SOMERTON, AZ WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
BORDER ENVIRONMENT COOPERATION COMMISSION
STEP II SUMMARY

Table of Contents

1. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2. ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN HEALTH

3. TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

4. ECONOMICS AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY

5. SOCIAL ISSUES

6. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

7. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

8. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

A. PROJECT NAME, TYPE, AND APPLICANT INFORMATION

NAME OF THE PROJECT: City of Somerton, New Wastewater Treatment Facility

TYPE OF PROJECT: Wastewater Treatment

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Conversion of a portion of the existing treatment plant to a new one-MGD wastewater treatment facility that will consistently meet the City's NPDES permit requirements.

NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION: City of Somerton
Name of Contact Person: Mark Ryan
Position: City Manager
Address: 110 North Main Street, P.O. Box 638
City: Somerton State: Arizona ZIP: 85350
Telephone: (502) 627-8866 Fax (502) 627-3794
E-mail Address: none

NAME OF CO-APPLICANT: not applicable

NAME OF CONTRACTOR: Microgen Corporation
Border Systems, Inc. (BSI)
Name of Contact Person: Dr. William J. Jewell, PhD.
Position: President
Address: 218 Cayuga Heights Road
City: Ithaca State: New York ZIP: 14850
E-mail Address: wjj1@cornell.edu

B. PROJECT LOCATION: U.S.A.

NEAREST CITY

The nearest cities to Somerton are San Luis, Arizona and San Luis, Sonora, Mexico, ten miles south of Somerton.

PROJECT LOCATION

The legal description of the property is as follows: "The West 650 feet of the NE 1/4 Section 4, Township 10 south, Range 24 West, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian; EXCEPTING THEREOF the North 1340.1 feet of the West 650 feet of the said NE 1/4 Section 4, Township 10 south, Range 24 West, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian."

The project is located in Somerton at the site of the existing facility. There will be no impact to the adjacent property owners, no added costs or time incurred by the City for property acquisition. There is ample space for future expansion. Due to Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) setback requirements for new wastewater treatment plants, agricultural property owners within 750 feet of the new treatment facility will be required to agree to the upgraded system. This would be difficult to accomplish at a new location.

C. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

The proposed Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System will continue to discharge into the Yuma Main Drain, an agricultural drain that flows into Mexico. The discharge is regulated by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit prepared by ADEQ, issued and enforced by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The existing wastewater treatment system periodically exceeds the stipulated compliance levels for five-day Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and Suspended Solids (SS).

The discharge generated by the Somerton wastewater treatment plant at the present time is 0.4 mgd or 0.62 cfs, equivalent to 0.6% of the flow of 100 cfs in the Yuma Main Drain. In the future, flows from the plant are expected to increase to approximately 1 mgd over a twenty year period, and assuming flows in the Yuma Main Drain remain constant, the contribution from the Somerton wastewater treatment plant will increase to 1% of the total flow. The impact on the Yuma Main Drain is therefore minimal. The Yuma Main Drain flows into Mexico, where the flows from additional discharges increases the flow to 120 cfs, decreasing the impact of Somerton's discharge on Mexico.

According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, there are two endangered species which may be impacted: the Yuma Clapper Rail and the California Brown Pelican. EPA has stated that the project will have no impact upon these endangered species.

D. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

Studies by Rubel Engineering and American Pacific Engineering developed a number of alternatives that would provide conventional solutions to the wastewater discharge compliance issues. While considering these options, an alternative technology developed by Microgen Corporation, referred to as a Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System, became another alternative.

The Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System consists of three-stage anaerobic digesters followed by a hydroponic system which together treat the wastewater in a gentle, natural way with very few resources in the form of electrical energy, chemicals or labor. An additional benefit is the future potential for the community to propagate nursery plants as a revenue crop in part of the hydroponic system. The proposed Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System will consistently meet Somerton's NPDES 30/30 secondary standards and resolve the community's existing non-compliance with the EPA. Further, it will provide for desired community growth, at a lower project cost and lower operating costs than the conventional options proposed.

E. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

Assurance of compliance with state and federal regulatory agencies, accommodate desired commercial and residential growth, continued ability to discharge effluent to Mexico for agricultural use, eliminate concern of exposure to endangered species. Concurrence with EPA Region IX and ADEQ with the recommended method of compliance.

F. TRANSBOUNDARY ASPECTS

The implementation of this project will result the new plant meeting its NPDES discharge limits. The net result will be the same volume of water released to Mexico as with the old plant, but with only a slight improvement in overall water quality. The Somerton wastewater plant is only one of the discharges into this drain, therefore the overall improvement in water quality delivered to Mexico will be relatively small.

G. PROJECT WORK TASKS

* 1 - City of Somerton
2 - Border Systems Inc.
3 - Woodward-Clyde
4 - Construction Contractor(s) to be selected

** Time in months, some tasks are concurrent. Estimated total time to startup is 9 to 12 months after acquisition of financing and permitting.

*** BSI will provide on-the-job training for selected Somerton city employees as operators for the new system. New or upgraded certifications are not included here.

2. ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN HEALTH

A. ENHANCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN HEALTH

The Microgen project addresses the critical needs of human health and the environment in the Somerton area. As can be seen in the attached letter dated July 6, 1992 from the USEPA to the City of Somerton the existing plant has not been able, on a consistent basis, to meet its NPDES discharge permit, resulting in enforcement actions. Although this permit has been reissued with more relevant parameters, the City still needs a long-term solution to consistently meet discharge standards and to meet the needs of community growth. The situation of discharging sewage without sufficient treatment has the potential to have effects on human health of those who come into contact with the water and on the environment for those animals and other life forms that may be effected by this discharge. This project will enable the City of Somerton to consistently meet or exceed its discharge limits thereby having the effect of enhancement of the environment and human health in the Somerton area and to recipients of the discharge to the Yuma Main Drain.

B. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

The existing wastewater system is based on a series of large ponds of sewage that have the potential to leak into the environment. The Microgen system is enclosed in the anaerobic digester stages and the water then is passed into a thin film nutrient system that is so dense that it precludes contact with wildlife. The treated water is then released into the environment. The new system has the potential to enhance the environmental protection of the area by providing protection to wildlife and providing a consistent discharge of compliant waters to the Yuma Main Drain. This is accomplished without the need of additional acreage of land and therefore no additional reduction of habitat in the Somerton area.

C. DOCUMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

See table below.

D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

The reports prepared by American Pacific Engineering and by Rubel Engineering, Inc. have made detailed analysis of the alternatives for wastewater treatment for the City of Somerton. These two documents are available at the BECC or the City for review. The final project alternative that was not addressed in these reports is the system as proposed by the Microgen company. This system is based on the use of anaerobic digestion after a standard system of trash racks. The wastewater in Somerton arrives at the plant in a "septic" condition. This is ideal for the anaerobic digester as the septic conditions means, in part, that the wastewater has already consumed the oxygen that was available in the wastewater. The water enters the digesters and is anaerobically digested. The gases derived from this digestion are either burned for energy or flared off depending on the size of the plant and the economic viability. The water then passes through a thin film hydroponic system where plants such as cattails are grown. These plants further polish the water and consume nutrients. The discharge is then released to the Yuma Main Drain.

IMPLICATIONS OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT: (NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE)

The attached July 6, 1992 letter from the USEPA to Somerton shows the effect of not implementing a new treatment system at Somerton or fixing the current system. The current system is not capable of consistently meeting its discharge limits and will continue to impact growth of the community.

JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CHOSEN ALTERNATIVE

The choice to use the Microgen system comes, in part, from an economic need. The system is considerably lower in cost than any system proposed to Somerton to date. The system has the capability to generate energy and create new jobs and possibly revenue from plant products derived from the hydroponic channels.

SHORT-TERM IMPACTS

Biological Diversity. The short term impacts to biological diversity will not be changed from the current situation. The water quality in the Yuma Main Drain that is the receiving water from the plant discharge will be improved only slightly at the onset of discharge, as the Somerton Wastewater plant is but one of many discharge sources to this drain. The plant will take several weeks to come into full compliance due to start-up and the water quality of the discharge will improve with time.

