and redevelopment projects resulting in an estimated 128,000 people and
156,000 employees within the WUSA through 2035.
The city's wastewater collection system consists of approximately 362 miles of sanitary sewer pipe
ranging in size between 4-inch and 60-inch diameter sewers. The system flows by gravity with the
exception of one sewage lift station, and associated force main. The Diagonal Highway Lift Station
is located at 5600 Diagonal Highway. The force main associated with the pump station is 12-inches
in diameter and approximately 800 feet in length. All sanitary sewer flow is conveyed to the city's
15`f' Street WWTP located at 4049 N 75th Street.
The 75'x' Street WWTP has a rated capacity of 25 million gallons per day (mgd). The WWTP serves
City of Boulder residences, commercial business, and light industry located within the city limits.
The WWTP has been in operation at its current location since 1968, and has undergone numerous
modifications since that time.
The most recent WWTP modification occurred in 2006/2008 when city staff completed two
significant process upgrades at the WWTP. The Liquid Stream Upgrades project was completed to
enable the plant to meet more stringent effluent discharge regulations required by the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). This project represented a transition in the
biological treatment process from a Trickling Filter/Solids Contact (TF/SC) process to the Activated
Sludge (AS) process. The project also increased the plant's hydraulic capacity from 20.5 mgd to 25
mgd. The Solids Processing improvements were completed to provide a more efficient and
sustainable solids management program.
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan was developed to serve as an overarching document for the
entire Wastewater Utility. The W WUMP addresses the WWTP and collection system C1P projects,
as well as Operation and Maintenance programs, and the water- Quality and Environmental Services
program. Utilities staff has previously completed individual master plans for each of the Utility's
major components. The WWTP Master Plan was completed in 2007. The Wastewater Collection
System Master Plan was completed in 2008 as part of the WWUMP. The Water Quality Strategic
Plan was completed in 2009.
AGENDA ITEM # 5A Page 3
The utility has developed a series of tools and processes that evaluate expenditures, revenue, and
planned capital projects. These are all evaluated using the city's Business Plan approach and by
outlining an anticipated 20-year capital improvements program. The existing and projected
flows through the wastewater system have been modeled based on the projected development
within the Boulder valley service area. Based on these projections, the wastewater utility has
anticipated that the facilities will be adequate for the projected increase on the system.
The wastewater collection system and the WWTP have adequate capacity to meet the City's
projected growth and associated development for the projected buildout period. The 20-year
Wastewater Utility CIl' has identified a number of collection system and WWTP improvements
to meet the City's goals. The collection system improvements are primarily focused on
rehabilitation of existing infrastructure, as the collection system has a very good ability to convey
the projected wastewater flows to the WWTP. The WWTP improvements are focused on two
areas: the replacement of existing aging infrastructure, and potentially pen-nit driven projects to
meet more stringent effluent discharge regulations. The WWTP is well positioned to handle the
City's flows consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan growth projections.
2. Does the master plan outline BVC'P Service Standards and a plan to meet them into the
future?
Policies 3.01 (Provision of Urban Services in the Boulder Valley), 3.02 (Definition of Adequate
Urban Facilities and Services), 3.03 (Phased Extension of Urban Service / Capital Improvements
Program) and the defined Urban Service Criteria and Standards describe the service standards,
service delivery expectations and the capital planning process.
The BVCP outlines service standards for public wastewater. The wastewater system currently
meets the service criteria and standards as outlined in the BVCP. The plan addresses the capital
projects required to maintain and improve the wastewater system into the future through the
city's Capital bnprovements Program. Standards related to personnel, training, and operation of
the water facilities are addressed in detail in the three primary planning documents that cover the
collection system, wastewater treatment plant, and water quality.
Boulder's future wastewater demands were estimated based on per capita usage for the revised
population and employment projections as part of the Wastewater Collection System Master
Plan. Modeling done at that time shows that the city's present system would provide sufficient
conveyance and treatment to the BVCP planning area through projected buildout. The current
collection system and treatment plant receive an average annual flow of approximately 14
million gallons per day. Areas of improvement may be needed based on various factors or
permitting changes, which are anticipated in the 20-year CIP. The current treatment plant
capacity is 25.0 million gallons per day on a maximum month basis, which provides adequate
capacity to meet growth past the planning period.
3. Does the plan/update describe and assess capital needs and a ;funding plan for them?
The W WUMP identifies a 20-year CIP of approximately $220 million in potential wastewater
and water quality related projects. The wastewater system is operated as an enterprise fund in
accordance with the Colorado State Constitution and City Charter. The funding sources of the
AGENDA ITEM # SA Page 6
wastewater utility fund primarily come from user fees, with the remaining income from
development fees and interest on fund balances.
As part of the development of the W WU MP, the Utilities Division developed a 20-year CIP,
rather than the traditional 6-year CIP. The 20-year CIP assists in ensuring that expansion and
rehabilitation of the system as remaining growth and annexations occur can be provided while
still meeting the reliability criteria and service standards established by the city.
A detailed analysis and condition assessment of the wastewater facilities is contained in the
respective planning documents for the collection system and treatment plant. A summary of
major projects is described in the Key Issues section, and Investment Program sections of the
WWIJMI". The projects are organized by Tiers 1, 2, or 3. The projects are also tied to the city's
business plan funding model. The recommended improvements in each area are outlined the
funding plan based on priorities, funding levels, and increases in user fees.
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) includes a comprehensive list of Wastewater Utility
projects to be completed during the 20-year planning period. These include wastewater treatment
plant capital and maintenance related projects, as well as wastewater collection system capital and
maintenance related projects. The 2010-2030 Wastewater Utility Fund CIP has numerous line items
identifying various projects for the WhVTP and the sanitary sewer collection system. The significant
CIP expenditures fall into the following three categories:
• WWTP Capital Projects
• WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
• WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
Utilities staff recently completed a WWTP Evaluation. The evaluation recommended
improvements to the following three key plant process areas: disinfection system, anaerobic
digesters, and the headworks facility. Utilities staff has hired an engineering consulting firm to
design the improvements identified in the evaluation. The design will occur in 2010, with a
projected construction bid to follow in late 2010 or early 2011. The design will include anew
ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system to replace the plant's aging gas chlorination system.
Additionally, the design will involve the replacement of the digester mixing system, and various
process and equipment improvements to the headworks facility to address reliability and
redundancy issues.
Utilities staff has identified approximately $8,400,000 in the 2010 CIP to fund these
improvements. The headworks facility upgrades are merely an interim measure to address
reliability concerns until a full replacement of the headworks facility can be completed. The
replacement of the headworks facility is the next major CIP project, and is identified in the 2016
CIP at approximately $15,000,000. Further out in the 20-year CIP are two projects identified to
address more stringent effluent discharge regulations. The first is the Liquid Stream Upgrades
Phase 2 project, identified in the 2020 CIP, which will address greater nutrient removal,
specifically more stringent nitrogen parameters. The second project, identified in the 2030 CIP,
will address potential regulations associated with endocrine disrupting compounds (F,DC's). The
need for these projects will be assessed in greater detail based on the revised CDPHE discharge
permit on a five-year cycle.
AGENDA ITEM # 5A Page 7
In addition to the WWTP capital projects listed above, there are numerous WWTP rehabilitation
projects identified in the CIP to address the plant's aging infi-astructure. These projects are listed in
the CIP in years 2016 through 2030, and have a combined cost (in 2008 dollars) of $4,500,000.
Utilities staff is in the process of reviewing the WWTP rehabilitation analysis and associated project
recommendations.
There are numerous wastewater collection system improvement projects currently identified in the
20-yr CIP. These projects were identified in the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan which
was accepted by the WRAB in December 2008. The CIP currently lists four (4) Tier 1 projects
(highest priority) and seven (7) Tier 2 projects (second highest priority). The total cost (in 2008
dollars) for these eleven projects is estimated at $28,000,000. The Tier 1 and Tier 2 project groups
are listed below with their estimated cost and projected timing:
• Tier I Projects - $5,000,000 2016 through 2021
• Tier 2 Projects - $23,000,000 - 2021 through 2030
The Action Program strategy is critical to funding the various CIP and rehabilitation projects
listed above: The Wastewater Utility has a tremendous investinent is facility infrastructure to
convey and treat the city's waste streams. A combination of pen-nit driven projects and
rehabilitation and replacement projects are necessary to maintain the level of service currently
provided to the corrimunity.
CONCLUSION:
In answering the questions before the Planning Board, staff believes that:
I . The Wastewater Utility Master Plan is consistent with the goals, policies and growth
projections of the BVCP.
2. The Wastewater Utility Master Plan outlines the BVCP service standards, and identifies
the needs to ensure adequate compliance into the future.
3. The Wastewater Utility Master Plan identifies potential capital projects and anticipated
costs. Although current funding levels for all improvements are inadequate to address all
these needs, this plan will be used to assist in prioritization of funding in the Wastewater
Utility Enterprise Fund.
Approved By:
~ m
I)avi Driskell
Executive Director of Community Planning and Sustainability
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Wastewater Utility Master Plan
B. Revisions to the BVCP Master Plan Summary
C. Summary Minutes from the May 2009 Water Resources Advisory Board Meetings.
D. Applicable BVCP Policies
AGENDA ITEM # 5A Page 8
A`tachnlcnt A
1 Boulder
W.- a....stewater Util t
17
I
R
STE ~P,;,,L
1
low.
A;, k
i 1 -S~lrr . 1~
• .u
1o- t .~Cm,.~Ir - ~:1't
Jlf► T I w IM
'pT f 1 -
%ow■r" "00&,
1 1 ' ,~'rti .t l t.
.7. T
lie!
ri,y
W_ "A I
PAPJIII~
Wastewater Utility Master Plan L~j W
Table of Contents
Executive Summaty i
Introduction i
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan ii
WWTP Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................................................
.................ii
Future WWTP Modifications ........................................................................................................................................................................
........iii
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan iu
Collection System lknalysis ......................................................................................................................................................................
..............iii
Recommended Collection System Improvements ............................................................................................................................................iv
Collection System Operations and Maintenance ..............................................................................................................................................iv
Collection System Rehabilitation Budgeting ..........................................................................................v
Water Quality Strategic Plan V
WASP Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................................
........vi
Industrial Pretreatment Program ..................................................................................................................................................................
........vi
Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program .....................................................................................................................................vii
Wastewater Utility CIP viii
WWTP Capital Projects
WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
WWCS Rehabilitation Projects .....................................................................................................................................................................
........ix
WASP Funding is
Investment Program Options X
Fiscally Constrained Plan ........................................................................................................................................................................
................x
Action Plan 3ci
Vision Plan ......................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................xi
Introduction and Background 1
Wastewater Utility Planning Process and Goals 2
Water Quality Strategic Plan Goals ...............................................................................................................................................................
........3
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan Goals ................................................................................................................................................3
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Goals .............................................................................................................................................4
Current Environment 5
Wastewater Treatment PJant Facility .......................................5
Wastewater Collection System .....................................................................................................................................................................
..........7
Water Quality and Environmental Services .........................................................................................................................................................8
Key Policies and Issues .............................................................................................................................13
Guiding Principles and Policies .....................................................................................................................................13
Principle #1 - Protect Public I Iealth and Safety ..............................................................................................................................................14
Principle #2 - Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment ...............................................................................................16
Principle 43 Maximizc the use of the Utility's Funds ..................................................................................................................................18
BVCP Urban Service Criteria and Standards ....................................................................................................................................................18
Wastewater Utility Key Issues
19
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan ..........................................................................................................................................................19
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan .......................................................................................................................................................27
Water Quality Strategic Pian ......................................................................................................................................................................
...........34
Investment Program 43
Investment Strategy .........................................................................................................................................................43
Wastewater Utility CIP 43
WWTP Capital Projects .............................................................................................................................................................................
...........43
WWTP Rehabilitation Projects ......................................................................................................................................................................
......44
WWCS Rehabilitation Projects ......................................................................................................................................................................
.....44
W SP Funding ..............................................................................................44
Investment Program Options 45
Fiscally Constrained Plan .........................................................................................................................................................................
.............45
October 2009
Wastewater Utility Master Plan ~jj "
Action Plan ......................................................................................................................................................................................
........................46
Vision Plan ......................................................................................................................................................................................
.........................46
Levels of Service 47
Investment Program Recommendations 47
OcCober 2009
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknkowledge the particpation of the following individuals. Their insights,
information and discussions have contributed to the accuracy and completeness of the
Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP).
City of Boulder
/ Director of Public Works for Utilities - Ned Williams
/ Utilities Planning and Project Management Coordinator Robert Harberg
/ Transportation and Utilities Maintenance Coordinator - Felix Gallo
► Water Quality and Environmental Services Coordinator - Bret Linenfelser
/ Wastewater Treatment Coordinator Chris Douville
/ Utilities Project Manager -Douglas Sullivan
► Utilities Project Manager - Randy Earley
Engineering Review Manager - Jeff Arthur
/ Civil Engineer - Steve Buckbee
► Gravity Systems Maintenance Supervisor - Mike Emarine
1 Stormwater Quality Specialist - Donna Scott
► Industrial Pre-treatment Manager - Ridge Dorsey
/ Water Quality Laboratory - Ed Mead
HDR Engineering
► Rich Thornton, PE -Project Manager
/ Jeff Blank, PE - GIS and Modeling Lead
► Bryon Wood, Er - Project Engineer/Modeling
/ Alex Palmetier - Operations and Maintenance Lead
/ David Spencer - Replacement and Rehabilitaion Lead
/ Jeroen Olthof, PE - Quality Control Reviewer
Water Resources Advisory Board
/ Bart Miller
/ Robin Byers
/ Kelly DiNatale
/ William DeOreo
/ Susan Lott
October ?OG9
ACIEVINI.
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
(page intentionally left blank,
October 2009
Wastewater Utility Master Plan L'Y
List of Acronyms
ADWF Average Dry Weather Flow
AWWA American Water Works Association
BMP Best Management Practice
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BVCP Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
CCTV Closed-Circuit'I'elevision
CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
C.DPS Colorado Discharge Permit System
CPR Code of Federal Regulations
CIP Capital Improvement Program
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
DAFT Dissolved Air Flotation'I'l-ickening
DCS Design and Construction Standards
DTN4R-QA Discharge Monitoring Report-Quality Assurance
DRCOG Denver Regional Council of Governments
EDC Endocrine Disrupting Compounds
FOG Fats, Oil and Grease
; TR Full `l'ime Equivalent
GFAA Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
G1S Geographic Information System
GRE Grease Removal Equipment
IIVAC I leating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP114S Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
IPT Industrial Pretreatment
IT Information Technology
L IMS Laboratory Information Management System
L.WM Liquid Waste Management
KAHL Maximum Allowable I-Ieadworks Loading
mgd million gallons per day
mg/l inilligrams per liter
October 2009
L
Wastewater Utility Master Plan L~i ;L
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
NP Nonylphenol
O&M Operations and Maintenance
P&DS Planning and Development Services
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PQL Practical Quantitation Limitation
QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control
SIU Significant Industrial User
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TIN Total Inorganic Nitrogen
TIN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
UMMS Ihilities Maintenance and Management System
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
UV Ultra Violet
WEF Water Environment Federation
WEL Wastewater and Fnvironmental Laboratory
WQF_S Water Quality and Environmental Services
WQSP Water Quality Strategic Plan
WRAB Water Resources Advisory Board
WUSA Wastewater Utility Service Area
WWCSMP Wastewater Collection System Master Plan
WWTPMP Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan
WWUMP Wastewater Utility Master Plan
October 2009
:J
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) is the overarching planning document that is
intended to present key issues, programs, projects and associated budgets for the collection
system, wastewater treatment plant and water quality programs. The WWUMP is supported by
three primary planning documents for the Wastewater Utility: the Wastewater Collection System
Master Plan (WWCSMP), the Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan (WWTPMP), and the
Water Quality Strategic Plan (WASP).
Boulder's wastewater collection system and the 75`t' Street WWTP serve residences and
businesses within the 26 sq. mile Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA). Areas outside the
WUSA boundary are served by other utility districts or septic systems. Boulder's wastewater
collection system currently serves a population of approximately 110,000 people and 101,000
employees associated with commercial and industrial
business. Projected growth is anticipated to occur
primarily through in-fill and redevelopment projects
resulting in an estimated 128,000 people and 156,000
employees within the WUSA.
Gvnbrrref
A series of guiding principles were used to defusc the
Faurmile
planning process for the Utility. These guiding _ WWTP
principles are based on Boulder's planning approach
GabseCrrck j, 'i
to community sustainability through evaluating
social, environmental and economic impacts
associated with various program and projects within l~
the city. Specifically, the three guiding principles for
Barldcr Crnek ,
the. \X/NXT) NIIP are: J -
1 Protect Public Health and Safety - svurhRoulaerCteek
Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the
Environment
Boulder's Wastewater Utility Service Area
1 Maximize the use of the Wastewater_ Utility's Funds encompasses 26 sq. mi. and contains five
interceptor sewer basins
Oclubc' 2009 i
Wastewater Utility Master Plan g,a-o~i"
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan
The Wastewater Treatment Plan Master Plan (WWTPMP) documents past decisions, the
current facility, and presents the approach that has been used to reach decisions on process
selection and introduce some future decisions that will be facing the utility. To continue to
provide the level of service required by federal regulations and match the expectations of the
community presented in the BVCP Goals, ongoing improvements to the treatment facility are
necessary.
The WWTP was upgraded in 2008 to meet future wastewater treatment capacity demands and
new ammonia--nitrogen limits that were incorporated in the CDPS permit. The upgrades
included improvements to both the liquid stream treatment and solids dewatering processes
(Phase 1). The current treatment capacity is 25.0 million gallons per day (mgd) on a maximum
month basis and provides adequate capacity to meet population growth past 2025 (the current
average annual flow rate is approximately 15 mgd). The Phase 1 improvements also kept the
future total nitrogen discharge at or below the current level. The solids dewatering process
improvements increased solids from the liquid stream treatment process and reduced the
volume of dewatcred solids that must be transported from the WWTP site.
