HomeMy WebLinkAbout5F - Report re: Grant for Assessing Iron Enhanced Sand Filtration
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
JULY 19,2010
SF
ROSS BINTNER, WATER RESOURCES ENGINEER
CONSIDER A REPORT DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE A WORK PLAN
FOR 319(H) GRANT FOR ASSESSING IRON ENHANCED SAND
FILTRATION.
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to request that the City Council direct staff
to prepare a work plan for 319(h) grant funding for Assessing Iron Enhanced
Sand Filtration for 2011.
Historv
Earlier this year the City of Prior Lake received grant funding from the Prior
Lake Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD) and Scott Watershed
Management Organization (SWMO) to build an innovative new stormwater
treatment device, the Iron Enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) and partner with the
University of Minnesota (UMN) to assess its stormwater pollutant removal
efficiency and cost effectiveness. Two filters were built in February and March
of this year, and testing began in June. Preliminary data shows the practice to
be a viable stormwater treatment practice with the potential to increase cost
efficiency.
Current Circumstances
In cooperation with the University of Minnesota, the City of Prior Lake applied
for a Federal 319(h) Development, Education or Research (DER) Grant. On
July 7,2010 the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) notified the City
that the grant proposal was one of six chosen for funding of 35 eligible DER
proposals.
The 319 (h) grant will expand the study of the original two filters and additional
filters proposed with the 2011 pond maintenance retrofit. The goal of this
additional study is to provide comprehensive longer term data at multiple filter
sites illustrating the effectiveness and fine tuning the design of this new
stormwater practice. By learning more, future designers will have the tools to
build filters in the most cost effective manner.
Securing federal grant funding can be an extended process and involves some
risks and burdens. While the MPCA administers the grant, the funding comes
from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and funding must be
approved by Congress before commitments can be made. The following is a
timeline of grant the grant process and related work the City would be
committing to in choosing to go forward with the work plan:
1. July 27, 2010: Draft work plan and submit to MPCA.
2. August - September 2010: Revise work plan with MPCA and EPA.
3. August - October 2010: Prepare plans and specifications for
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245/ www.cityofpriorlake.eom
ISSUES:
maintenance and retrofit of 5-15 existing pond systems including new
applications of the IESF.
4. November 2010: Advertise water quality maintenance and retrofit
project for bid.
5. December 2010: Accept bids and award contract for water quality
maintenance and retrofit project.
6. January 2011 - October 2011: Manage maintenance and retrofit project
including the construction of IESF.
7. March - August 2011: Sign contract with MPCA for grant funding.
8. August 2011 Sign contract with UMN for study and partnership.
9. August 2011 Sign contract with Scott Soil and Water Conservation
District (SWCD) for water quality monitoring assistance.
10. August 2011 - August 2014 administer grant work, monitor and study
IESF and report on results.
The 2011 Water Quality Maintenance and Retrofit Project # 11-012 is currently
in the preliminary design phase which can be easily modified to meet the grant
match requirements. Unlike the Street Sweeping 319(h) grant the City is the
lead agency on this grant and will incur some expense in managing finances
and contracts.
Performance data of two existing IESF systems is very preliminary, but the
systems are currently working in the efficiency range that makes this practice
competitive. However, the uncertainty of new technology may eventually prove
IESF not cost effective compared to other technologies. This grant study will
help determine the cost effectiveness and viability of this new technology.
While the MPCA has selected the proposal for grant funding, the final level of
funding will not be known until it is approved by Congress in 2011. The
preparation of the work plan is the next step in the 319(h) grant process. As
shown in the timeline, the City will have constructed additionallESF systems
before a contract is signed with the MPCA.
Acceptance of grant funds would put additional pressures on staff time.
Additional staff time demands will range from 400-500 hours per year for 4
years for water quality monitoring and an average of 150 hours per year for
study project management (not including already anticipated staff demand for
grant related construction, used for match). While paid by the grant, these
demands on staff time will necessitate either increased staff levels or
decreased level of service in other areas of the Water Quality Utility. Through
the City budgeting process, City Staff will be proposing an added engineering
position funded out of the water quality fund to help manage this grant and
other water quality related tasks, if City Staff are directed to prepare the work
plan. Acceptance of the grant also enters the City into a contractual
relationship with the State. The City Attorney has approved the form of the
agreement.
Although there are risks and burden for accepting this grant funding, there are
significant rewards as well:
1. Grant funding totaling $311,000, approximately $138,000 of which go
for monitoring equipment and City Staff time
2. Building on additional in-house expertise in installing, inspecting,
maintaining, retrofitting and analyzing state of the art stormwater
pollutant removal systems.
3. Continuing and accelerating the trend of managing City infrastructure
with an increasing focus on cost effectiveness.
RICouncil12010 Agenda Reportsl071910\1007191ESF 319h Grant Work Plan AGENDA.doc
2
4. Strengthening existing partnerships with University of Minnesota and
focusing statewide expertise on the study of the Prior Lake Water
Quality Utility.
Conclusion
Although funding from this grant does not displace local funding, the grant and
associated study create real value for the City of Prior Lake. Affecting
improvement in water quality in our lakes is a generational challenge that
requires long-term sustained effort; by increasing the depth-of-understanding of
how structural and programmatic treatment methods affect water quality, we are
increasingly able to tailor those treatment methods to increase their function
and decrease their cost.
By continuing to be a statewide leader in water quality and developing this
depth of knowledge, the City positions itself well for future grant funding
targeted at stormwater pollutant removal and cost efficiency.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
The total project cost of the DER research study is $566,150. including match
funding of $255,150, the grant award would total $311,000. The following is a
breakdown of approximate grant match and award amounts.
I City of Prior Lake University SWMO/PLSLWD
I Grant Funds $138,000 $173,000 *
I Grant Match $198,200 $20,600 $36,400
* The City may choose to contract with either the PLSLWD or the SWCD for
assistance with monitoring.
The majority of the grant match is provided by the City of Prior Lake through
construction of the IESF and related construction costs planned as part of
Project #11-012. Of the $198,200 grant commitment, $175,000 comes from
construction funding already programmed in the 2011 CIP in the amount of
$350,000, meaning at least half of 2011 maintenance project must be use
directly for, or related to, installation of IESF. The remaining grant match
amount is from staff time directly related to managing the maintenance and
retrofit project.
These expenditures are included in CIP for the Water Quality Fund (602-49420-
530) for construction, maintenance and retrofit of the City's Water Quality Utility.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Other significant grant match sources are from the SWMO and PLSLWD
through the already approved grant.
1. Direct Staff to prepare a work plan for 319(h) grant funding for assessing
iron enhanced sand filtration.
2. Table this item for a specific reason.
3. Deny this agenda item for a specific reason and provide staff with direction.
Alternative #1
AL TERNATIVES:
Reviewed by:
(IS I c- ~~\
Frank Boyles, City Manager
R:\Council\2010 Agenda Reports\07 19 10\1007191ESF 319h Grant Work Plan AGENDA.doc
3