Ecosystem Integrity. The short term impacts to the receiving ecosystem will not be changed from the existing system. At start-up the plant will discharge waters that are similar to the current discharge from the Somerton plant. As indicated above this will improve with time.

Sensitive Environmental Habitats. There will be no short-term positive or negative effects to existing habitat.

Human Health. The water quality will on the short-term be similar to current discharges from the existing Somerton plant. The water is discharged into the Yuma Main Drain that flows from Somerton to Mexico.

LONG-TERM IMPACTS

Biological Diversity. Long-term biological diversity could improve slightly as the water will, after start-up, meet or exceed the NPDES discharge limits. Thus higher quality waters will be discharged into the Yuma Main Drain improving only slightly the water quality in the Drain.

Ecosystem Integrity. The improvement of the water quality discharge into the Yuma Main Drain will slightly improve the ecosystem in the area of the discharge as the water will be of higher quality than the current discharge. As the water moves away from the plant other discharge sources are added and the overall water quality is only slightly impacted.

Sensitive Environmental Habitats. Any sensitive habitats near the discharge point into the Yuma Main Rail will be slightly improved.

ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND COSTS

The Microgen system has been proven over a four year period at Cornell University and the pilot plant proved highly resilient and able to withstand upset conditions. As with any new concepts there are risks. The worst case risk is failure of the system. For the first phase project the bulk of Somerton's ponds will be left in place and the sewage could be rediverted into the existing ponds. The water quality would revert to the approximate level of Somerton's current discharge until restart actions could be taken. The costs of repair depends on the mechanism of failure.

ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND OBJECTIVES

The environmental standards for any wastewater plant operating in the United States has its standards set for it by the EPA via the NPDES discharge permit process. This permit will be resubmitted to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) which processes the permit for EPA Region IX. It is our objective to met or exceed the current standards set for the plant.

TRANSBOUNDARY EFFECTS

The discharge generated by the Somerton wastewater treatment plant at the present time is 0.4 mgd or 0.62 cfs, equivalent to 0.6% of the flow of 100 cfs in the Yuma Main Drain. In the future, flows from the plant are expected to increase to approximately 1 mgd over a twenty year period, and assuming flows in the Yuma Main Drain remain constant, the contribution from the Somerton wastewater treatment plant will increase to 1% of the total flow. The impact on the Yuma Main Drain is therefore minimal. The Yuma Main Drain flows into Mexico, where the flows from additional discharges increases the flow to 120 cfs, decreasing the impact of Somerton's discharge on Mexico.

E. CONFORMANCE WITH LOCAL AND REGIONAL CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS

The project complies with all local applicable plans, land use, and zoning regulations. Somerton's Master Plan is scheduled for completion and subsequent adoption in late November. The City anticipates that the project will conform with this plan.

F. CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT

Please see this section at the end of the attached tables as indicated in C. above.

3. TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

DESIGN CRITERIA FOR NEW 1-MGD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

A. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS, GIVEN OR ASSUMED

1. DESIGN PARAMETERS 2016 Design Year
Design Flows (Avg. 24 hr) 1.000 mgd 694 gpm
Maximum Daily Flow 2.000 mgd 1,389 gpm
Ratio: (Maximum/Daily) 2.00

2. FLOWS FOR BAR SCREEN AND GRIT AND GREASE SYSTEM
Design flows (Avg. 24 hr) 2.000 mgd 1.389 gpm
Maximum Daily Flow 4.000 mgd 2,778 gpm
Ratio: (Maximum/Daily) 2.00

3. DESIGN LOADINGS
BOD5 220 mg/L
lb BOD5/day =
mgd x mg/L x 8.34 IBC/gal 1,834 lb/day

Suspended Solids 210 mg/L
lb SS/day =
mgd x mg/L x 8.34 IBC/gal 1,751 lb/day

Ammonia (NH3-N) 25 mg/L
lb NH3-N/day =
mgd x mg/L x 8.34 lb/gal 209 lb/day

4. EFFLUENT CRITERIA
BOD5 30.0 mg/L
SS 30.0 mg/L
Fecal Coliform Bacteria 1000 col./100 ml.

5. ANTICIPATED PERFORMANCE Less Than:
BOD5 30.0 mg/L
SS 3 0.0 mg/L
Ammonia (NH3-N) 20.0 mg/L
Fecal Coliform Bacteria 200 col./100 ml.