Phase 1B construction, currently planned for 2010-2011, will include a UV disinfection system,
solids stabilization (anaerobic digester) improvements, and possibly improvements to the
headworks facility. Phase 2 construction, scheduled for 2020, includes expansion of the
bioreactor with improvements to biologically remove nitrate and phosphorus.
WWTP Evaluation
Even though the City of Boulder recently completed $45 million in major improvements to the
liquid and solids handling processes at the 75th Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, new
discharge permit requirements are expected in 2010 and will require bringing the entire facility
up to the same level of treatment capacity. As such, the City is currently in the process of
evaluating the WWTP's treatment process capabilities - specifically focusing on the following
three areas:
/ Evaluate the plant's anaerobic digestion process (capacity, mixing, heating, etc.) and
recommend improvements to provide greater capacity and operational stability.
/ Evaluate UV disinfection alternatives to replace the existing gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide
systems.
/ Evaluate the WWTP's ability to meet the City's upcoming CDPHE permit effluent.
October 2009 ii
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
The WWII" Evaluation project was completed in October 2009. The evaluation included
recommendations at various plant processes including the following:
• A new UV (ultraviolet) Disinfection system to replace the gaseous chlorine and sulfur
dioxide systems.
• New digester mixing to replace the existing gas mixing system.
• Headworks improvements including bar screen replacement, grit conveyance, and screenings
and grit removal.
The City is in the process of selecting an engineering consultant to provide the design services.
The design is scheduled for 2010, with an anticipated construction bid in late 2010 or early
2011. The construction is estimated at $8,000,000 to $9,000,000.
Future WWTP Modifications
Discharge permit limits are revisited every five years, and it is anticipated that some level of TIN
and phosphorus removal may be required by future discharge permits. Additionally, the Boulder
WWTP may be required to remove microconstituents...Microconstituents include very small
particles such as endocrine disrupting compounds and disinfection byproducts. Other future
projects identified in the CIP include modifications to, or the replacement of the Ileadworks
facility.
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan
The WWCSMP is a comprehensive planning document that assesses the conveyance capacity of
Boulder's sanitary sewer system and identifies recommendations with associated capital cost
estimates to resolve conveyance capacity deficiencies.
Collection System Analysis
The purposes of the conveyance system analysis were to 1) document the analysis of the
existing collection system during dry weather and wet weather flows and 2) to identify and.
characterize hydraulic capacity issues. By analyzing the existing collection system under existing
and buildout flow conditions, problem areas were identified for both land use scenarios.
The primary source of data that was used for the collection system hydraulic model and analysis
was Boulder's sanitary sewer Geographic Information System (CIS) layers for manholes and
sewer pipes. The collection system pipes with identified capacity limitations, established from
October 2009 iii
4" 7
Wastewater Utility Master Plan 'rN
the model results, were examined to identify lilzely hydraulic issues under the various flow
scenarios. There are a total of 138 pipes in the analyzed collection system with hydraulic
deficiencies identified. A detailed problem identification and characterization process was
completed to better understand the nature and extent of these problems. The hydraulic
problems were separated into two categories: Type A and Type B. Type A problems consisted
of a series of under capacity pipes that were hydraulically connected to one another. Type B
problems are isolated hydraulic restrictions that are not hydraulically connected to other
problem locations or series of problem pipes.
Recommended Collection System Improvements
The recommended system improvements were developed to resolve the existing and future
capacity issues are shown on the following figure. This figure includes both improvements that
address Type A and Type B problems.
The recommended improvements were grouped in three tiers to establish implementation
priority:
► Tier 1 projects address TypeA problems and have the highest priority;
/ Tier 2 projects also address Type A problems but have lower priority compared to Tier 1;
/ Tier 3 projects address Type B problems which have the lowest priority.
The improvement priorities were assigned based on a number of qualitative factors including
the flow conditions in which they occur (existing versus future), extent of the problem, potential
for sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and service lateral backups, ease of constructability, and
relative benefit over other improvement projects. The resulting implementation priorities and
associated estimates of capital construction cost are shown in the following table.
Improvement Priority Capital Construction Cost
Tier 1 $4,977,000
Tier II $22,664,000
Tier III $2,296,000
$29,937.000
Collection System Operations and Maintenance
The WWCSMP project team reviewed the collection system operations and maintenance
(O&M) procedures. The purpose of this O&M procedure was to review the current state of
collection system O&M practices and evaluate potential increases in service levels due to trends
October 2009 iv
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Li LCI 4
in the regulatory environment in the western United States. In addition, the 2008 QualServe
peer review program and self assessment survey evaluated the Utility's overall performance,
efficiency and customer service as well as maintaining industry best management practices.
Both the QualServ program and the WWCSMP O&M review found that the Gravity System's
Maintenance group operates and maintains the collection system such that it continues to
provide a high level of service to its existing customers.
Collection System Rehabilitation Budgeting
Boulder developed a methodology for determining the mileage and cost of the 20-year CIP for
rehabilitating wastewater pipes and manholes. This methodology was based on spreadsheet
model that characterized pipe failure as a function of time to assist in forecasting long-term
budgetary needs for rehabilitation of sanitary sewer pipe. This analysis resulted in a
recommendation for an annual manhole and sewer pipe rehabilitation budget of $850,000. This
methodology was given an independent review which recommended that an annual sewer
rehabilitation budget of $500,000 would be adequate for the 20-year planning period.
Water Quality Strategic Plan
The Water. Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP) has been developed, and will be implemented by the
City's Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES) Group within the city of Boulder
Public Works, Utilities Division. The Industrial Pretreatment JPT) and Laboratory Services
programs are included in this WQSP as they are directly related to the wastewater utility
planning effort.
The purpose of the WQSP is to develop clear and concise water quality goals, develop
recommendations and performance measures to achieve these goals, and provide a process to
address current and future water quality challenges. The WQES Group is funded through the
city's Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater enterprise funds and supports the Utilities Division
water services with seven programs.
Water quality goals were developed using an inventory of existing water quality goal statements
found in the City's master plans, policies, and regulations, starting with the BVCP. From this
exercise, five goal statements were developed and include:
/ Provide safe and high quality drinking water.
Manage pollutants from wastewater and other point-sources.
October ?009 v
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
► Manage pollutants from stormwater and other non-point sources.
/ Protect, preserve and restore natural water systems.
/ Conserve water resources.
WQSP Recommendations
The recommendations developed for the WQSP are based primarily on the objective of
adopting citywide water quality goals, and integrating these goals into planning and policy
instruments. In addition, the recommendations address strategies to meet an unprecedented
number of new or proposed federal and state water quality regulations. The recommendations
include:
/ Evaluate and update policies in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan to incorporate water
quality goals. WQES staff will review and recommend updates to the BVCP to ensure
incorporation of water quality goals. The BVCP is scheduled to be updated in 2010.
► Perform analyses on City plans, policies and projects to identify gaps in meeting water
quality goals. WQES staff will review relevant plans, policies, and projects, such as master
plans, design and construction standards, and the Boulder Revised Code to: 1) ensure that
the City complies with all state and federal laws and regulations on water quality and
environmental protections; and, 2) meet water quality goals.
/ Develop annual work plans and water quality reports. Annual work plans and reports will be
developed for each of the seven WQES Group programs. These programs include:
Stormwater Quality, Water Quality Education, Water Conservation, Industrial Pretreatment,
Drinking Water Quality, Water Quality Planning and Laboratory Services. Staff will use the
work plans to direct program activities specific to the WQSP goals.
► Prepare for future water quality regulations. WQES staff will prepare for future water
quality regulations, ensure regulatory compliance, and incorporate capital improvement
requirements needed to meet regulations in the City's budget planning process.
Industrial Pretreatment Program
The City's IPT program is part of the Public Works, Utilities, Water WQES Group. The
WQES Group serves as an in-house technical resource for Utilities and other City departments
to help maintain compliance with various levels of regulations. The current, primary purpose of
the city of Boulder 1P`I~ program is to control or limit the discharge of toxic or hazardous waste
into the sanitary sewers and thus the City's 75th Strcct WWTP. The primary objectives of the
IPT program are described as follows:
/ To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the city of Boulder wastewater collection and
treatment system that could interfere with plant operation.
October 2009 vi
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
/ To prevent the pass-through of untreated pollutants into Boulder Creek.
/ To improve recycling capabilities of sludge.
/ To protect the general health and safety of wastewater treatment plant workers and
downstream users.
1 To encourage pollution prevention as a feasible alternative to treatment and disposal.
IPT Gaps, Deficiencies and Recommendations
In addition to the ongoing responsibilities of the IPT Program, special studies and/or additional
programs are necessary to further characterize industrial and commercial discharges to the city's
sanitary sewer system sources, support compliance with WWTP discharge permit requirements
and collect data and information in preparation for future regulatory requirements. The
following programs or studies should be evaluated and modified or initiated as necessary.
1 Fats, Oil and Grease Program
o Evaluate potential modifications to the existing FOG program and regulations.
/ Industrial Waste Survey
o Consider initiating a comprehensive industrial waste surveys.
/ Business Inventory Mailing
o Send out business questionnaires to determine if targeted businesses continue to be non-significant or
move into a significant industrial user category.
Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program
The WEL Program currently provides broader support for the WWTP including biosolids
analysis, field services including water quality monitoring and management of the laboratory
information management system (LIMS) and database system. WEL program responsibilities
will continue to expand as increasingly complex and interrelated water quality regulations
develop.
WEL Program Gaps, Deficiencies and Recommendations
In addition to the ongoing responsibilities of the WEL Program, special studies and/or_
additional programs are necessary to further characterize WWTP performance, characterize
water quality conditions in Boulder Creek and provide compliance support for State and Federal
regulations. It is recommended that the following programs or studies should be evaluated and
modified or initiated as necessary.
/ Evaluate Laboratory Size and Function
o Perform Business Case evaluation on the, Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program
/ Staffing Analysis
OcCcber ?oO~J vii
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
o Review staffing levels compared to other municipalities.
Laboratory Maintenance
o Ongoing funding for equipment replacement and laboratory upgrades
Wastewater Utility CIP
The Wastewater Utility Master. Plan (WWUMP) includes a comprehensive list of Wastewater
Utility projects to be completed during the 20-year planning period. These include wastewater
treatment plant capital and maintenance related projects, as well as wastewater collection system
capital and maintenance related projects. The 2010-2030 Wastewater Utility Fund CIP has
numerous line items identifying various projects for the WWTP and the sanitary sewer
collection system. The significant CIP expenditures and Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP)
funding fall into the following categories:
WWTP Capital Projects
/ WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
/ WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
1 WASP Funding
WWTP Capital Projects
There are five (5) significant WWTP capital projects currently identified in the 20-yr CIP. The
total cost of these projects (in 2008 dollars) is estimated at $40,000,000. These projects, their
estimated escalated cost, and their projected timing are listed below:
/ UV Disinfection - $4,400,000 - 2010
► Digester Modifications - $4,000,000 - 2010
/ Headworks Improvements - $15,600,000 - 2016
/ Phase 2 Improvements (Denitrification & Phosphorus removal) - $15,000,000 - 2020
/ Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC's) removal - $19,000,000 - 2030
Utilities staff is currently completing a WWTP Evaluation project which is an analysis of the UV
Disinfection, Digester Modifications, and Headworks Improvements projects. This analysis will
present several process alternatives for the various facilities, their respective estimated costs, and
,vill provide a recommendation regarding their overall priority.
WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
In addition to the WWTP capital projects listed above, there are numerous WWTP
rehabilitation projects identified in the CIP to address the plant's aging infrastructure. 't'hese
projects are listed in the CIP in years 2016 through 2030, and have a combined cost (in 2008
October 2009 viii
- --rte
Wastewater Utility Master Plan - "``r
M--
dollars) of $8,500,000. Utilities staff will continue to review the WWTP Rehabilitation analysis
annually to identify the estimated tuning for the various rehabilitation projects within the 6-year
CIP.
WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
Lastly, there are numerous wastewater collection system improvement projects currently
identified in the 20-yr CIP. These projects were identified in the Wastewater Collection System
Master Plan which was accepted by the WRAB in December 2008. The CIP currently lists four
(4) Tier 1 projects (highest priority) and seven (7) Tier 2 projects (second highest priority). The
total cost (in 2008 dollars) for these eleven projects is estimated at $28,000,000. The Tier 1 and
Tier 2 project groups are listed below with their estimated cost and projecting timing:
0 Tier 1 Projects - $5,000,000 - 2016 through 2021
/ Tier 2 Projects - $23,000,000 - 2021 through 2030
WQSP Funding
The Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP) is implemented by the Water Quality and
Environmental Services (WQES) Group. This include recommendations associated with the
Water Quality Strategic Plan, Industrial Pretreatment Program and Wastewater and
Environmental Laboratory Program. These recommendations provide a strategy that focuses
on maintaining and operating existing programs and planning for future regulations and their
implications on City regulatory requirements.
The WQSP elements, including Industrial Pretreatment, Wastewater Environmental Laboratory
and associated capital projects, are currently being approached in the following funding manor.
It should be noted that this element of the WWUMP plan is more of an opportunistic program
such that if funds are available, some recommendations can be moved forward as described in
the Action Plan recommendations within the WQSP document.
► WQSP Recommendations
o Requires a $50,000 one-time investment, a $94,000 on-going adjustment to base,
and an additional 1.0 FTE.
/ Industrial Pretreatment Program
o Requires a $30,000 one-time investment.
/ Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program
o Requires a $30,000 one-time investment and $30,000 ongoing adjustment to base
plus 0.5 FTE
1 Near Term Capital Improvements
October 2009 ix
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
R`il
Li I
o Requires a $196,000 one-time investment plus an ongoing $124,000 adjustment to
base and an additional 1.5 FTF
Investment Program Options
Boulder's Wastewater Utility is financed through an enterprise fund through monthly payments
from the city's rate payers. The Wastewater Utility addresses projects both at the WWTP and
also in the wastewater collection system. The funding is allocated to a variety of projects and
programs according to the facilities' greatest needs. City staff prioritizes the various projects in
planning level studies and evaluations, and then identifies the projects and their associated
schedule and fee in the CIP.
The WWUMP presents three Utility investment programs based on different levels of funding
including the following:
/ Fiscally Constrained Plan
/ Action Plan
► Vision Plan
These programs implement the policy direction of the WWUM-P at the three funding levels.
Fiscally Constrained Plan
The Fiscally Constrained Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes a Wastewater
Utility Fund rate increase of two percent (2%) in 2010, and a three percent (3%) annual increase
in years 2011 through 2030. Under the Fiscally Constrained program, there are numerous
programs and projects which would be either eliminated or have reduced funding. These
include the following:
► Either the UV Disinfection or the Digester Modifications project (both scheduled for
construction in 2010) would need to be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
0 The 2016 Headworks Improvements project would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
► The 2020 Phase 2 Improvements project (Nutrient Removal) would be eliminated from the
20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address MPH permit issues
► The 2030 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC) removal project would be eliminated
from the 20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address CDPI lE permit issues
0 The WWTP Rehabilitation funding would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
The Wastewater Collection System Replacement projects (Tier 1 and Tier 2) would be
eliminated from the 20-year CIP
October 2009 x
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
► The Sanitary Sewer System Rehabilitation funding would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
1 Future budget supplementals would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
Action Plan
The Action Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes an annual Wastewater
Utility Fund rate increase of four percent (4%o) in years 2016 through 2030, with the following
exceptions. The Action Plan will follow the recommended 6-year (2010-2015) CIP which
includes the following rate increases: 2010=2%, 2011-2012=3%, 2013=4%, and 2014-
1015=6%. There is one period of increased funding which is necessary to maintain a positive
fund balance in 2030. Two consecutive years (2019 and 2020) of nine percent (9%) rate
increases would be required to fund the Nutrient Removal project. Under the Action Plan,
there are a few programs and projects which would be either eliminated or have reduced
funding. These include the following:
/ The 2030 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC) removal project would be eliminated
from the 20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address CDPHE permit issues
/ The Wastewater Collection System Replacement projects (Tier 2) would be eliminated from
the 20-year CIP
Vision Plan
The Vision Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes an annual Wastewater Utility
Fund rate increase of four percent (4%) in years 2010 through 2030 with the following
exceptions. There are three periods of increased funding necessary to maintain a positive fund
balance in 2030. Two consecutive years (2014 and 2015) of eight percent (8%) rate increases
would be required to fund the Headworks Improvements project. Two consecutive years (2019
and 2020) of eight percent (8%) rate increases would be required to fund the Nutrient removal
Improvements project. Two consecutive years (2029 and 2030) of eight percent (8%) rate
increases would be required to fiend the EDC removal project. Under the Vision Plan, there are
no programs that would have reduced funding.
Ocloir 2009 xi
i
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Oage intentionally left blank)
October 2009 xii
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) is the overarching planning document for
Boulder's Wastewater Utility (Utility). The purpose of the WWUMP is to present key issues,
programs, projects and associated budgets
for the collection system, wastewater wwUMP
treatment plant and water quality programs.
The intent of the WWUMP is to present
information regarding the Utility operations,
programs and funding plans such that
department coordinators, policy makers, and The Wastewater Utility Master Plan is the overarching
interested citizens can better understand planning document for the Utility
Boulder's Wastewater Utility program. The
WWUMP is supported by three primary planning documents for the Wastewater Utility: the
Wastewater_ Collection System Master Plan (WWCSMP), the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Master Plan (WWTPMP), and the Water Quality
Strategic Plan (WQSP). These three supporting
plans contain the technical analysis and
recommendations that are used to develop
recommendations supporting the operations of the
GunAarml
city's wastewater utility. Future updates to the
WWUIVMP and the three supporting documents are
76th SUeet
anticipated to be done concurrently. Typically - WVTP
utility master plans are updated on a 5-year basis. ` 1- '
Goa.'e Creek y~
This update period can be extended if the level of
development and infrastructure improvements is 1"'(
not significant.
Boulder Creek".
Boulder's wastewater collection system and the
O
75"' Street WWTP serve residences and businesses so,tl,Bo,AdcrCmelt
within the Wastewater Utility Service Area
(WUSA). The WUSA is comprised of Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Area I (within Boulder's Wastewater Utility Service Area
encompasses 26 sq.mi. and contains fide
Boulder city limits) and Area II (areas adjacent to interceptor sewer basins
the city limits that may be subject to annexation in
Qrto~er2C09 t
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
the future). Areas outside the WUSA bmin.dary are served by other utility districts or septic
systems. The resulting LNUSA contains approximately 16,340 acres (26 sq. irides).
Boulder's wastewater collection system currently serves a population of approximately
110,000 people and 101,000 employees associated with commercial and industrial business.
Projected growth is anticipated to occur primarily through in-fill and redevelopment projects
resulting in an estimated 128,000 people and 156,000 employees within the WUSA.
Wastewater Utility Planning Process and Goals
The mission of the Utilities Division is to provide quality water services, as desired by the
community, in a manner which emphasizes efficient management of fiscal and natural
resources, and protects human and environmental health. In general, the planning process
for the Wastewater Utility (Utility) focuses on identif ng opportunities that continue the
high level of service provided to its customers and evaluating the associated cost of the
opportunities. The opportunities and recommendations resulting from the planning process
take the form of capital construction projects; system rehabilitation and repair projects;
preparing systems and operational processes that anticipate future regulations; and evaluating
staffing needs. Wastewater and water quality planning projects, such as the WWTMP,
WQSP, and WWCSMP, are the primary tools that provide the detailed analysis that result in
the opportunities and recommendations contained within the WW UMP.
The three wastewater and water quality planning documents also include a financial element
as they provide costs associated with their specific recommendations. The cost implications
with these water quality and wastewater service opportunities are then evaluated against
annual operating budgets for the Utility in a Business Plan approach. The Business Planning
approach classifies the various projects and programs encompassed by the Utility according
to criteria of 1) essential 2) desirable and 3) discretionary. As many of the programs and
projects for the Utility are driven by water quality regulations, there are very few items that
are classified as desirable or discretionary. However, those projects and programs that are
identified as desirable or discretionary have a lower implementation priority when it comes
to the budgeting process.
Implementation options for the various programs and projects are evaluated at three funding
levels, according to a Fiscally Constrained Plan, Action Plan, and Vision Plan which are
defined as:
October 2009 2
Wastewater Utility Master Plan poi`
/ Fiscally Constrained Plan (Current Funding) - is a prioritized, refocused service plan
within existing budget targets.
Action Plan - the next step of service expansion or restoration that should be taken
when funding is available either within current revenue sources or if new sources are
approved.
/ Vision Plan - the complete set of services and facilities desired by the community and
aligned with values and policies, with alternative proposals to fund them.
Another valuable source of information relating to improvement opportunities within the
Utility is from the QualServe program offered by the American Water Works Association
(AWWA) and the Water Environment Federation (WE, F). The QualServe program is a peer
review program, coupled with a self-assessment survey, performed in late 2008 to assist the
Utilities Division in evaluating the division's overall performance, efficiency, and customer
service as well as maintaining industry best management practices. Results from this peer
review are included in the WQSP, WWTPMP, and the WWCSMP sections of the WWUMP.
Water Quality Strategic Plan Goals
The WQSP is the first comprehensive planning
effort to address water_ quality policies and
priorities for the city of Boulder (City). The
purpose of the WQSP is to develop clear and
concise water quality goals, develop
recommendations and performance measures t,
achieve these goals, and provide a process to
address current and future water quality
challenges. Goals for the water quality stratcV;ic
plan are to:
lNatr~r' u`!!.?i+ty Sir.rfegic 1-'iari is a corrtprel!ensive
planning effort to address water quality policies and
► Provide safe and high-quality drinking water. priorities for the city and its water facilities like Barker
Reservoir shown here.
/ Manage pollutants from wastewater and
other_ point sources.
► Manage pollutants from stormwater and other non-point sources.
► Protect, preserve and restore natural water systems.
► Conserve water resources.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan Goals
The city's Wastewater Treatment Master Plan (WWTPMP) was completed in June 2007 with
the purpose and goal to document past decisions, describe the current treatment facility, and
October 2009
A
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
LA J
present recommendations for improving the facility in the future. The ` VITl'MP also
documents how the recommended improvements were selected and how these
improvements will allow Boulder to meet anticipated future effluent regulations and effluent
water quality requirements. The key tasks associated with this included the following:
► Identify current wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) improvements and how they
conform to City and County policies and goals;
/ Describe how the WWTP is currently operated and compare to historic operations;
/ Discuss the economic impacts of the recommended WWTP improvements;
/ Provide an implementation plan for improvements;
/ Provide strategies for measuring performance of systems;
► Describe anticipated future requirements and develop an implementation plan.
Additionally, the WWTPMP discusses the relationship of the WWTP improvements in
conjunction with the city and Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) goals. These
include: ,
► Improving and protecting water quality is
r
Reducing waste and improving recycling and reuse y r
of biosolids~,
/ Protecting the general health and safety of plant i i
workers
/ Meeting future wastewater capacity demands `ti IRA
► Creating a sustainable community through;
o Improved energy efficiency '
o Minimization of greenhouse gas emissions Boulder's Wastewater treatment Facility
o Cost savings
o N inimizing chemical usage
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Goals
The primary goals of the WWCSMP are to identify capacity problems within the collection
system and develop a prioritized list of recommended capital projects to resolve the capacity
limitations. These goals were met through the following tasks:
/ Develop land use projections within the Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA) and
associated wastewater flows
/ Develop a computer model of the sewer collection system based on the city's Geographic
Information System (GIS) data
/ Analyze the existing collection system under existing and future land use conditions
October 2009 4
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
~I
/ Identify capacity problems within the collection system
/ Develop improvement alternatives and identify recommended improvement projects
/ Prioritize the recommended improvements and develop planning level estimates of
capital construction cost.
Current Environment
Boulder's wastewater treatment plan and collection system arc continuously being improved
through planning, system rehabilitation and maintenance, and capital improvement projects.
This section provides an overview of the current environment of the wastewater system
through a general summary of treatment and collection system improvements that have
occurred since the previous master plans were published.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility
The City of Boulder 75th Street WWTP is located at 4049 N. 75t1' Street in the SW 'A of
Section 13, T1N, R70W, Boulder_ County, Colorado. Treated effluent from the WWTP is
discharged to Segment 9 of Boulder Creek. The WWTP is defined as a major facility and
operates under a CDPS permit (Number CO-0024147) dated February 1, 2003, which
expired on January 31, 2008. The permit .has been administratively extended and the renewal
date is currently in review with CDPIJE.
The WWTP was upgraded in 2008 to meet future wastewater treatment capacity demands
and new ammonia-nitrogen limits that were incorporated in the CDPS permit. The upgrades
included improvements to both the liquid stream treatment and solids dewatering processes
(Phase 1). The current treatment capacity is 25.0 million gallons per day (mgd) on a
maximum month basis and provides adequate capacity to meet population growth past 2025
(the current average annual flow rate is approximately 15 mgd). The Phase 1 improvements
also kept the future total nitrogen discharge at or below the current level. The solids
dewatering process improvements increased solids from the liquid stream treatment process
and reduced the volume of de-watered solids that must be transported from the WWTP site.
The WWTP is continuously looking toward ways to optimize operations; including energy
improvements. The City is currently in the process of constructing a one megawatt
(1,000,000 watts) solar photovoltaic (PV) system, located at the WWTP. The PV system is
scheduled to be operational in December 2009, or early 2010. The PV system is located on
approximately five acres, and will provide approximately 15 percent off the average daily
power required at the WWTP. City staff has estimated that annual energy savings will he
approximately x$43,000.
5
October 7009
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
'r
Wastewater utility Permitting
The City's WWTP is permitted by the Colorado Department of Public Heath and
Environment (CDPHE). The city is required to meet various effluent limit parameters
identified in the Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) discharge permit. This permit
is typically renewed on a five-year cycle. It is expected that CDPHE will initiate the permit
renewal process in the first quarter of 2010. City staff expects the final permit will be
completed in the third or the fourth quarter of 2010.
It is expected that the new permit will require more stringent effluent limit parameters such
as ammonia, metals, and additional nitrogen series. New regulations often result in the need
for WWTP improvement projects which provide a greater level of treatment. City staff does
not anticipate that this new permit will require significant plant modifications.
WWTP Evaluation
Even though the City of Boulder recently completed $45 million in major improvements to
the liquid and solids handling processes at the 75th Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, new
discharge permit requirements are expected in 2010 and will require bringing the entire
facility up to the same level of treatment capacity. As such, the City is currently in the
process of evaluating the WWTP's treatment process capabilities - specifically focusing on
the following three areas:
/ Evaluate the plant's anaerobic digestion process (capacity, mixing, heating, etc.) and
recommend improvements to provide greater capacity and operational stability.
/ Evaluate UV disinfection alternatives to replace the existing gas chlorine and sulfur
dioxide systems.
Evaluate the WWTP's ability to meet the City's upcoming CDPHE permit effluent.
The WWTP Evaluation project was completed in October 2009. The evaluation included
recommendations at various plant processes including the following:
• Anew UV (ultraviolet) Disinfection system to replace the gaseous chlorine and sulfur
dioxide systems.
• New digester mixing to replace the existing gas mixing system.
• Headworks improvements including bar screen replacement, grit conveyance, and
screenings and grit removal.
October 2009 6
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
W
The City is in the process of selecting an engineering consultant to provide the design
services. The design is scheduled for 2010, with an anticipated construction bid in late 2010
or early 2011. The construction is estimated at $8,000,000 to $9,000,000.
Phase 1B construction, currently planned for 2010-2011, will include a UV disinfection
system, solids stabilization (anaerobic digester) improvements, and possibly improvements
to the headworks facility. Phase 2 construction, scheduled for 2020, includes expansion of
the bioreactor with improvements to biologically remove nitrate and phosphorus.
Wastewater Collection System
Boulder's wastewater collection system and the 75`" Street WWTP serve residences and
businesses within the WUSA. The V USA is comprised of BVCP) Area I (within Boulder
city limits) and Area II (areas adjacent to the city limits that may be subject to annexation in
the future). Areas outside the WUSA boundary are served by other utility districts or septic
systems. The resulting WUSA contains approximately 16,340 acres (26 sq. miles).
There are five sewer basins that contribute wastewater flow to the primary collector and
interceptor system and ultimately to the WWTP. The five sewer basins and associated
collector sewers are listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1 - SEWER BASINS
Sewer Basin Area (acres)
Gunbarrel 2803
Fourmile 1677
Goose Creek 5076
Boulder Creek 5234
South Boulder Creek 1551
Total 16,430
The wastewater collection system includes gravity sewers, diversion manholes, one siphon
and two lift station/forcemain systems that convey wastewater flow from the five sewer
basins to the WWTP. Major features and gravity sewers by pipe size that compose the
existing system are summarized in Table 2.
Ocloh--r 2009 7
Wastewater Utility Master Plan IL
TABLE 2 - EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM SUMMARY
Collection System Gravity Diversion Lift Stations Forcemains Siphons
Feature / Sewer Sewer Manholes
Basin (miles)
Gunbarrel 46.7 3 1 (City-owned) 1 (City-owned) 1
Fourmile 45.4 1 0 0 0
Goose Creek 119 9 0 0 0
Boulder Creek 118 10 0 0 0
South Boulder Creek 34 7 1 (Private) 1 (Private) 0
Recent improvements to the collection system primarily take the form of increased system
reliability through repair/ rehabilitation projects as well as operations and maintenance
processes. Currently, the Utility is budgeting $750,000 per year or pipe repair and
rehabilitation and $100,000 per year on manhole repair and rehabilitation. The Utility has
also recently improved its collection system planning process through a comprehensive
update of the collection system master plan.
Water Quality and Environmental Services
Boulder's Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES) Group is included within the
city of Boulder Public Works, Utilities Division. The WQES Group serves as an in-house
technical resource for Utilities and other City departments to help maintain compliance with
various levels of regulations. The WQES Group is funded through the city's Water,
Wastewater, and Stormwater enterprise funds and supports the Utilities Division water
services though multiple programs.
The Industrial Pretreatment (IPT} and Laboratory Services programs are included in this
WQSP as they are directly related to the wastewater utility planning effort.
Industrial Pretreatment Program
The City's Industrial Pretreatment (IPT) Program is part of the WQES Group. The current,
primary purpose of the city of Boulder IPT program is to control or limit the discharge of
toxic or hazardous waste into the sanitary sewers and thus the City's 75th Street WWTP.
The City IPT program must comply with multiple regulatory requirements at the federal,
state and local levels. The general philosophy behind national federal standards is to provide
consistent application to all industrial users throughout the country. Local _standards help to
prevent the introduction of pollutants into the sewer system that would interfere with the
October 2009 8
LJj
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
normal operation of the system or inhibit the biological process of the WWTP. In addition,
local standards are enforced to optimize the cost effective method of WWTP sludge disposal
(beneficial reuse) and to prevent any discharge that would result in pass-through of any
pollutant resulting in a permit violation or adverse water quality impact of the receiving
stream.
General activities of the City's IPT Prograrn are:
Work Group Involvement
Monitor and Inspect all Permitted Industries for Compliance with Applicable
Regulations.
► Implement Commercial/Domestic Wastewater Source Sampling Program.
► Continue to Implement the Silver Source Control Program.
► WWTP Monitoring
Currently, special studies conducted by the City's IPT Program include:
/ Dental Waste Management Program
/ Nonylphenol (NP) Outreach and Evaluation
Significant Industrial Users
In order to administer the regulations of the IPT program, authority to take enforcement
action is needed. IPT program enforcement response can vary from informal action such as
phone calls or warning letters to formal action such as administrative orders or judicial
action. In 2007 enforcement response included reminder phone calls, meetings, demand
inspections, warning letters, notices of violation. In 2008 enforcement also included penalty
assessment at one facility.
The first objective of the IPT Program is to prevent the introduction of pollutants into the
city's wastewater collection and treatment system that could interfere with the performance
of the WWTP. Traditionally the pollutants of concern have been metals released from
manufacturing operations. Table 1 details metals loading data from samples collected at the
WWTP influent. In each case the annual average for the pollutant is well below the
Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL). In some cases loadings have stayed
relatively stable in other cases loading have decreased considerably, as in copper and
mercury.
OCCober 2009 9
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program
The Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory (WEL)Program currently provides broader
support for the WWTP including biosohds analysis, field services including water quality
monitoring and management of the laboratory information management system (LIMS) and
database system. WEL program responsibilities will continue to expand as increasingly
complex and interrelated water quality regulations develop.
The WEL Program plays an important function in operational support testing for the
wastewater plant operations, process optimization, backup and assistance to the Drinking
Water Quality Program, analysis for wastewater collection system and storm drainage
projects, and acting as a general resource for chemical safety information, both within
Utilities and for other city departments. The WEL Program performed over 57,500 analyses
in 2007.
Current Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program Special Studies
WFL program staff conduct multiple special studies to support the 75`l' Street WWTP and
other city Departments. Current special studies arc as follows.
/ DMR-QA Study
/ Practical Quantitation Limitation (PQL) Assessment/Development
/ Site Specific PQL Development
/ Boulder Creek Monitoring
► Copper Translator Development
/ E. coli Study
Process Optimization Support Group
WIIP program staff are actively involved in the WWTP Process Optimization Group. The
Process Optimization Group provides WWTP technical input and laboratory analysis
support to evaluate and solve WWTP problems that may arise. WEL program staff
assistance was provided for the following projects in 2007 and 2008.
/ Tracking Ammonia trends during construction
/ Centrate/Thickener Study
/ Trickling Filters- Decommissioning
/ Volatile Acid/Alkalinity Evaluation
/ New processes as they come on-line.
October 2009 10
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
``'ri
Ldi SFi=__2
Metals Program
Metals analysis is an important component of the WEL Program, which conducted 16,528
metals analysis in 2007. In 2007 it is estimated that the metals program saved over $176,000
by providing metals analysis in-house versus contracting all metals analysis to an outside
analytical laboratory.
Quality Control/Quality Assurance Program
Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) comprise approximately 29 percent of the
total sample load in the WEL Program. The QA/QC program allows continuous evaluation
of analytical accuracy and precision, representativeness and scientific validity, which is
rcgtured by both the USEPA and CDPHC. In 2007 WEL Program QA/QC Manual was
updated. The manual establishes systematic, written policies and guidelines to be followed
by all laboratory personnel and specifies minimum performance standard criteria to be used
in the analytical process.
October 2009 11
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
05age intentionally left blank)
October 2009 12
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Lai L
KEY POLICIES AND ISSUES
Guiding Principles and Policies
A series of guiding principles, policies and implementation measures were used to define the
planning process for the Utility. The guiding principles for the WWUMP are based on
Boulder's planning approach to community sustainability through evaluating social,
environmental and economic impacts associated with various program and projects within
the city. Specifically, the three guiding principles for the WWUMP are:
/ Protect Public Health and Safety
/ Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment
/ Maximize the use of the Wastewater Utility's Fund
U~. mat
In general, the policies that support the guiding _ a
principles noted above are defined by the Boulder
1
Revised Code and the Boulder Valley _
Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). The WWTPMP, the:
WWCSMP, and the WASP provide the implementation measures by defining specific' =
Tannin elements, requirements, and
recommendations, and, where applicable,
identifying capital improvement projects. " y - -
Boulders Gravity Systems Maintenance group
protects public heath and the environment by
The guiding principles listed above provide the reducing sewer back-ups through routine
framework to help the City maintain an maintenance and system operations
environmentally sustainable program to provide
waste disposal services for the City of Boulder residents and businesses
The approach of this section is to present the guiding principles, identify associated policies,
and then present the more specific aspects, the implementation measures. Note this
document does not attempt to repeat city code or other documents, but rather to capture the
general intent and to include the most relevant specifics within the WWUMP. Existing
policies related to each of the three guiding principles are summarized in the following
sections. The implementation measures used in meeting these policies are shown in italics.