6. ANTICIPATED SLUDGE/SOLIDS DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS*

Dry Solids Loading(primary and secondary):
0.17 lb/lb BOD5 removed

Dry Solids/mgd =
8.34 x (220-30)x 1mgd x 0.17 269 lb/mgd

Digested primary sludge
@ 4% Dry Solids 269 lb/mgd/.04 =
6730 wet lb/mgd/8.34 = 807 gal/mgd
Grit & Grease Loading
75 Ib/ft3 @ 4 ft3/mgd 300 lb/mgd

* At-volumes less than one MGD, the solids volumes will reduce proportionately.

B. TECHNICAL PROCESS

1. RECEIVING AND PRETREATMENT

Inlet Manifold: for connections to force mains with provision for future connections. The piping will be sized for a maximum 4 MGD flow rate.

Headworks: provisions for grease and grit removal, and flow measurement. This facility will be sized for 4 MGD maximum flow rate. (Flow of process water from the headworks through the treatment plant into the outfall to the Main Drain to be by gravity, except where pumping through unit processes or recycle is required.)

Equalization: An overflow weir or comparable device will be used to divert excess flow to a two million gallon lagoon, lined and covered with geomembranes.

2. PRIMARY SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

Settled primary sludge separated in the anaerobic treatment process. Estimated quantities above taken to an ambient temperature hydrolysis/acidification digester. Design solids retention time is in excess of 60 days. Volume of tank in the form of a covered lagoon equals 60dx807gal/d = 48,500 gallons.

Anaerobically treated wastewater used to mix/rinse hydrolyzing sludge by turning over the liquid volume once per day, pumping 5 minutes every two hours. Overflow returned for further anaerobic treatment.

Settled sludge wasted from lagoon once per week or less at the rate of 807 gallons per day accumulation rate, or less. Little secondary sludge is generated by anaerobic BOD treatment. Any excess sludge would be directly wasted into the hydroponic system and removed and stabilized in this process. Expected solids accumulation in the hydroponic system is expected to be less than two inches per year of wet sludge.

3. ANAEROBIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT

Total required design hydraulic retention time is 12 hours. Bioreactor volume = 0.5 days x1.0 mgd /7.48= 70,000 cubic feet.

Equal parallel treatment trains will be constructed to each treat a design flow of 500,000 gallons per day, or operated intermittently at a full design flow of 1 mgd.

Anaerobic treatment system composed of six different units (three units in series in each of two parallel treatment trains) constructed of above ground tanks, or using baffles in covered lagoons, the choice depending on the hydraulic gradient, and the costs. First two units are "floating expanded bed" (FEB) attached film bioreactors with a retention time of one hour and four hours at half the design flow; or half these values when only one train is in operation. The third unit is an anaerobic sludge blanket accumulating bioreactor with a hydraulic retention time of seven hours. All excess primary and secondary sludge will be wasted from this unit on an "as needed" basis to keep the sludge blanket in the reactor. The hydraulic retention time of each of these third anaerobic treatment units is 3.5 hours when all of the flow is diverted through one side of the treatment system.

4. SULFIDE CONTROL

Anaerobic treatment systems must exert positive control over hydrogen sulfide and other malodors. Several steps will be taken to insure that odors are controlled. Since sewage arrives at the treatment facility in an aerobic form, it is expected that hydrogen sulfide will exist as a result of sulfate reduction under anoxic conditions in the treatment system. A small structure will be constructed over the headworks and the grit/grease removal units. An air biofilter will be used to treat the air removed from this structure by a negative pressure air control device.