October 2009 1.3
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Principle #1- Protect Public Health and Safety
The Utility protects the public heath and safety through capital projects associated with the
collection system and wastewater treatment facility and through various programs within the
Utility, including with the Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES) group and the
Gravity Systems Maintenance group.
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
/ Plan S Wastewater Treatment Master Plan
o Define service area for the WWTP with determined and limited boundaries
This policy is implemented with the WIWM-IMP and IPIY/C,:S'LIiIP. These documents define the wastewater utility
service area based on the BVCPArea I and lI boundary definitions. 7771s boundary was also used to identf
custortler types, land use, and populatioril emplyees serviced by the utility.
a Describe existing and projected WWTP flows
This policy is implemented with the IVII'MP and IVIVCSIWP. These documents describe existing and future
lvastervaterflows based on the service area boundary, BVC.I' population and emplayrnentforecasts, and the
Denver Regional Council of Governments population and erriploynrettl forecast,. 1 hese population and
employment forecasts are used in corjunction with historical data front the wastewater trealmentfacility to protect
future wastewater flows.
o Describe the collection system contained within the WWTP service area and potential future
upgrades and improvements
4 This policy is implemented with tl7e IYII C'IC.SMP
® Plan 9 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan
o Provide wastewater collection at a flow rate required by the city's customers, precluding backups and
spills that would endanger human health, personal property and the environment.
This policy is implemented with the IY VCSMP
and the Gravity Systems Maintenance IVorkgrot p.
The IVIYICSMP leveraged the Boulder's investtttent
in their- GS data to determine the distribution of
wastewater flatus across the city for Boulder's
existing and future crustomem IVastetvater flows
were also developed to include the collection system s
' Fg
F ' .
response to significant rainfall events and L
groundwater in tllratiort. These waslervater flows
were used with a computer model to analyse the
collection.,gstem and identf locations of capacity 7~1 L
totential sewer over lows and areas that 1
problems, l .f
coztld potentially cause sewer back-ups. Upgrades to collection system master planning identifies potential
the collection gsterit were identified to address these problem locations and recommends improvements to
potential problevts within the collection ystem. reduce sewer overflows and back-uvs
17)e Gravity J' ,sterns Maintenance IVor group includes cleaning crews, a constrzrction crew, closed cit roil
telec"ision (C(.7-V) o-ew. 11-Taiutcrratrce staff r'etrtoi)e obstrrrclion. fiotrt the collection gslent pipes, repair frilirrg
October 2009 14
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
ysterrrs, and monitor the performance of the sewer system. As u result, these activities increase the collection
ystem's ability to convey flows from the city's customers and reduce the number and extent of sewer back-ups.
o Require pretreatment of wastewater from certain commercial and industrial customers to reduce the
concentration of chemical constituents that may adversely impact the treatment ability of the
WWTP.
The 6Y/QES workgroup includes the Industrial Pretreatment (IPT) program whose purpose is to ensure that
commer vial and residential entities are not contributing pollutants to the sewer system. The IPT program monitors
wastewater flow and constituents at select industrial sites within the service area. In addition to chemical
constituents, an additional pollutant the IPT progravi monitors and addresses is grease or oil from restaurants in
levels that could impact the ability of the collection system to convey flow. Although Boulder does not currently Piave
a fully developed fats, oils and grease (FOG)pro
gram, current dty standards do require oillgrease interceptors in
new restaurants in an e fort to address this pretreatment activity.
Boulder Revised Code
1 Chapter 11-2 Septic Systems
o There are a few city properties currently on permitted septic systems. As these properties redevelop
or their existing septic systems fail, they are required to connect to the city wastewater system and
abandon their septic systems to health department standards.
o In areas where city sewer service is available to county properties, the city works with the county to
facilitate connection to the city wastewater system via annexation or an outside city utility permit.
o In areas where no city sewer service is available to county properties eligible for annexation or
outside city utility permits, the city works with the neighbors and the county to find creative
solutions for funding the utility work.
o If an emergency situation exists, the septic tank is pumped out at the property owner's expense and
the applicable processes are expedited to the extent city ordinances and county regulations allow.
Chapter 11-3 Industrial and Prohibited Discharges
o Provide for and promote the general health, safety and welfare of the citizens residing within the city
and downstream water users and residents
As noted previously, the IPT program monitors wastemater flow and constituents at select industrial sites within
the ser Dice area. In addition, the IPT program addresses oils and grease fi nm new restaurants. Bath of these
activities inprove the ability of the l,YIVFP to discharge clean, safe went and meet regulations that-Protect the
waters of Boulder Creek and its downstream users.
Additional implementation measures are provided through Boulder's Design and
Construction Standards (DCS), Chapter 6 Wastewater Design. The pertinent sections of the
DSC that relate to protection of public health and safety arc summarized below:
o Establish tninirnum design standards for providing and maintaining the public wastewater utility
collection system including, but not limited to main extensions, collection mains, services, and
manholes.
The design standards defined in the DCS are appropriate. No recommendations for revisions have been
identified
o Establish standard design flows for any project or development proposal for the purpose of
designing wastewater collection mains to convey peak flow.
Octcber X009 15
1 aon~lra um S~ PON
Wastewater Utility Master Plan ~Y.
The design jlozzcr and pecrking factor r in the DCS are approlriate. No i ecoiim2enrlations for revisions bave been
identified.
o Provide requirements for utility reports in order to assess the impacts and service demands of any
project or development proposal connecting to the public wastewater collection system.
The utility report requirements in the DCS' are appropriate. No recommendations. for revisions have been
identified.
Principle #2 - Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the
Environment
The Utility protects Boulder's natural resources and the i~• :r:
environment through the WQES group, Gravity Svst, ii i,) V
Maintenance group, and WWTP operations and
~
treatment facilities. , x.
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
/ Plan 8 Wastewater Treatment .Master Plan Boulder's WWTP meets or exceeds
o Describe existing and projected WWTP flows permit requirements defend by the
CDPHE and protects the quality of water
As noted in the Policy #I discussion, the WIWIIPMI) and in Boulder Creek
WIIF1'CSMP have developed existing and future wastewaterflow
projections in order to provide adequate collection Dutem and IVVIT'I' hydraulic capacity. This protects the
Boulder's natural resources and the environment by reducdng the chance of sanita y sewer overflows
0 Maintain the current Class B biosolids land application program with a portion of the biosolids
production composted at a private composting facility and continuing to track biosolids treatment
and recycling research and trends to see if better .long-term options become available.
1 he Utility has recently fnz'shed a significant investment in its ongoing Class B .Biosolids program with the
completion of the Solidsl Dewatering project Tlyis pr ject included crew gsteriis that optinii,Ze the processing of the
solids and their disposal housed within a new building at the IMMP.
o Track National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and land use
regulations to anticipate more stringent treatment requirements.
Boulder WIWTP and JVOE.S staff continue to be proactive in anticipating future regulations throirgh discussions
rvitli Colorado Department of Public Heath and Environment (CDPHE) staff and through IFIWIP facility
planning studies. For example, the Utility has recently star-ted the I FTP -Evaluation where f cticre permit
requirements and horn those affect the WII PTT'facilities will be evaluated.
o Provide information on fixture treatment processes
7be Utility corriiraices to research and stzrdy treatnientprocess upgrades that could cierrtly work, within the
existing pr ocesses at the WI1171 P and provide flexibr.'lity to address facture discharge permit requirements. The
previously mentioned IVIVI'P Evaluation planning study will address and identify the future treatmentprocesses
that best fit the needs o f 'R,ulder.
OcwO.ci- 2009 1G
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Boulder Revised Code
/ Chapter 11-3 Industrial and Prohibited Discharges
o Prevent the introduction of pollutants into the publicly owned treatment works (POTW) thereby
affecting the operation of the system and the receiving waters or atmosphere
Tlie curl ent IPT Program, within the WI E.S group, monitors
and regulates wastewater discharges fr om identified industries
avilhin the wastewater service area. f
o Improve the opportunity to recycle biosolids from the
system ,J:f
The ClassB BiosolidsprograrrZ continues to be optimised and
improved. Recent improvements at the 11/WTP include a new
Biosolids Pr ocessing facility whicb utilises high torque centrifrsges
to greatly reduce the volume of biosolids removed and transported .i
from the facility. P
o Protect city personnel who may work with wastewater and
biosolids in the course of their employment
Safety is ofparamorrnt importance to the Utilities Division and
its staff GVW'I'P and Gravity Systems Maintenance staff '
undergoes safety training and hold the required ~
licenses/classifications. The recenL!y completed Solids
Dewatering Project optimized the
W VI P has a all established Sue ' Committee to address biosolids program and resulted in a
f ' f more cost effective and
unsafe work conditions as well as a 12 person Emegerrcy environmentally sound process.
Response 'I earn (EIS Team) trained specifically to deal with the
emergencies encountered at a WW1TP.
o Prevent the introduction of wastes that may adversely affect the environment or may cause a
violation of the city's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
As noted previously, the IPP Program monitors and regulates industrial wastewater discharges The result, as it
applies to the NPDEX permit, is the IPT Program reduces /he risk of Il%IYr"IP operational issues and/or sewer
overflows by striving to eliminateproblematic chemical and constituentsfro»s the wastmaterflom.
Additional implementation measures are provided through the WWTPNW.
Reduce waste by ivpr-oving recycling and reuse of biosolids
Create a sustainable community t/orough improved enemy effcieny, minimi7,a ion of';reenhousegar emissions, cast
savings, and nranimz.Vng chemical usage
Improve ammonia nitrogen redretion capability
Evaluate treatment capacity for oi(gb facility planning to meet future needs
Improve the dervaterirrg pr ocess capabilities to meet increased rapacity requrt-emerits
Replace inefficient equilmient rvith nerves, improved equipment.
Octouer?009 17
Ayn
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Principle #3 - Maximize the use of the Utility's Funds
The Utility has developed a series of tools and process that evaluate expenditures, revenue
and planned capital projects. The various projects and programs are evaluated in an annual
budgeting process using a Business Plan
AdrtY 7~ llon
capilal Project Management
approach that incorporates level of service and Improvements 3%
31% Maintenanco
investment strategies to prioritize programs 13%
and needs. The policy of using the Business Wastewater Quality
o%
Plan approach for utility planning is outlined in
ppo
the "City Plans and Projects Handbook", City Transfors
8% Deb! Payernts
of Boulder, November 13`11, 2008. The details 30%
of the Business Plan approach and its Boulder has adopted a Business Plan approach
application to the Utility are presented in the that incorporates level of service and investment
Investment Program section of the WWUMP strategies to prioritize programs and needs
report.
Boulder Revised Code
/ Chapter 11-2 Wastewater Utility
o Adopt a system of plant investment fees
The City currently ulili.~es a funding ystem comprised ora plant investn>etat fees (PIF) atad ireoaatl>ly user o ales to
fund the Wastewater Utility Fund Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and operating budget expenses.
o Utility expansion outside city limits shall be consistent with the BVCP and the city charter
requirements to insure the most efficient and cost effective service
The IMVCSMP and W/W7PMI' have identified the rvastewaterutidity service area based on the boundaries
defined by the BVCP Areas I and II. Irlaprovements to existing facilities and ystem extensions have
incorporated this service area boundary into the analysis process. Both of these plans have developed alternatives to
existing and future service areas that were evaluated against a set of criteria that included cost effectiveness.
o Continue to provide wastewater services as an Enterprise
q The City hill continue to operate the W/astervater Utility Fund as an Enterprise Funel.
o Provide for equitable distribution of cost of the wastewater utility among users
4 7 he City provides an equitable distribution of cost for the lVastewaler° Utility through PIF's and user rates.
BVCP Urban Service Criteria and Standards
An additional guiding policy is the Urban Service Criteria and Standards of the BVCP. As
referenced in the preceding three guiding principals, Wastewater Treatment Master Plan and
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan sections of the BVCP provide policies
supporting many of the technical requirements within the Wastewater Utility. The Urban
Service Criteria and Standards provide guidance as to the effectiveness of the operation and
October 2009 18
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
financing aspects within the Utility. Specifically the Urban Service Criteria and Standards as
they relate to the public sewer system identify service standards as follows:
/ Responsiveness to Public Objectives
/ Sufficiency of Financing
/ Operational Effectiveness
/ Proficiency of Personnel
► Location and Adequacy of Equipment and Facilities
Through wastewater system operations, planning, budgeting, and training programs, Boulder
is able to meet the service criteria and standards identified in this section of the BVCP. This
is evident in the positive feedback the Utility received during the AWWA QualServe peer
review process, in the high level of service provided to its wastewater customers, and ability
to meet and exceed State water quality permit requirements.
Wastewater Utility Key Issues
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan
The Wastewater Treatment Plan Master;
Plan (WWTPMP) documents past
4
decisions, the current facility, and
presents the approach that has been used u
to reach decisions on process selection
and introduce some future decisions that
will be facing the utility. To continue to
provide the level of service required by 2.
federal regulations and match the
expectations of the community
presented in the BVCP Goals, ongoing
improvements to the treatment facility Boulder's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) along Boulder
Creek at 4049 N. 75"' Street
are necessary.
WWTPMP Improvement Alternatives
The WWTPMP investigated various treatment alternatives to support the recommendations
contained within that plan and to provide guidance for the Phase 1 WWTP Improvements.
OcWler 209 19
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Liquid Stream Improvements Alternatives
The WWTPMP evaluated five treatment processes for upgrading the Boulder WWTP as part
of dic Phase 1 improvements. These included:
/ 'T'ricking Filter - Solids Contact Tank - Nitrifying Trickling Filters - Tricking Filter
Recycle - Denitrification Filters - Chemical Phosphorus Removal (TF-SC-NTF- fFR--
DNF)
/ Trickling Filter - Activated Sludge (TF-AS)
/ Activated Sludge (AS)
/ Tric1ding Filter - Membrane Bioreactors (TF-MBR)
/ Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)
These alternatives were then evaluated based on economic and non-economic factors to
determine the preferred treatment process. Figures 1 and 2 below, from the WWTPMP,
show that the activated sludge (AS) process scored the highest as part of the non-economic
evaluation and provided the lowest life--cycle cost.
zJ r y V V
Criteria a 3 G'
T: 2
4 - t b _
a x 3 _ H W
J ~ ; C ~ V `L Jrr 7
O J ~ J ti ~ ':J C rJ
EMA
ALr. 3 - TF/SC, N`T'F, TFl2, DF,
CPR 3 4 3 3 5 1 3 i 4 4 35
Alt. 6 - TrkUnp Filter - Activarecl
Sludge 4 .1 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3G
Alt. 7- Activated Sludie 5 4 5 5 4 3 4 4 5 4 45
Alt. S - Tric".ig Filter -
lrembraneBiocenctor 5 2 2 2 5 2 5 1 4 5 33
Alr. 9- Membrane Bioreactor 5 2 3 4 5 2 .5 1 5 S 3Note: a hio.ec 1core is more r:arable.
Figure 1. Non-Economic Evaluation of Process Alternatives
October 2009 ?0
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Lai
-0 ❑ 'T'otal P\V OrQ,IT Cost
■ Phase 2 P\V Construction Cost
60 - ® P11"se 1 Construction Cost
3 0
40 - -
A
G 30
0
?0 -
10
0
U u r- -
AlteLiouve :~ltcrll.~ti~ e G Alternative 7 rUtermtive S Atennilv(. 9
TF-SCT- TF-AS AS TF-,IIBR 11BR
TF-TT--R-
D\F
Figure 2. Economic Evaluation of Process Alternatives
As mentioned previously, the Liquid Stream Upgrades project was operational in 2008. The
main goal was to improve nutrient removal and increase capacity from 20.5 to 25 mgd. In
anticipation of more stringent ammonia limits (and potential future nutrient limits for
nitrate, nitrite, total nitrogen, and/or phosphorus), the City converted the Trickling
Filter/Solids Contact process to an Activated Sludge process. The new activated sludge
process includes three new aeration basins arranged in a three-pass configuration making use
of anoxic and aerobic zones. Mixed liquor is recycled from the end of the aerobic zone to
the anoxic zone. In the future Phase 2 configuration, the first two anoxic zones will be
converted to anaerobic and an additional biological phosphorus recycle will be added to
return flows from the end of the anoxic zone to the beginning of the anaerobic zone.
Specific improvements included the construction of and/or modifications to the following
processes and facilities:
/ Three new aeration basins
/ Blower building
/ Secondary pump station modifications - =
► Two dissolved air flotation thickening
r
~%_3
r
(DAFT) units
► A fourth secondary clarifier P k
► Removal of two large trickling filters - .;°pi
abandonment of two others`
/ Xcel Energy dual power feed
A4ixecl Liquor Wasting Station
Qctni72f 2009 21
Wastewater Utility Master Plan ~ j- B,-` ,
F =7
Figure 3 below provides a schematic flow diagram of the Boulder WWTP after
implementation of Phase 1 improvements.
Removal I CCT
A
d ucle w , illo,e ANX AER Snwndary VIII
cat~r~
~ I enirg
I 1
I
a
I Ivs
I -I '
,
1
. 1 I OAFi '
GATT Fu'! -tom. 1 WA5
- -
( _________ll 1.
I f I
I
I ( I I
I
L -,T
I
I
I
I
' I
I , I
I 0:~.t.:r3J {I~ ~~ty ~I
F, -1,
APR = ',mbm DAF T = O,auEwO Au f-luln!-0n TH-,tnx, GP •G-tV TKck,,-, NtUt = Ubx J L.qun Rccy::o
ANA v A-c TPSL e-.d P-V 5'.Jo. WAS = Waco Actlvwed Siudoo
CCT • CTAa C40.d Tank SWAS = I1<ia nod Waste AcW.W Sudge RAS v Anlum Antvwcd Sludge
Figure 3. Boulder WWTP Process Schematic after Phase 1 Improvements
Dewatering Improvements Alternatives
The Dewatering Improvements project was initiated to increase the capacity of the existing
solids processing facilities in anticipation of increased solids loading from the activated
sludge process. The project was recently completed and included a new biosolids dewatering
building and three new centrifuges to increase dewatering capability from 6.3 dry tons per
day to a maximum of approximately 11.6 dry tons per day. Digested sludge is stored in two
new holding tanks prior to dewatering. Dewatered cake from this process is trucked to
eastern Colorado for agricultural land application. The centrate is returned to a new 500,000
gallon storage tank and then metered back into the process for treatment. ESpecific I
improvements included the construction of and/or modifications to the following processes
and facilities:
October 2009 22
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
0 New Biosolids Dewatering Building
including- operations facility : ji .1
/ Three high torque centrifuges y:
/ Dry polymer feed system
/ 't'hree sludge cake pumps
r.
-41
/ Three sludge cake hoppers ,
/ 500,000 gallon centrate storage tank and y:_ }rte !
~ ~.J r ,~l Yid. '~-a (."q~w'i~ (..~,i IIC-:" J
pump station
® Abandoned tanker fleet trucks and direct
relationship with farmers where the city
land applied biosolids WII1111- 0
1 Currently utilize Liquid Waste Management The new Biosulids DeWdtenng 6u;ldk7g at 010 wwrF ~
(LWM) for contract hauling (20% cake
product) and end-use biosolids disposal
Disinfection System Alternatives
'I'he WWTP.MP also evaluated alternatives for replacement of the existing chlorine gas
disinfection and gaseous sulfur dioxide dechlorination systems which disinfect the effluent
prior to discharge to Boulder Creek. The existing chlorine disinfection system has adequate
capacity to meet the needs of the proposed expansion of the 75th Street facility from 20.5
mgd to 25 mgd, however it does not meet current industry standards associated with the safe
handling of chlorine and sulfur dioxide gases (both chlorine and sulfur dioxide gases are
considered hazardous chemicals). This, along with a broader concern about the safety
aspects of transporting and handling hazardous chemicals and the environmental impacts
associated with using chlorine as a disinfectant, prompted the City to evaluate replacing the
existing chlorine disinfection system with a different system.
The follow=ing disinfection alternatives were considered:
0 Alternative 1 - Chlorine (-as with Sulfur Dioxide (Existing Gaseous Chemical. System)
Alternative: 2 - High Strength Sodium I-Iypochlorite with Sodium Bisulfite (Liquid
Chemical System)
9 Alternative 3 - Onsite Sodium Hypochlorite Generation with Sodium Bisulfitc (Liquid
Chemicals System)
/ -Alternative 4 - Disinfection with Ultraviolet Light (LJV Disinfection)
OcLober 2009 23
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Figures 4 and 5 below, from the WWTPMP, provide the results frorn the economic and
non-economic evaluations of the alternatives.
® Collst111ct1on Cost ■ O&M Cost
G
LW
LW 5
4
A
O -
J
z 2 - -
n
v
Gaseous Chlorine High Strength Liquid Disinfection with UV Disinfection
Disinfection Sodium H)podilorite Low Strength Liquid
Disinfection Socliiim Hypodilorite
Generated on Site
Figure 4. Economic Evaluation for Disinfection Alternatives
October 2009 24
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
V C C~J r
G J
P. v v
~ U
Criteria o I W Q O o
r o C ~IJ
R, o U o W v o
+ v1 J
ran n M W U to
a4 A 4.4 U U cn M o 5
0 o y v to L_91T Y
Alt. 1 - Gaseous CI-dontle.
3 4 1~ 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 39
Alt. 2 - High-Strength Sodium
Hypoclrlorite a 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 43
iUt. 3 - Can-Site Sodiurn
Hypochlorite Generation 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 42
Alt. 4- T UV 3 3 3 5 4 4 3 2 5 5 5 48
-Note: A bigger score is mole frkrorable.
Figure 5. Non-Economic Evaluation for Disinfection Alternatives
UV disinfection was rated the highest of the disinfection alternatives from a non-economic
standpoint and scored second for cost. UV disinfection is the safest for the WWTP staff and
the community and it eliminates the need for hazardous chemicals to be shipped to and
stored at the WWTP. UV disinfection is also very easy to operate and maintain, and will
allow the City to continue to meet their effluent disinfection requirements without the
negative aspects of chemical addition. UV disinfection was selected as the preferred
disinfection method.
Due to budgetary constraints, the UV system was removed from the Phase 1 improvements
construction project. Plant staff have identified the gaseous chlorine system as the greatest
cost and a significant safety hazard. The City has indicated this system will be replaced as
part of the next budgeting cycle.
Future WWTP Modifications
Discharge permit limits are revisited every five years, and it is anticipated that some level of
TIN and phosphorus removal may be required by future discharge permits. Chemical
addition and/or additional aeration basin volume may be requixcd to remove additional TIN
Cciober 2009 25
Wastewater Utility Master Plan p`oi''
and phosphorus. If extremely love TIN limits are implemented in the future, a tertiary
denitrification treatment process may also be required. If extremely low phosphorus limits
are imposed, tertiary filtration may be required. The 2005 Liquid Stream Upgrades project
design accounted for "Phase 2" improvements (future) to address more stringent CDPHE
effluent discharge regulations. The Phase 2 improvements would involve minor
modifications to the recently constructed aerations basins (anaerobic & anoxic zones) to
specifically address plant denitrification. The Phase 2 improvements might also involve the
construction of a fourth aeration basin. This project is tentatively scheduled for 2020.
Additionally, the Boulder WW I'P may be required to remove micro constituents.
Micro constituents include very small particles such as endocrine disrupting compounds
(EDC's) and disinfection byproducts. At present little is known about the significance of
these contaminants or appropriate treatment technologies for their removal from
wastewater; however, regulatory requirements associated with these contaminants may be
adopted in the future. If emerging contaminants removal becomes necessary, public
education and additional treatment processes will likely be required. This issue will be
evaluated in the future as appropriate.
Other future projects identified in the CIP include modifications to, or the replacement of
the Headworks facility. The headworks facility is old and antiquated as several key process
components are inefficient and lack redundancy. 'T'hese components include the bar screens,
grit removal system, and rag removal system, and he heating, ventilation and air conditioning
(HVAC) system. The bar screens are 3/4-inch and lack the ability to remove fine size particles
permitting too many debris to pass through the headworks and impact other plant processes.
This results in downstream wear and tear on mechanical equipment. The grit system lacks
an efficient washing system to maintain the organics in the process flow. The rag system is
not adequately sized to work properly with the existing screens, and requires both conveyors
to move the rags to the dewatering machine. There is no redundancy in the conveyors or
the rags dewatering process. The HVAC system is inadequate to provide heat for the
building. Recently, the heating coil froze rendering the system useless. This project is
tentatively scheduled for 2015 and may include the construction or modification to the
existing maintenance facility. Although not yet identified in the near terns the CIP, this
project is a priority for the City.
October 2009
76
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan
The WWCSMP is a comprehensive planning document that assesses the conveyance
capacity of Boulder's sanitary sewer system and identifies recommendations with associated
capital cost estimates to resolve conveyance capacity deficiencies. The following is a
summary from the WWCSMP report prepared by HDR
and published December 2008.
Land Use and Flow Proiections
Land use planning projections for both population and o~nbarrer
employment were developed within the WUSA. There
are three prominent planning documents that establish
population and employment projections for the WUSA
and included 1) 2007 DRCOG Traffic Analysis Zones, copse cmek
2) 2007 WWTP Master Plan and 3) 2008 Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). These documents
include consideration for both existing and future land
uses, as well as historical and projected population
trends. A summary of the population and employment j
projections for the WUSA is shown in Table 3. The s°°rh6ouldercreex
2007 Denver Regional Council of Governments
(DRCOG) Traffic Analysis Zones (TA'/_,) data was used Boulder's Wastewater Utility Service Area
to represent existing conditions in the WWCSMP as it encompasses 26 sq.mi. and contains true
$ interceptor sewer basins
was based on census data and provided good correlation
with the BVCP. To be consistent with the 2007 WWTPMP, projections for future
employment and population were based on data from that document. As a result, buildout
condition (2030) population and employment values presented in the 2007 WNWPMP were
used for this analysis.
TABLE 3 - 2008 WWCSMP PROJECTIONS FOR WUSA
Year 2008 2015 2020 2025 Buildout
(2030)
Population 110,092 119,072 122,529 124,266 128,162
Employment 100,598 128,918 134,381 136,706 155,864
Total average dry weather_ flow (ADWI~ or base flow projections in the collection system
for existing and future conditions are comprised of population, employment and Significant
October 2009 27
Wastewater Utility Master Plan ''YI
Industrial User (Sf (J) contributions. The population and employment contributions are
combined with the unit flow factors of 102 gpd per capita and 50 gpd per employee. The
SIU contributions are based on 2006/2007 flow data from each user adjusted for domestic
flow. In addition to existing (2008) and buildout (2030) conditions, flow projections were
developed for intermediate years including 2015, 2020, and 2025 for information purposes.
Table 4 presents the ADWF projections used as the basis of the Wastewater Utility Master
Plan (WWUMP) analysis. It should be noted these ADWF values do not reflect collection
system hydraulics including hydrograph attenuation and pump station influences. As a
result, the collection system hydraulic model results are anticipated to vary slightly when
compared to the values in the table below.
TABLE 4 - AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW PROJECTIONS
Year 2008 2015 2020 2025 Buildout (2030)
Population ADWF (mgd) 11.3 12.1 12.5 12.7 13.1
Employment ADWF (mgd) 5.0 6.5 6.7 6.8 7.8
SIU ADWF (mgd) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Total ADWF (mgd) 16.9 19.2 19.8 20.1 21.5
Collection System Analysis
The purposes of the conveyance system analysis
were to 1) document the analysis of the existing
collection system during dry weather and wet
weather flows and 2) to identify and characterize
hydraulic capacity issues. By analyzing the
existing collection system under existing and
T
buildout flow conditions, problem areas were
identified for both land use scenarios. The primary source of data that was used for the
J
collection system hydraulic model development
and analysis was Boulder's sanitary sewer 15~-
Geographic Information System (GIS) layers for f "T
Legend
manholes and sewer pipes. This database was 1_ Iavsneanday
provided to HDR in November of 2007 and McWaleCapaa.y
i Capaaly I.-nlab o - t1uldmt
formed the basis of all subsequent work.
Combined, the two GIS layers represent 9,596 Hydraulic analysis of interceptor-, collector and local
collector sewers was performed to identify existing
and fixture capacity problem areas.
Oc[ober 2009 28
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
manholes and 9,671 sewer main pipe segments, ranging in size from 4 to 60 inches in
diameter.
Gravity sewers are typically classified as local, collector or interceptor sewers. Local sewers
have diameters that are typically less than 10 inches and convey wastewater from relatively
small service areas (approximately 20 acres and less). Local sewers have numerous service
line connections collecting wastewater from individual customers. Collector sewers have
diameters that typically range between 12 and 24 inches. Collector sewers convey flow from
multiple local sewers and also include individual service line connections, although not as
many as local sewers. Interceptor sewers typically have very few, if any, individual service
line connections and convey wastewater from connections with collector sewers to the
WWTp.
Many of Boulder's local sewers provide service to relatively large areas with some local
sewers serving areas up to 100 acres in size and/or highly developed areas. These small
diameter local sewers are an integral part of the gravity sewer system. As a .result, these local
sewers that serve large areas have been termed "local collectors" for purposes of this study.
Additional collection system features included in the model and analysis included lift
stations, forcemains, diversion manholes, and siphons.
The collection system pipes with identified capacity limitations, established from the model
results, were examined to identify likely hydraulic issues under the various flow scenarios.
There are a total of 138 pipes in the analyzed collection system with hydraulic deficiencies
identified. A detailed problem identification and characterization process was completed to
better understand the nature and extent of these problems. The hydraulic problems were
separated into two categories: Type A and Type B. Type A problems consisted of a series of
under capacity pipes that were hydraulically connected to one another. Type B problems are
isolated hydraulic restrictions that are not hydraulically connected to other problem locations
or series of problem pipes.
Recommended Collection System Improvements
The recommended system. improvements that resolve the existing and future capacity issues
are shown on the following figure. This figure includes both improvements that address
Type A and Type B problems. The conveyance system analysis separated the hydraulic
problems into two categories; Type A and Type B Type A problems consist of a series of
problem pipes that are hydraulically connected to one another. Type B problems are
Octoi)er 7009 ?9
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
isolated hydraulic restrictions that arc not hydraulically connected to other problem locations
or series of problem pipes.
The recommended improvements were grouped in three tiers to establish implementation
priority:
1 Tier 1 projects address Type A problems and have the highest priority;
1 Tier 2 projects also address Type A problems but have lower priority compared to Tier_ 1;
/ Tier 3 projects address Type B problems which have the lowest priority.
October 2009 30
c~ }
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
ELM
r '
, I
r'
rf Z _
--Gunbarrl
..1 ffJJ++ff~~~
Gunbarrel 2
Boulder Creek 4
Goose Creek 1~ ~J
Goose Crl ek 1A J I(
'Go'se Creek
kGoose Creek 3 1
-Goose Creek 2
oose Creek 5
Boulder-Greek#1 Boulder Creek 3 -
i
i~
I Bourdei Cree 2
5. Boulder Creek 1 -
I Legend
7 r Improvement Priority
® Tier 1
_ Q Tier 2
Q Tier 3
Improvement Recommendations
WUSA Boudary
Recommended improvements were developed and prioritized into Tier 1, 2 and 3 categories.
October 2009 31
Wastewater Utility Master Plan `er'r
The improvement priorities were assigned based on a number of qualitative factors including
the flow conditions in which they occur (existing versus future), extent of the problem,
potential for sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and service lateral backups, ease of
constructability, and relative benefit over other improvement projects. The relative benefit
takes into account the amount of pipe replaced compared to the extent of the "problem
remedied. The resulting implementation priorities and associated estimates of capital
construction cost are shown in Table 5.
TABLE 5 - CAPITAL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Problem Priority Improvement ID Location Capital Cost
Tier 1 Boulder Creek 2 Colorado Ave and 28 h St $733,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 1/1A Iris Ave and 191n St $1,203,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 3 Spruce St and 24th St $482,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 5 Arapahoe Ave and 55"' St $2,559,000
TIER 1 TOTAL $4,977,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 1 Colorado Ave and 28`h St $1,653,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 3 Arapahoe Ave and Foothills Pkwy $1,939,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 4 Valmont Rd and 6151St to WWTP $12,356,000
Tier 2 Goose Creek 4 Pearl St, Valmont Rd and Mishal Rd $3,928,000
Tier 2 Gunbarrel 1 Boulder Supply Canal & Left Hand Ditch $1,116,000
Tier 2 Gunbarrel 2 Jay Rd and Boulder Supply Canal $939,000
Tier 2 South Boulder Creek 1 Baseline Rd and 55th St $733,000
TIER 2 TOTAL $22,664,000
TIER 3 TOTAL $2,296,000
TOTAL ALL PROJECTS TOTAL $29,937,000
1 Tier 3 costs represent approximately 13 localized improvement projects
Collection System Operations and Maintenance
The WWCSM13 project team reviewed the collection system operations and maintenance
(O&M) procedures. The purpose of this O&M procedure was to review the current state of
collection system O&M practices and evaluate potential increases in service levels due to
trends in the regulatory environment in the western United States. In addition, the 2008
QualServe peer review program and self assessment survey evaluated the Utility's overall
October 2009 32
r
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
performance, efficiency and customer service as well as maintaining industry best
management practices.
Both the QualServ program and the WWCSMP O&M review found that the Gravity
System's Maintenance group operates and maintains the collection system such that it
continues to provide a high level of service to its existing customers. In addition, the
WWCSMP O&M review noted that the Utility has the framework in place to address the
potential emerging regulations seen in the western United States. Both evaluations noted
opportunities for improvement which are discussed in detail in their respective documents.
In addition, both evaluations identified three common opportunities for improvement.
These common improvement opportunities and potential implementation options (shown in
italics) are summarized below:
/ Provide a computerized system that incorporates field collected data into the analysis and
prioritization of line replacement or rehabilitation
The Utilities Planning and Pr ject Management workgroap isgoing to implement a separate asset rrlanagement
ystem for which Utilities Maintenance workgroup willprovide Utilities Maintenance and Management System
(UMMS) data for inclusion in making replacement/re%abi/itation decisions. The field reports will be moiled to
capture pipe and manhole condition, lhen the UMMS hill be modified to capture and sort by maintenance need
priority in order to prioritise maintenance work
/ Upgrading CCTV equipment and adopt an industry standard defect coding system
The Gravity System Maintenance workgrotp is currently in the process of acquiring Granite XP software in
order to further evaluate, categoii.7f and characterize the conditions of the sewer mains. This system willprovide a
more uniform analysis of the p pe conditions and provide a standardi,,;ed defect coding system.
1 Upgrade the UMMS to include geo-assigning of work orders
f[ planned overhaul of the UMMS work order ystem includes tasks that will allow the utilities maintenance
supervisors/ other staff to generate a work order for an asset by interactively selecting that asset from a GI. S
mapping application.
An additional outcome of implementing these recommendations will be that rate at which
the collection system is cleaned can be optimized based on findings from the CCTV
inspections and field collected data logged in the UMMS during cleaning operations.
Collection System Rehabilitation Budgeting
Boulder developed a methodology for determining the mileage and cost of the 20 year CIP
for rehabilitating wastewater pipes and manholes. This methodology was based on
spreadsheet model that characterized pipe failure as a function of time to assist in forecasting
long-term budgetary needs for rehabilitation of sanitary sewer pipe. This analysis resulted in
a recommendation for an annual manhole and sewer pipe rehabilitation budget of $850,000.