The anaerobic units will be operated in such a way to avoid significant biological sulfate reduction. In addition, the effluent from the anaerobic treatment units will be treated as needed for sulfide removal. Several proprietary devices will be available for sulfide control. One technique involves precipitating hydrogen sulfides on particulate metals. This unit process is similar to a grit chamber, and the metal precipitate can either be recovered and regenerated or disposed of in a landfill. The cost of both alternatives will be examined if this odor control technology is utilized.





5. HYDROPONIC TREATMENT

A four acre Nutrient Film Technique(NFT) hydroponic area, divided into four equal areas, with channels between 20 and 50 feet wide will be used. These are to be constructed in Lagoon Number 2.

At a hydraulic loading rate up to double the 1.5 ft/d, anaerobically treated effluent was treated to less than 30/30 mg/l of BOD and SS in a four year study of resource-recovery wastewater treatment conducted at Cornell University.

Channels are constructed so that they can be isolated from the system and dried/harvested separately.

6. DISINFECTION

Effluent to flow through existing chlorinating chambers, as necessary, to achieve biological kill prior to sampling and discharge to the Main Drain.
Equipment to be sized for 1 MGD flow rate.

C. QUALITY CONTROL PLAN

The Quality Control Plan will include provisions to accomplish the following:

1. Leak testing of all pressure pipes.

2. Infiltration/exfiltration and deflection testing of all gravity flow pipes.

3. All metal pressure vessels to be ASME Code Section VIII designed and stamped.

4. All backfill material and imported materials to be tested by independent testing laboratory.

5. Compaction of backfill material to be tested in field by independent testing laboratory.

6. Concrete test cylinders to be prepared in field and taken for testing to an independent testing laboratory.

7. Installation contractor to be pre qualified prior to award of construction contract.

8. Welders to be certified.

9. Electrical motors to be balanced, aligned, and checked for phase rotation.

10. Electrical circuits to be tested for compliance with functional requirements.

11. Computer software to be reviewed for compliance with functional requirements on designated computer.

12. Laboratory equipment to be calibrated and tested with standards and certification samples.

13. Instrumentation to be calibrated throughout their range of operation, and where possible checked against secondary standards. All alarms to be tested.

14. Startup and test pumps, blowers, and other mechanical equipment prior to facility startup.

15. Operators will be trained by BSI on-the-job.

16. Quality Control/Quality Assurance for construction by BSI, or BSI's designated agent, with additional oversight from Somerton Public Works Department staff.

D. INVESTMENT TIMETABLE

When receipt of funds and construction time table are certain, a draw down schedule which maximizes earnings on idle funds will be enacted.

A. MAIN FINANCIAL INFORMATION

The estimated construction cost of the project is $1.4 million. The project will be funded through a combination of grants (Rural Development and EPA) estimated to total $1.2 million. The remaining $200,000 will be paid by the City of Somerton or through a loan.

Additionally, there is a large scale project being considered for annexation into Somerton. The project provides for an estimated 800 residential units. Developer and Sewer Impact Fees from this project are estimated at $1.6 million. It is likely, though not desired, that these fees would offset any financing shortcomings of the project.

B. PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET

BSI estimates the engineering for the project is about 30% complete. Estimated total time to startup is 9 to 12 months after acquisition of financing and permitting.

BSI will manage and operate the system under a 10 year renewable contract at an annual fee of $120,000 for flows up to the 1-MGD system capacity which excludes profit, insurance, replacement of capital equipment, and new capacity investment. Capital equipment is anticipated to cost $200,000. Annually, 3% of that figure is anticipated for replacement of parts. BSI will have overall responsibility for the facility and will employ a site manager. BSI proposes to use selected city employees, trained and supervised by BSI, for plant operations. Total labor is expected to be less than one man-year. Labor cost for city employees will be charged against the BSI fee.

The fee will be adjusted for inflation annually. The following table estimates operating costs for the system.

The total capital cost of the proposed facility is estimated at $1,366,000. The breakdown of costs are as follows for a sewage treatment facility with a present flow of around 400,000 gallons per day, an average design flow capacity of one million gallons per day, and a peak daily flow of two million gallons per day.