October Z009 33
Wastewater Utility Master Plan ,
Boulder's rehabilitation methodology was reviewed by IIDR. This independent review
noted that several funding scenarios are provided but the model does not identify the return
on investment for each scenario. This makes it difficult to determine the most appropriate
level of funding for Boulder. Also, the results of each model scenario are primarily driven by
the useful life and failure interval assumptions. While the analysis does an excellent job in
reviewing the impact of various assumptions for both useful life and failure interval, there is
little emphasis placed on quantifying these assumptions based on actual field conditions
experienced by Boulder.
HDR recommends that Boulder consider developing a return on investment based funding
scenario model. HDR also recommends that the existing conditions assessment data be
leveraged to determine the useful life and failure interval of their pipes and manholes. In
order to accomplish this, Boulder must first define what failure is for each asset
classification. Then an analysis should be performed on the existing condition assessment
data to determine how much remaining useful life each asset has before it reaches the failure
threshold. hinally, this analysis should be leveraged to estimate the average useful life and the
Wcibull parameters that define the shape of the curve.
HDR also recommends that Boulder evaluate whether CIPP will be the only technique used
to rehabilitate the system. If alternate techniques (e.g. replacement) are warranted in certain
circumstances, it is recommended that the condition
assessment review also incorporate a component which
estimates the appropriate mix of approved techniques a'; s,
based on pipe defects and other inspection results. This t`
low,
will provide a more accurate estimate of the system wide w;! 1
s.y
cost of rehabilitation.
Water Quality Strategic Plan The Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSl') addresses . ,
water quality policies and priorities for the city. Boulder
r
Creek and its tributaries are vital for providing drinking
water, agricultural irrigation water, aquatic habitat, Water Quality and Environmental Services
Group protect habitat and water qualify
recreation, and power generation. Water quality within the creeks of Boulder
determines the suitability of water for most of these
uses. Water quality in the Boulder Creep Watershed is affected by natural factors such as
geology, climate, and physiography, and human-caused factors, such as wastewater- effluent,
October 2009 34
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Lgi R11
runoff from roads and urbanized areas, agricultural practices, atmospheric contaminants, and
other sources. The relative effect of these factors on water quality has changed over time and
will continue to shift as population and urbanization increase and more demands are placed
on our water resources.
The WQSP supports many of the principles and policies of the Boulder Vallcy
Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). The WQSP is designed to fit within the broader framework of
the BVCP, which provides the overall policy direction for planning decisions within the
Boulder Valley. The BVCP also outlines the city's communitywide goals and provides a
general statement on the community's desires for development and preservation in the
Boulder Valley, including protection of water resources. Protection and improvement of
water quality is specifically discussed in Section 4 of the 2005 BVCP. In Section 4.26 the
BVCP states: "The city and county will protect, maintain and improve water quality within
the Boulder Creels basin and Boulder Valley watersheds as a necessary component of
existing ecosystems and as a critical resource for the human community." BVCP Section
4.27 states: "Water resource planning efforts will include such things as water quality master
planning."
The BVCP also outlines the city's environmental goals. When the BVCP was adopted in
2005, Boulder City Council established a goal of becoming a national environmental leader.
City Council's water-related environmental priorities included promoting water conservation.
City Council also aimed to strengthen water quality improvement efforts by protecting
biodiversity and native ecosystems, by managing the city's water sources through a larger
watershed approach, and by reducing pollution sources.
The city must establish strong but achievable water quality goals to protect the environment
and public health, and to address fixture water quality challenges. The WQES group
developed goals for city adoption by first completing a comprehensive inventory of existing
water quality goal statements found in the city's master plans, policies, and regulations,
starting with the BVCP. The group also reviewed water quality regulatory compliance
objectives. The goals support the city of Boulder, Utilities Division Mission Statement:
Our Mission is to provide quality water services, as desired by The conimunio, in a 11lanner which
emphasisescient manageigent of fiscal and natural resources, and protects human and
environmental heallh.
October 2009 35
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Li '`'r
Water Quality Strategic Plan Implementation
The WQSP has been developed, and will be implemented by, the City's Water Quality and
Environmental Services (WQES) Group within the city of Boulder Public Works, Utilities
Division. The WQES Group is funded through the city's Water, Wastewater, and
Stormwater enterprise funds. The WQES group supports the Utilities Division water
services and comprises seven programs:
/ Industrial Pretreatment / Water Conservation / Water Quality Planning
Laboratory Services / Water Quality Education / Stormwater Quality
1 Drinking Water Quality ►
The primary function of these programs is to protect water quality and ensure compliance
with state and federal water quality regulations, such as the federal Clean Water Act and Safe
Drinking Water Act. The WQES Group also provides water quality program management
and serves as an in-house technical resource for the city's Utilities Division and other city
departments. Services include monitoring the performance of wastewater treatment and
drinking water treatment processes and monitoring the health of natural systems such as
creeks and lakes. The WQES Group provides project management services to integrate
water quality enhancement and compliance goals into planning efforts and city capital
improvement projects.
Water Quality Strategic Plan Goals
The WQES group developed five goals and supporting statements which will be used to
implement the WQSP.
Goal 1. Provide safe and high-quality drinking water
The city is required to provide drinking water that meets all state and federal requirements.
Drinking water safety cannot be taken for granted. A number of potential threats to drinking
water exist within the raw source water and within the treated water distribution system.
Improperly disposed of chemicals, animal and human wastes, pesticides, naturally-occurring
substances such as bacteria, and an improperly maintained distribution system all can
contaminate drinking water and pose a health risk. To ensure the quality of drinking water,
protection strategies must be implemented from "source to tap."
Goal 2. Manage pollutants from wastewater and other point sources.
The city is responsible for operating the 75th Street WWI'P and meeting Colorado
Discharge Permit System (CDPS) permit requirements. Adequate wastewater treatrrient is
October 2009 36
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Lai
critical in protecting public health and the environment. Currently, the WWTP treats an
average of 16 million gallons of wastewater per day and discharges treated wastewater into
Boulder Creek. A number of smaller wastewater treatment systems, as well as individual
septic systems, also discharge into the Boulder Creek Watershed. These include the Town of
Nederland wastewater treatment plant, which discharges into Barker Reservoir, a source of
drinking water for the city of Boulder.
Goal 3. Manage pollutants from stormwater and other nonpoint sources.
The city is required to implement programs required under the State of Colorado Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) discharge permit to protect the quality of stormwater,
which is discharged into water bodies such as streams. In urban areas, stream and water
quality degradation generally are related to development. Adding impervious areas such as
roads, parking lots, and buildings to land that once had natural cover increases surface
runoff and reduces groundwater infiltration, which damages natural stream hydrology and
aquatic systems. Urban and agricultural runoff containing sediment, fertilizers, and pesticides
means managing pollutants
also can pose a threat to water quality. Protecting water quality
from these diverse sources.
Goal 4. Protect, preserve, and restore natural water systems.
Natural water systems include riparian and wetlands habitat as well as stream flow. Intact
riparian ecosystems provide ecological benefits, which play an important role in maintaining
water quality, protecting aquatic life, and preserving the aesthetic, recreational, and
economical value of the city's waterways.
Goal 5. Conserve water resources.
Conserving water is integral to protecting water quality. Water conservation practices can
improve water quality by increasing the amount of water flowing in streams and reducing the
amount of treated wastewater discharges. Water conservation also diminishes the need to
find or construct new water sources. Water conserving landscaping can minimize irrigation
runoff, reducing impacts to local streams.
Meeting these five water quality goals will provide water quality protection, which means
clean water to drink, clean streams and lakes to swim in, and healthy waterways that support
fish and other wildlife.
cdiober 2009 37
Wastewater Utility Master Plan L~i '
Water Quality Strategic Plan Recommendations
Water Quality Strategic Plan Recommendations and Performance Measures are outlined in
detail in the May 2009 Final WQSP document. A summary of the Recommendations and
Performance Measures are as follows:
/ Recommendation 1: Evaluate and update policies in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive
Plan to incorporate water quality goals.
WQES staff will review and recommend updates to the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) to ensure incorporation of water quality goals. The
BVCP is scheduled to be updated in 2010.
Performance Measure: Adoption of the five water quality goals into the BVCP in 2010.
0 Recommendation 2: Perform analysis of City plans, policies and projects to identify gaps
in meeting water quality goals.
WQES staff will review relevant plans, policies and projects, such as master plans,
design and construction standards, and the Boulder Revised Code to: 1) ensure that
the City complies with all state and federal laws and regulation on water quality and
environmental protections; and, 2) to meet water quality goals.
Performance Measure: Number of formal policy and master plans reviewed and updated
to incorporate water quality goals; development of a matrix of water quality indicators
and evaluation of plan review based on criteria.
/ Recommendation 3: Develop annual work plans and water quality reports.
Each year the WQES group will identify and outline priorities to achieve the City's
water quality goals and to document monitoring, community involvement, watershed
management efforts and regulatory compliance. An annual water quality report will
be developed detailing the progress on meeting water quality goals. The annual report
will be based on specific objectives and water quality indicators, and will present water
quality data collected by the WQES Group.
Performance Measures: Development of a number of program work plans and the
annual report.
/ Recommendation 4-: Prepare for future watei: quality regulations.
The City will anticipate and prepare for future water quality regulations, ensure
regulatory compliance, and incorporate capital improvement requirements in the
October 2009 33
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Ldi ~'r''
City's budget planning process. The foundation of of water quality planning is
forecasting future water quality criteria and permitting issues related to emerging water
quality issues and new regulations.
Performance Measures: Success in implementing a program to conduct special studies,
track new and proposed regulations, and participate in rule-making activities.
IPT Gaps, Deficiencies and Recommendations
In addition to the ongoing responsibilities of the IPT Program, special studies and/or
additional programs are necessary to further characterize industrial and commercial
discharges to the city's sanitary sewer system sources, support compliance with WWII'
discharge permit requirements and collect data and information in preparation for future
regulatory requirements. The following programs or studies should be evaluated and
modified or initiated as necessary.
Fats, Oil and Grease Program
One of the major causes of maintenance problems, blockages, and sanitary sewer overflows
in Boulder's collection system is fat, oils and grease (FOG). Boulder addresses grease in the
collection system through two programs: the sewer cleaning program and in the IPT
program.
The purpose of IPT program is to ensure that commercial and residential entities are not
contributing pollutants to the system. One of the pollutants is grease or oil in levels that
would impact the operation of Boulder's collection system. The IPT program does not have
a formal FOG program.
Boulder's FOG program is governed by municipal code regulation with specific section
relating to fats, oils, and grease. This code establishes a threshold for dischargers of 100
milligrams per liter (mg/1), or requires a plumbing device for FOG for those who exceed the
threshold. Currently the municipal code refers to the International Plumbing Code for the
design criteria of grease removal equipment (GRE). The municipal code has minimal
requirement for grease removal equipment cleaning, which is every b months or as needed.
FOG producing facilities are not currently required to obtain permitting from Boulder.
FOG producers are identified by Plannii-.g and Development Services (P&DS). When
applying for permits, applicants fill out a Business Environmental Questionnaire. If the
facility generates wastewater., they are required to fill out an industrial waste survey. Any
October 2009 39
Wastewater Utility Master Plan LA `
applicant determined to exceed the above mentioned discharge threshold is required to
install GRE. There is an existing plan check system for restaurants during the initiation
phase. Design approval is performed by the Development Review group. During
construction, inspection of the GRE is performed by the plumbing inspector.
The FOG municipal code should be modified to require all new grease-producing facilities
to install and maintain GRE. Any new facility or remodel of existing facilities that will have a
kitchen, cooking equipment, or a food producing facility should contact Boulder to
determine the need and size of the grease controlling device. Modifications should be made
to the municipal code to allow for the development of a FOG program that can perform
inspections and assess violations accordingly.
Specific recommendations for the FOG program include:
/ Installation of Grease Removal Deviccs
o The FOG municipal code should be modified to require all new grease-producing facilities to install
and maintain GRE.
o Modifications should be made to the municipal code to allow for the development of a FOG
program that can perform inspections and assess violations accordingly.
/ FOG Inspection & Maintenance Program
o Outline components of a typical FOG program:
Ident database needs
.fi Develop Building .Services /Planning interface
Address problem areas in city (hot spots) -
Ongoing compliance - quick toucb approach or spot check with pass /fail evaluation and then comprebensive
follow up as needed
o Boulder should perform a business case for investment in a FOG prevention program.
Development of a formal inspection program should be considered to be included in their FOG
ordinance.
o Boulder should identify all of the food service establishments that would require grease removal
equipment. There is a database that currently lcceps this data, but it is incomplete,
o Boulder should develop a policy on how to handle existing food service establishments that do not
have GREs. Additionally, the FOG paograin needs to worl: with P&DS to ensure that all new food
establishments are entered into the database.
Industrial Waste Survey
Consider initiating a comprehensive industrial waste survey. Due to the growth in Boulder it
may he useful to consider a "full sweep" of the non-domestic users. The goal would be to
identify facilities that need to he further- regulated.
October- 2009 40
Wastewater Utility Master Plan Ldi
Business Inventory Mailing
As time permits staff will send out business questionnaires to determine if targeted
businesses continue to be non-significant, and /or as new businesses are identified,
information will be gathered to determine the nature of operations.
WEL. Program Gaps, Deficiencies and Recommendations
7n addition to the ongoing responsibilities of the WEI'_, Program, special studies and/or
additional programs are necessary to further characterize WWTP performance, characterize
water quality conditions in Boulder Creek and provide compliance support for State and
Federal regulations. It is recommended that the following programs or studies should be
evaluated and modified or initiated as necessary.
Evaluate Laboratory Size and Function
The city last expanded the WEL footprint in 1990. As the demands on the laboratory
services increase so do the demands on the counter space. The following laboratory
recommendations were identified:
/ Perform Business Case Evaluation on the Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory
Program
o Review standard laboratory spacc needs ranging from laboratory layout to WWTP program needs
served by the WEL.
o Review existing laboratory assets (current equipment, future equipment needs, laboratory benches,
hoods and other structures, etc.), develop value and life of assets, develop needed investment plan to
maintain assets, and compare to existing WEL budget.
o Perform Cost Benefit Analysis of maintaining current and future WEL Program operations versus
contracting all or part of the WET. Program operations.
o Review long-term needs of all WQES staff located at the 75th St WWTP for office space, storage
and staging areas.
o Review the exhaust air system of the Instrumentation Room.
o Review the feasibility of adding organics analysis to the laboratory duties including staffing, budget
and capitol costs for instruments and square footage.
o Review a replacement schedule and costs for the ICP, ICPMS and the GFAA instruments.
October 2009 41
Yll
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Near-Term Capital Improvements
The WEL laboratory area is 20 years old and has had very :few improvements made over the
20 year period. Capital improvements, including upgrades to laboratory area and analytical
equipment replacement, have been identified and need to be implemented within the next
two years (2010 through 2011). These improvements are as follows:
► 2010 Capital Improvements
o Laboratory Area Upgrades: painting; window repair, chemical storage area upgrade; ceiling file and
ceiling light replacement; laboratory sink replacement/ repair (4 sinks total)
o Laboratoryy Equipment Replacement: laboratory stools (6 total); dish carts (2 total);
spectrophotometer; dishwasher
1 2011 Capital Improvements
o Laboratory Equipment Replacement: top loader scale (2 total); analytical balance; autoclave; muffle
furnace
Octol)er 2009
?
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
(INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Investment Strategy
The city's investment strategy focuses on a combination of maintaining and operating the
existing wastewater treatment and conveyance facilities, and constructing new facilities to
meet ongoing State and Federal discharge permit regulations. This strategy serves the
Utility's three primary goals to:
► Protect Public Health and Safety
► Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment
► Maximize the use of the Wastewater Utility's Funds
Wastewater Utility CIP
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) includes a comprehensive list of Wastewater
Utility projects to be completed during the 20-year planning period. These include
wastewater treatment plant capital and maintenance related projects, as well as wastewater
collection system capital and maintenance related projects. The 2010-2030 Wastewater
Utility Fund CIP has numerous line items identifying various projects for the WWTP and
the sanitary sewer collection system. The significant CIP expenditures and Water Quality
Strategic Plan (WQSP) funding fall into the following categories:
/ WWTP Capital Projects
► WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
► WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
1 WQSP Funding
WWTP Capital Projects
There are five (5) significant WWTP capital projects currently identified in the 20-yr CIP.
The total cost of these projects (in 2008 dollars) is estimated at $40,000,000. These projects,
their estimated cost, and their projected timing arc listed below:
0 LTV Disinfection - $4,400,000 - 2010
0 Digesters Modifications - $4,000,000 - 2010
0 Hcadworks Improvements - $12,300,000 - 2016
/ Phase 2 Improvements (Denitrification & Phosphorus removal) - $15,000,000 - 2020
0 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC's) removal - $19,000,000 - 2030
October 2009 43
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
Utilities staff is currently completing a WWTP Evaluation project which is an analysis of the
UV Disinfection, Digester Modifications, and Headworks Improvements projects. This
analysis will present several process alternatives for the various facilities, their respective
estimated costs, and will provide a recommendation regarding their overall priority.
WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
In addition to the WWTP capital projects listed above, there are numerous WWTP
rehabilitation projects identified in the CIP to address the plant's aging infrastructure. These
projects are listed in the CIP in years 2016 through 2030, and have a combined cost (in 2008
dollars) of $8,500,000. Utilities staff will continue to review the WWTP Rehabilitation
analysis annually to identify the correct timing for the various rehabilitation projects within
the 6-year CIP.
WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
Lastly, there are numerous wastewater collection system improvement projects currently
identified in the 20-yr CIP. These projects were identified in the Wastewater Collection
System Master Plan which was accepted by the WRA.B in December 2008. The CIP
currently lists four (4) Tier 1 projects (highest priority) and seven (7) Tier 2 projects (second
highest priority). The total cost (in 2008 dollars) for these eleven projects is estimated at
$28,000,000. The Tier 1 and Tier 2 project groups are listed below with their estimated cost
and projecting timing:
/ Tier 1 Projects - $5,000,000 - 2016 through 2021
► Tier 2 Projects - $23,000,000 - 2021 through 2030
WQSP Funding
The Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP) is implemented by the Water Quality and
Environmental Services (WQES) Group. This include recommendations associated with the
Water Quality Strategic Plan, Industrial Pretreatment Program and Wastewater and
Environmental Laboratory Program. These recommendations provide a strategy that
focuses on maintaining and operating existing programs and planning for future regulations
and their implications on City regulatory requirements.
The WQSP elements, including Industrial Pretreatment, Wastewater Environmental
Laboratory and associated capital projects, are currently being approached in the following
oc:ub; r 2009
Wastewater Utility Master Plan r2'
funding manor. It should be noted that this clement of the WWUMP plan is more of an
opportunistic program such that if funds are available, some recommendations can be
moved forward as described in the Action Plan recommendations within the WQSP
document.
D WQSP Recommendations
o Requires a $50,000 one-time investment, a $94,000 on-going adjustment to
base, and an additional 1.0 hTE.
b Industrial Pretreatment Program
o Requires a $30,000 one-time investment.
D Wastewater and Environmental Laboratory Program
o Requires a $30,000 one-time investment and $30,000 ongoing adjustment to
base plus 0.5 I,TE
D Near Tcrin Capital Improvements
o Requires a $196,000 one-time investment plus an ongoing $124,000 adjustment
to base and an additional 1.5 FTE
Investment Program Options
The WWUMP presents three Utility investment programs based on different levels of
funding including the following
1 Fiscally Constrained Plan
/ Action Plan
/ Vision Plan
These programs implement the policy direction of the WWUMP at the three funding levels.
Fiscally Constrained Plan
The Hscally Constrained Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes a
Wastewater Utility Fund rate increase of two percent (2%) in 2010, and a three percent (3%)
annual increase in years 2011 through 2030. The 3% increase rate is based on an assumed
average annual rate of inflation. Under the Fiscally Constrained program, there are
numerous programs and projects which would be either eliminated or have reduced funding.
These include the following:
1 Either the UV Disinfection or the Digester Modifications project (both scheduled for
construction in 2010) would need to be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
/ The 2016 Headworks Improvements project would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
October 2009 45
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
/ The 2020 Phase 2 Improvements project (Nutrient Removal) would be eliminated from
the 20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address CDPHE permit issues
/ The 2030 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC) removal project would be
eliminated from the 20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address CDPHE permit issues
/ The WWTP Rehabilitation funding would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
/ The Wastewater Collection System Replacement projects (Tier 1 and Tier 2) would be
eliminated from the 20-year CIP
/ The Sanitary Sewer System Rehabilitation funding would be eliminated from the 20-year
CIP
► Future budget supplemcntals would be eliminated from the 20-year CIP
Action Plan
The Action Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes an annual Wastewater
Utility Fund rate increase of four percent (4%) in years 2016 through 2030, with the
following exceptions. The Action Plan will follow the recommended 6-year (2010-2015)
CIP which includes the following rate increases: 2010-2%, 2011-2012=3%, 2013=4%, and
2014 to 2015=6%. There is one period of increased funding which is necessary to maintain
a positive fiend balance in 2030. Two consecutive years (2019 and 2020) of nine percent
(9%) rate increases would be required to fund the Nutrient Removal project. Under the
Action Plan, there are a few programs and projects which would be either eliminated or have
reduced funding. These include the following:
/ The 2030 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds (EDC) removal project would be
eliminated from the 20-year CIP
o This project would likely be required to address CDPHE permit issues
► The Wastewater Collection System Replacement projects (Tier 2) would be eliminated
from the 20-year CIP
Vision Plan
The Vision Program reflects an investment strategy which assumes an annual Wastewater
Utility Fund rate increase of four percent (4%o) in years 2010 through 2030 with the
following exceptions. There are three periods of increased funding necessary to maintain a
positive fund balance in 2030. Two consecutive years (2014 and 2015) of eight percent (8%)
rate increases would be required to fund the Headworks Improvements project. Two
consecutive years (2019 and 2020) of eight percent (8%) rate increases would be required to
fund the Nutrient removal Improvements project. Two consecutive years (2029 and 2030)
CcLober 2009 G
Wastewater Utility Master Plan 11`r'`
of eight percent (8%) rate increases would be required to fund the EDC removal project.
Under the Vision Plan, there are no programs that would have reduced funding.
Levels of Service
The three investment program options listed above will involve some combination of
providing essential, desirable, and discretionary services. These are defined below.
Essential Services - include the operation, maintenance and administration of existing
systems that ensure highly reliable wastewater treatment/ delivery in a manner that meets
federal and state regulatory criteria or industry standard levels of best practice. These
services ensure that customers and employees are in a safe environment, that a basic
"customer care" service standard (ie responsiveness, financial or permits) is provided with
minimal disruptions. Maintaining quality of life is addressed as a result of these, services.
These services ensure the health and safety of people and property and collect sufficient
funds to maintain these services.
Desirable Services - include the expansion of wastewater treatment and delivery systems
that are intended to respond to impacts of future growth or development, meet federal or
state goals, or which support city council adopted goals and values. These services might
enhance quality of life by providing a higher level of service or ability to access information
than is routinely provided by regulatory criteria or industry standards.
Discretionary Services - include enhancements of wastewater treatment or delivery
systems that, while not necessary for others to perform their business, do provide added
value. These services may provide information to the industry for analysis and comparisons
in order to develop future regulations, or may include another way for customers to access
information. These services may provide a special convenience to a small number of
customers
Investment Program Recommendations
It is recommended that the City proceed with the Action Plan identified above. The Action
Plan will ensure that both critical capital and rehabilitation projects continue to be funded
adequately through the 24-year CIP planning period.
Octob{or .'_009 47
Attachment 13
8. Wastewater Utility Master Flan Summary
Background Information
Boulder's wastewater collection system and the 75"' Street wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) serve
residences and businesses within the 26 sq. mile Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA). Areas
outside the WUSA boundary are served by other utility districts or septic systems. Boulder's
wastewater collection system currently serves a population of approximately 110,000 people and
101,000 employees associated with commercial and industrial business. Projected growth is
anticipated to occur primarily through in-fill and redevelopment projects resulting in an estimated
128,000 people and 156,000 employees within the WUSA.
All domestic and industrial wastewater generated within the city of Boulder is processed at the
WWTP. Septic wastes, hauled to the facility by private haulers, are also processed at the facility.
Treated liquid effluent, which meets numerous Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS)
parameters, is discharged to Boulder Creek. Anaerobically digested sludge generated at the
wastewater treatment plant is hauled away and land applied to farmland.
The WWTP was upgraded in 2008 to meet future wastewater treatment capacity demands and new
ammonia-nitrogen limits that were incorporated in the CDPS permit. The upgrades included
improvements to both the liquid stream treatment and solids dewatering processes. The current
treatment capacity is 25.0 million gallons per day (mgd) on a maximum month basis which provides
adequate capacity to meet population growth past 2025. The current average annual flow rate is
approximately 15 mgd. The solids dewatering process improvements increased the solids
concentration thereby greatly reducing the volume of dewatered solids that must be transported from
the WWTP site.
Utilities staff recently completed a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Evaluation which provided
recommendations for facility improvements to three key plant process areas. These improvements,
which are scheduled for 2010-2011, will include a new UV disinfection system, anaerobic digester
improvements, and headworks facility improvements. The UV disinfection system will replace the
existing gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide systems. The anaerobic digestion improvements will provide a
new pump mixing system. The headworks facility improvements will provide greater redundancy,
reliability, and longevity for several aging process components.
Wastewater Utility Master Plan
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (W WUMP) is the overarching planning document that is intended
to present key issues, programs, projects and associated budgets for the collection system, wastewater
treatment plant and water quality programs. The WWUMP is supported by three primary planning
documents for the Wastewater Utility: the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (WWCSMP),
the Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan (WWTPMP), and the Water Quality Strategic Plan
(WQSP). The WWTPMP was accepted by the Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB) in June
2007. The W WCSMP was accepted by the WRAB in December 2008. The WASP was accepted by
the WRAB in April 2009.
The mission of the Utilities Division is to provide quality water services, as desired by the community,
in a manner which emphasizes efficient management of fiscal and natural resources, and protects
human and environmental health. In general, the planning process for the Wastewater Utility focuses
on identifying opportunities that continue the high level of service provided to its customers and
evaluating the associated cost of the opportunities. The opportunities and recommendations resulting
from the planning process take the fonn of capital construction projects; system rehabilitation and
repair projects; preparing systems and operational processes that anticipate future regulations; and
evaluating staffing needs. Wastewater and water quality plamling projects, such as the WWTPMP,
WWCSMP, and WQSP arc the primary tools that provide the detailed analysis that result in the
opportunities and recommendations contained within the WWUMP.
A series of guiding principles, policies and implementation measures were used to define the planning
process for the Utility. The guiding principles for the WWUMP are based on Boulder's planning
approach to community sustainability through evaluating social, environmental, and economic impacts
associated with various program and projects within the city. Specifically, the guiding three principles
for the W W UMP are:
e Protect Public Health and Safety
a Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment
o Maximize the use of the Wastewater Utility's Funds
The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) includes a comprehensive list of Wastewater Utility
projects to be completed during the 20-year planning period. These include wastewater treatment plant
capital and maintenance related projects, as well as wastewater collection system capital and
maintenance related projects. The 2010-2030 Wastewater Utility Fund CIP has numerous line items
identifying various projects for the WWTP and the sanitary sewer collection system. The sigiuficant
CIP expenditures fall into the following three categories:
WWTP Capital Projects
o WWTP Rehabilitation Projects
o WWCS Rehabilitation Projects
These CIP projects have been identified for both the wastewater collection system and the WWTP to
ensure that the Wastewater Utility is able meet the guiding principles listed above.
Future Service Projections and Programs
The wastewater collection system and the WWTP have adequate capacity to meet the City's projected
growth and associated development for the projected buildout period. The current treatment capacity
is 25.0 million gallons per day (mgd) on a maximum month basis which provides adequate capacity to
meet population growth past 2025. The current average annual flow rate is approximately 15 mgd.
The WWTP liquid stream improvements project provided adequate treatment of the city's wastewater
through the year 2025, provided the current discharge permit and land use regulations do not change
substantially. The City is currently in the process of renegotiating new effluent discharge limits
(specifically ammonia) with the Colorado Department of Public health and Environment (CDPHE).
These anticipated limits for nutrient removal will require the city to further improve the treatment
process. The 20-year CIP includes various CDPHE permit driven projects in an effort to anticipate the
changing needs and requirements of the wastewater treatment industry.
More information on Boulder's Wastewater Treatment operations can be found on the Web at:
http://www. b oulderwater. net
ATTACHMENT('
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY FORM
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Water Resources Advisory Board
DATE OF MEETING: May 15, 2009
NAME/TELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPARING SUMMARY: Suzanne Lieberman, 303-441-3260
NAMES OF MEMBERS, COUNCIL, STAFF, AND INVITED GUESTS PRESENT:
BOARD MEMBERS -Robin Byers,, Kelly DiNatale, William DeOreo, Susan lott, Chuck i Iowe
STAFF- Ned Williams; Bob llarbcr<g; Douglas Sullivan, Erin Kiiltzle, Joanna Crean; Bret Linenfelser:
Kurt Bauer, Suzanne Lieherman - Secretary.
WHAT TYPE OF MEETING (BOLD ONE) )REGULAR) [SPECIAL] [QUASI-JUDICIAL]
A(;enda Item I - Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.
Agenda Item 2 - Mectinb Minutes -April 20, 2009.
[]ott arrives at 7:04 P.M. Motion: Howe - Move to approve April 20, 2009 minutes as amended.
Seconded: lott
Vote: 4-0 in favor, Motion passed. IDiNatale not yet present]
Agenda Item 3 - Public Participation and Comment. 17:06 P.M.)
Water budget rates. Adamski: Asked about triggers for increasing water rates during drought at April
meeting; more interested in getting information on when rates wit] be decreased as projected storage
indexes increase, versus when rates are increased when rations decrease. Williams: If no drought, rates
stay at same level as what council has approved; even if increased snowpack, water rates and rations stay
where they are. If water supply becomes extremely abundant, rates do not decrease. Adamski: As
projected storage increases beyond 0.4, not a document or policy on rate changes reflecting this? Williams:
Drought Response Plan describes moving into different drought stages; price of water and water budgets
not included in current Drought Response Plan; staff and WRAB working on including this; staff can't
impose rates without council action. Presumably, as city moves away from a more severe drought, would
return to pre-drought conditions. Adamski: But no policy that currently states this? DeOrco: Two ways
rates get adjusted during a drought: 1. adjustment of rates for revenue stability; 2. application of drought
surcharges to enforce water restrictions, but tl2 not yet decided. Adamski: So no policy exists on reducing
rates when supply high again? Lott: Understanding is that rates return to what they were prior to drought in
terms of council-approved rates. Williams: When there is no drought, no surcharge, and this is in city code.
Byers: The policy is apparently in the code. loll: Can we get a copy of the policy in the code? Byers: E-
mail or send Adamski the reference to the policy in the code. Adamski: 'Has additional public comment
items. )Board agrees to extend public continent time for Mr. Adamski.]
Issue of utilities workgroups exceeding budget. Adamski: Allowing workgroups to exceed their budgets
for consecutive three years is irresponsible [referencing, "Feedback on Peer Review Costs for 2010 Budget
Development," April 20 WRAB meeting]. How does staff respond when a workgroup goes over budget?
Williams: Doesn't recall saying that workgroups are allowed to go over budget for three consecutive years,
but that it can happen and that rationales for exceeding budget are reviewed-, sometimes over budget
because more water- or sewer- main breaks than anticipated, other times, poor management of budgets or
unanticipated costs; so there is not a rule about penalties when exceeding budget. Adamski: Three
consecutive yearsjust does not seem fair.
Questions on water rates during drought periods. Adamski: [Referencing memo Williams supplied to
WRAB March 25, 2009 and supplied to Adamski April 20, 2009 ] "A 9% water rate increase was effective
on January 1, 2002. A 3% water rate increase was effective on January 1, 2003. There was no rate
increase in January 2004, though there was a mid-year adjustment in residential/block 4 (decrease) and
CII/btock 2 and 3 (increase) so that beginning in June 2004, all customer classes and rates were back to
nonnal." Adamski: Consulted federal inflation rates for that time period: Bureau of Labor Statistics
2002: 1.59%, inflation rate versus a 9% Boulder water rate increase; 2003: 2.27 versus a 3% Boulder water
WRAB Sumnrarv
May 18, 2009
Page No. I
i Y
rate increase; 2004: 2.69% with no Boulder water rate increase; so Boulder water rate increases total 183%of federally-indexed inflation. City appears to be keeping up with inflation.
Howe. Consumer Price Index
is not the relevant index; have to look at engineering news record, consti oction cost index, etc. Adamski.:
Was not aware of this because DeOreo discussed rate of inflation at a previous meeting. DeOrco: Didn't
mean to imply rate increases only meant keeping up with inflation, particularly in terms of operating costs.
Adamski: But city also has a big budget suthlus. DcOrco: We will be discussing this later in the agenda.
lott: So what indices does the city use for adjusting for inflation? Williams: Several: construction, labor
costs, etc.
Procedure for scheduling a WRAB agenda item. Adamski: 1 low does public get an item on the agenda?
Williams: Attend WRA13 meeting;, e-mail, write a letter, call; agenda item moves through WRAB or other
board and then to city council. Adamski: Draft presentation of drought plan but no public comment
period at the previous WRAB meeting. Byers. Probably not correct. Adamski: My mistake. Byers: We
want to hear from people: call, c-mail or write a letter.
Agenda Item 4 17:24 P.M.1
Matters from Board -
• Flood mitigation. DeOreo: Thanks to staff for answering his questions on flood mitigation plan.
Still planning to talk about this at a firture meeting? Williams: For the board to decide if they want
to schedule it as a future agenda item. Ilarberg: Kurt Bauer is the new city flood engineer who
prepared answers to DeOrco's questions in the memo; will take the lead on emergency flood
response issues for utilities.
Matters from Staff -
• Memo on status of Boulder water supply. Williams: Sent out memo to WRAB; city not calling
for any drought stage or levels this year.
• Updated Benchmarking Report. Williams: Provided in the packet as an information item.
Howe: Such a report a very valuable tool for utilities. Chaired National Research Council
Committee on Privatization of Urban Water Utilities. Under the threat of privatization, many
utilities have turned to more efficient budgeting processes, with many turning to benchmarking to
measure their own progress. Byers: Would like WRAB to consider the study as an agenda item;
extremely useful document. Harberg: Information in report based on 2003 data so it is very
current; staff wants to continue to do this every year (has already done it four years). AWWA
(American Water Works Association) compiled a 2007 report that updated the previous
Benchmarking report. DeOreo: Why have complaints in water taste and odor increased (page 2 of
report). Harberg: Boulder Reservoir issues at the end of the year. Linenfetser: Issues with
Betasso, too; calls also coming in to various city locations, and staff is attempting to consolidate
these more; this might be affecting whether drinking water personnel receive all relevant calls.
DeOreo: Rationale for huge gap between actual expenditures and theoretical investments?
Harberg: Last year city based theoretical investment numbers on replacement schedule of one
percent per year for 75-100 year pipeline life; recent studies indicate that the theoretical
investments might be much lower than what is indicated in the Benchmarking report. Iott: Same
numbers here as in C111? Ilarberg: Yes, page S. Most cities not able to keep up with theoretical
investments but Boulder is well above average in most cases on system replacement already.
Howe: EPA's and AWWA's estimates of maintenance backlog of urban water infrastructure are
substantial. Iott: For items where 2003 is above average, does city use that information to bring
numbers back to average? Harberg: Only in terns of replacement-renewal rate. Howe: impressed
with city's management of effluent for copper exceedences.
• Update on Boulder Feeder Canal outfall diversion project. Williams: Per DiNatale's request,
staff has provided a written update on this project.
WTZAB Summary
May 13, 2009
Page No. 2
Agenda Item S - Final Recommendation on Wastewater Utility Master Plan.
Sullivan gave the presentation. The Wastewater Utility Master Plan (WWUMP) is an overarching
document that is intended to present key issues, programs, projects, and associated budgets for tile City's
Wastewater Utility including the collection system, wastewater treatment plant, and associated water
•tjnality and support programs. The WWUMP is supported by three primary planning documents for the
W'Istewater Utility: Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (WWCSMP), Wastewater Treatment Plant
Master Plan (WWTPMP), and the Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP).
The mission of the Utilities Division is to provide quality water services, as desire([ by the community, in a
Manlier which emphasiMS efficient management of fiscal and natural resources, and protects human and
environmental health. In general, the planning process for the Wastewater Utility focuses on identifying
opportunities that continue the high level of service provided to its customers and evaluating the associated
oust of the opportunities. The opportunities and recommendations resulting fi-om the planning process take
the tixm ol*capital construction projects; system rehabilitation and repair prpjects; preparing systems and
operational processes that anticipate future regulations; and evaluating staffing needs. Wastewater and
water quality planning projects, such as the WWTPMP, WWCSMP, and WQSP are the primary tools that
provide the detailed analysis that result in the opportunities and recommendations contained within the
WWUMP.
A series of guiding principles, policies and implementation measures were used to define the planning
process for the Utility. The guiding principles for the WWUMP are based on Boulder's planning approach
to community sustainability through evaluating social, environmental and economic impacts associated
with various programs and projects within the city. Specifically, the three guiding principles for the
WWUMP are:
• Protect Public [Health and Safety
• Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment
• Maximize the use of the Wastewater Utility's Funds
in general, the policies that support the guiding principles noted above are defined by the Boulder Revised
Code (BRC) and the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). The WWTPMP, WWCSMP and the
WQSP provide the implementation measures by defining planning elements, requirements,
recommendations, and, where applicable, identify capital improvement projects.
WRAB discussion and feedback included: Whether Eyeon PV (photovoltaic) project scaled for using
some power for UV disinfection or just for current use: 15%. Staff will return to WRAB with response on
whether UV disinfection would acid 15% to city's power requirements; confirmation that project is coaxed
out in teens of wetlands and prairie dogs (city using 5.5 acres). Whether finance people aggressively
regularly refinance, given strong city bond ratings: yes, not daily, but often, based on formulae; whether
rate increases are permanent: yes. Whether the data reflect value engineering solutions: yes, city is not truly
capacity-limited. Whether the digester versus UV disinfection is more critical: UV, in teams of safety, but
mixing component of digester also very important. Discussion on age and technological capabilities of
digester component; questions about chlorine leaks: a few, quickly responded to.
Clarifieations: Explanation of "headworks": physical removal of solids before biological and chemical
removal; significant wear on equipment otherwise. UV disinfection more about safety or economics?
Safety; UV disinfection is highly energy-intensive. Clarifications on differences between fiscally-
constrained plan, action plan, and vision plan. Questions on industrial pretreatment program (page 21): city
has looked at industrial flows for thirteen (13) permitted industries (page 21) but has no inspection power;
industrial survey currently identifying potential unregulated users in Boulder, beyond the thirteen, that
could represent significant industrial flows, which could be potentially subject to future regulation.
Clarifications on how options can or cannot be reconciled with current state and federal standards. Staff not
asking WRAB to pick among the scenarios, but to approve the overall plan.
Public Comment (Adantski): I low is 9% handled in CIP for wastewater: a TABOR issue? Williams: Rate
increases for the utilities and bond issuances are council action; the utility itself is not a TABOR-restricted
fund so council action does not go to a referendum or vote of the public like a sales tax referendum.
Adamski: So if city wants to take on $50 million dollars in debt, they don't need to ask voters for those
fi.uud? Williams: That's correct fbr the utility fiends, but not for other types of debt. Byers: The city is a
water activity enterprise under "I'ABOR so rate issues do not go to the ratepayers, but to council.
WRAL3 Summary
May 18, 2009
Page No_ 3
I
[8:32 P.M.]
Discussion on recommendation: lott and l ]owe think action plan is justified by large infrastructure needs.
DeOreo would like the report to include a better way to summarize the data, e.g. pie chart on debt service;
supports action plan or vision plan; concerns about energy-intensive operations: will start to be addressed
through an energy audit in 2009. Byers's theoretical support for fiscally-constrained option but practical
support for action plan; concerns with "big-ticket" items like endocrine disruptors.
[DiNalale arrives at 8:37 P.M.]
Motion (DeOreo): Move that TAB accept the Wastewater Utility Master Plan.
Seconded: Howe
Vote: 5-0 in favor, Motion passed.
Agenda Item t - Update on preliminary 2010 Budget and 2010-2015 CIP. 18:50 PMJ
Williams and Harberg gave the presentation. As part of the city's annual budget process, Utilities develops
a six-year planning budget, this year for the time period o[201 0 through 2015. Utilities staff has
fornntlated revenue and expenditure projections for each of the three utility funds through the year 2015.
Within the budget process Council approves and appropriates fluids only for the first year, 2010.
This packet contains information concerning the Preliminary 2010 Utilities Budget and the 2010-2015
Utilities Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The attached fiend financials (Attachment A - Water
Utility, Attachment B - Wastewater Utility and Attachment C -Stor nwater / Flood Management Utility)
reflect actual revenues and expenditures for 2008, updated revenue projections/rate increases for the
planning period (this includes the phased-in implementation of the adopted Plant Investment Fees), updated
CIP and any proposed budget supplementals (additions to the current budget). The operating budget (i.e.
personnel costs, chemicals, energy, etc.) and transfers will be updated and incorporated into the fitnd
financials later in May after the city's budget guidelines have been distributed.
At the May 18, 2009 WRAB meeting, staff will ask WRAB for input and feedback on the preliminary 2010
budget and 2010-2015 CIP. Staff will return to the Board on June 15th for further discussion and to solicit
a recommendation to Planning Board and City Council concerning the proposed 2010 Utilities Division
budget and 2010-2015 CIP.
WRAB discussion and feedback included: Whether PIFs can legally be used for operating expenses if
revenues down: probably not; idea of slowing down some of the capital improvements versus increasing
rates. Questions about how deficits covered: utility can continue to accumulate surpluses over a long
period of time, but also have to have a balanced budget, can't nun a deficit; clarifications on distinctions
between different reserve fiends. Rationale for choosing 25% as the proportion to keep in operating
reserves: set on industry standards and recommendations from bond-rating agencies. City finance
department makes decisions line by line about whether reserves will accumulate interest and whether they
will be invested short- or long- term; why some funds versus others do not accumulate interest. Request for
a summary from staff on how Boulder will use Windy Gap water if not part of the Finning Project. The
extent to which certain items in the Peer Review recommendations are outsourced: combination of staff and
consultants, with periodic inspections contracted out; Peer Review integrated with the budget. Carter Lake
funding not included in this planning period unless staff gets additional federal funds, but could be part of
capital reserve. Questions on remaining bonding capacity: as given in benchmarking study, significantly
lowered debt ratio. Questions on annexation issues, including which enclaves are responsible for paying
Boulder PIFs: Gapter: all except stonnwater PlFs; Crestview: likely all but stormwater PIFs. Discussion on
county's role in flood mitigation for city - not really proactive. Questions on flood capacity issues for
Goose Creek Basin. Discussion on charging users for hazardous household waste: still an option, but better
to initially provide the service to customers free of charge. Discussion on costs of using water monitors as
tools to manage water within the water budgets. Currently $100 for water meters per account, so monitors
at $50 each would add $ 1.5 million: currently $10,000 in the budget for monitors.
WRAB Summary
May 18, 2009
Page No. 4
Clarifications: Line itew 42, Attachment C-"2, Transportation Coordination: explanation Tor why utility
ratepayers pay for it: many utility components in transportation projects, with stormwater often a lame
component. Allows utilities to stay aliead of the curve by taking advantage of upgrades, economics of scale.
Clarification of Line 63, Attachment C-1: funds appropriated not spent or encumbered as of end of 2005;
funds not spent on capital projects carried over. Staff obligated to have council consider zero percent rate
increases for water, wastewater, and stormwater.
[9:56 P.M.]
Public Comment - Rate increases (Adamski): Rate increases don't make sense if considering inflation
data, which was negative for 2009 (inflationdata.coin). Thought Broadway reconstruction project was fully
funded through federal government and city sales taxes; didn't realize lie was also paying for Broadway
reconstruction project. Sullivan: Yes, transportation proiects can include utilities components and utilities
pays for those components (water, sewer, storm). Adamski: Page 4, Option C: zero percent rate increases
across the board, yielding 5900,000 deficit. If utilities is running a S48.5 - S53.28 million surplus, Why
couldn't staff take 5900,000 out of the. surplus instead of charging ratepayers'? Williams: Sounds like
you're including reserves in the surplus. Lott: Request for staff to explain how stn-pluscs get spent down
over time. Williams: Reserves all need to be subtracted from the Rind balance (line 84 in fund financials),
so they're not really surplus; always have to account for designated reserves each year that come out of
fund balance when developing a fund financial that doesn't result in an ongoing deficit. DeOreo: Which
criteria to use for future capital projects for emergencies (line 90)? Williams: Not intended for emergencies
but WRAB suggested that city should accumulate savings to cash finance major projects like the Carter
Lake Pipeline to prevent major rate increases. Capital projects reserves as one way to have a savings
account; build up cash to appropriate for large future capital projects, or try to do it within the C1P.
Adamski: Still don't understand how city would face hardship without rate increases. Williams: Would
reduce budget by same amount, $900,000 per year, unless expenditures reduced. Adamski: Problem with
reducing expenditures? lott: City cannot keep infrastructure intact without capital improvements.
Public Comment - issue of utilities workgroups exceeding budget (Adamski): Mechanism to ensure
workgroups not exceeding budget three consecutive years. Byers: Already addressed in Public Comment
period earlier in agenda.
Discussion on preferred options: Staff will return in June with budget and UP for final WRAB
recommendation. DeOreo: 5% water; 2% wastewater, 2% stormwater, Option A. DiNatale: Given:
economy, 4% water; 2% wastewater; 2% stomtwater. Howe: No strong opinion; water underpriced under
any scenario. Consumers also only care about total monthly bill, not breakdowns. lott: 1% wastewater and
1% stormwater possible? Williams: Yes. Byers: 4% water; I % wastewater; 1% stomtwater. Ratepayers
tired of incessant increases if they don't see bang for buck. Request to have staff supply budget information
in an Excel sheet.
Agenda item 7 - Discussion of 2009 WRAB Retreat. [10:35 P.M.]
Williams: Scheduled Monday, June 1 in the 13`x' Street Conference Room. Howe: Aurora study discussed
at retreat? Crean: Staff was planning to incorporate paper into drought response item at regular June
WRAB meeting. DeOreo: Purpose of retreat is for WRA13 to discuss its goals. Iott: Also about strategy
and figuring out what WRAB can and cannot accomplish. Byers: Food: family-style from Noodles and
then everyone to bring an appetizer, salad, or dessert. DiNatale: Have Secretary also bring flipcharts,
materials, etc.
Agenda Item 8 - Discussion on future schedule. 110:42 P.M.]
Williams: hute scheduled items: final recommendation on budget, tentatively, flood management and
critica[ facilities ordinance; draft CEAP for Carter Lake Pipeline. Decision to postpone discussion of next
round of changes to Drought Response Plan to July WRAB meeting, pending availability of Carol
Idlinghouse, with the final recommendation in August or September. DeOreo: ICI study? Williams:
Nothing being done on this.
Agenda Item 9-Adjournment
Motion: Motion to adjourn by lott.
Seconded by: DiNatale.
'WRAB Summary
May 18, 2009
Page No. 5
Vote: 5-0 in faenr, passed.
llcetinr; adjourned at 10:50 PNI.
Date. Time, and Location of Nt:-%t Niveting: -
1'hL next WRAB meeting will be Ad6nday, June 15 - 7 p.m, regular meetm& at the l3°i Amet Cun &cwe
(Zoom. unless oihcrevise deckled b y stall and the board,
'these are sunumry minutes. Audio tapes Or full record arc available through C'entrnl Records or on the
WRAB web site.
ivlintre;s appruved by:
Date:
MMAB Snmm ry
May 18, 2009
Page No. 6
ATTACHMENT D
Wastewater Utility Master Plan - Applicable BVCP Policies
Wastewater Utility Principle #R - Protect Public 13ealth and Safety
1.02 Principles of Environmental Sustainability.
There are limits to the capacity of the biosphere to support the 1 ife of human beings at current levels of
consumption and pollution. There are limits to the land and soil available for food production, to available
water, to resources such as trees, fish and wildlife, to industrial resources like oil and metals, and to the ability
of nature to absorb our waste.
With this in mind, the city and county acknowledge the importance of natural capital, which can be kept at
healthy levels for the long term only when we are able to do the following:
a) Renewable resources should not be used faster than they are recharged or replenished by the environment.
b) Non-renewable resources should be used with the greatest care and efficiency, and some of those should
be used to develop renewable replacements.
c) Waste should not be dumped into nature any faster than nature can absorb it.
4.03 City Leadership in Resource Conservation.
The city government will serve as an example by continuing to improve resource conservation practices in all
city operations. The city will integrate environmental impact considerations in decision making for all city
services, processes and facilities. The city organization will comply fully with environmental laws and
regulations and implement programs and procedures to strengthen compliance. Strict compliance with
environmental standards will be a key factor in employee training, performance review and program
evaluation. Emphasis will be placed on periodic monitoring of internal environmental practices to continually
improve the city's effectiveness. The city will provide appropriate environmental training and educate
ernployees to be environmentally responsible.
4.04 Environmental Education and Technical Assistance.
The city and county will promote public education and provide technical assistance about issues of local and
regional environmental concern and seek to engage businesses, residents and visitors in the goal of protecting
the quality of the natural and built environment.
4.05 Monitoring and Tracking.
The city and county will continue to improve monitoring and evaluation of land, air and water quality and will
track progress made in maintaining and enhancing environmental quality in the Boulder Valley.
4.34 Wastewater.
The city will meet all requirements for wastewater treatment under its National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System Permit and evaluate additional voluntary standards as appropriate. The city and county
support the County Board of Health's policy discouraging the installation of private sewage disposal systems
where municipal collection systems are available or where a potential pollution or health hazard would be
created. The city and county will support the development of programs to monitor problems associated with
failing septic systems. (See Policy 1.27 Annexation.)
Wastewater Utility Principle #2 - Protect Boulder's Natural Resources and the Environment
4.26 Protection of Water Quality.
Water quality is a critical health, economic and aesthetic concern. The city and county will protect, maintain
and improve water quality within the Boulder Creek basin and Boulder Valley watersheds as a necessary
component of existing ecosystems and as a critical resource for the human community. The city and county
will seek to reduce point and nonpoint sources of pollutants. Special emphasis will be placed on regional
efforts such as watershed planning and protection.
:SA
4.27 Water Resource Planning.
The city and county will work together and with other governmental agencies to develop and implement
appropriate water quality standards, water resource allocations, and water quality protection programs. Water
resource planning efforts will include such things as water quality master planning, surface and ground water
conservation, and evaluation of pollutant sources.
Wastewater Utility Principle #3 - Maximize the use of the Utilitv's funds
3.02 Definition of Adequate Urban Facilities and Services.
a) `Adequate facilities and services' for new urban residential development means the availability of public
water, public sewer, stormwater and flood management, urban fire protection and emergency medical
care, urban police protection, urban transportation, developed urban parks, and schools based upon the
criteria set forth in subparagraph (c) below.
b) `Adequate facilities and services' for new urban industrial and commercial development means the
availability of public water, public sewer, stonnwater and flood management, urban fire protection and
emergency medical care, urban police protection, and urban transportation, based upon the criteria set
forth in subparagraph (c) below.
c) The availability and adequacy of urban facilities and services as set forth in subparagraphs (a) and (b)
above will be determined based upon the following criteria and as further defined in the Urban Service
Criteria and Standards section of this plan. Determinations of facilities and services adequacy will be
based upon the following criteria:
(i) Responsiveness to public objectives
(ii) Sufficiency and dependability of financing
(iii) Operational effectiveness
(iv) Adequacy of equipment and facilities
(v) Proficiency of personnel
3.03 Phased Extension of Urban Services/Capital Improvements Program.
a) The city and county agree that extensions, furnishing, or provision of less than adequate facilities and
services for new urban development is contrary to the objectives and intent of the comprehensive plan and
would be injurious to the public health, safety and welfare because it would seriously impair the efforts of
the county, which has governmental authority and jurisdiction regarding land use control and development
in the unincorporated areas of the county, to implement the comprehensive plan through reasonable land
use regulations.
b) The county requests that the city accompany any extension of facilities and services to urban development
outside the boundaries of the city with concurrent annexation to the city of the land served. The city agrees
not to extend or furnish facilities and services to new urban development outside the boundaries of the city
without annexing to the city the land to be served, except as indicated in Policy 3.11.
e) The city and county recognize that certain properties within the Boulder Valley have filed for subdivision
approval with Boulder County prior to June 13, 1977, the date on which the county approved amendments
to its subdivision regulations that require compatibility of applicants for subdivision approval with the
comprehensive plan and have previously been granted water and sewer by the city. The development of
these particular properties may be permitted to occur without full compliance with policies 3.01 and 3.02
provided that such development is otherwise in accordance with the comprehensive plan and existing
Boulder County land use regulations at the time of submission of the application.
d) The city's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) is a major program for funding an adequate range of
urban services and facilities within Area I and Area II as annexation occurs during the planning period.
The Capital Improvements Program, within the framework of a responsible budget of balanced revenues
and expenditures, schedules the necessary capital projects to ensure maintenance of an adequate range of
urban services within Area I and to provide urban facilities and services to Area II through annexation on
a phased and orderly basis over the planning period. The CIP is a tool to direct the location and timing of
growth by coordinating and targeting public capital expenditures.
ter)