Preliminary Project Cost Estimates

C. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

While this analysis has not been conducted, it is highly probable that a modest rate increase would not impact customer usage.



D. BREAK-EVEN ANALYSIS - OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL

Projected Annual Costs: $120,000 (BSI annual fee)

Break-Even Analysis - Operational

Projected annual costs under the BSI proposal would actually reduce Somerton's operating costs. The contracted annual rate proposed by BSI would be $120,000. Historically, operating costs incurred by Somerton have been well above this amount, ranging from $173,489 in fiscal year 1992 to $209,874 for the fiscal year 1994.

Somerton's current user fees would recover operating costs under the BSI proposal and provide an ability to responsibly set aside funds for capital replacement.

Current user fees and revenue projections are as follows:

Estimated monthly revenues:

Residential - $15,060
Commercial - $ 1,145
Trailer parks - $ 347
Monthly $16,552^* Annual projection $198,624

* Revenues have historically met or exceeded this figure each month beginning with the rate increase effective January 1995.

E. ECONOMIC BENEFITS

The project would allow the City to begin to accommodate its desired growth leading to additional tap and monthly service fees. The cost to operate the new system will be slightly less than the current system. Added residential units will provide economy of scale in future utility rate determinations.

5. SOCIAL ISSUES

A. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE COMMUNITY

Somerton is a rural community of 5,900 and is located 12 miles north of the San Luis, Sonora, at the Mexican border and is 10 miles south of Yuma, Arizona. 1990 census figures confirm that over one half of the population is in the low to moderate income category.

The primary source of revenue is agricultural, growing and processing citrus and vegetables. A community profile as prepared by the Arizona Department of Commerce is provided.

B. DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

The Somerton Ordinance 219 provides a description of City services in the areas of water, sewer, and solid waste. A copy of the Ordinance is available from the City or at the BECC office.

C. POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Slightly positive. The project would allow the city to begin to accommodate its desired growth. No additional land will be required to construct this new plant. The plant will allow the city to collect additional tap and monthly service fees. The cost to operate the new system will be slightly less than the current system. Added residential units will provide economy of scale in future utility rate determinations.

D. PROJECT IMPACTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES

There are no impacts on cultural resources. See section 2. Environment and Human Health, c. Documentation of Environmental Regulatory Compliance.

E. OTHER PROJECT IMPACTS

None.

A. COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PLAN

The City of Somerton has submitted and implemented a Comprehensive Community Participation Plan approved by the BECC. The Plan consists of four major tasks. A summary of each task is described below.

LOCAL STEERING COMMITTEE

A local steering committee was created to educate community leaders about the need for a new treatment facility for the City. The Committee is called the "Somerton Infrastructure Advisory Committee." The first meeting of the steering committee was held on December 6, 1995 at 6:00 pm at the Somerton Senior Nutrition Center. Each participant was given a project fact sheet to distribute to their organizations. Steering committee members were tasked with the following assignments:

Educate yourself about the project benefits and drawbacks.
Help educate others about the project, by providing fact sheets on the project.
Attend the public meeting at 7:00 pm, December 19th.
Bring other residents to the public meeting for maximum public input.

MEETINGS WITH LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS - CONSULTANTS

In order to effectively educate the community, and bring the project to the community, meetings were held with local organizations. The Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager met with at least four organizations before December 19th to discuss the project and solicit support.

PUBLIC MEETING

Notices of a public meeting were placed in the Yuma Daily Sun News and Bajo el Sol in English and Spanish, promoting a special public meeting to be held on December 19, 1995 at 7:00 pm, at the Somerton Senior Nutrition Center. A press release was sent to the Yuma Daily Sun News and Bajo el Sol to encourage newspaper articles about the project. Yuma's article was favorable. A radio announcement was developed to air four days prior to the public meeting on December 19th to ensure public awareness of the public meeting. This was the first time the City of Somerton had ever used radio to encourage participation in a public meeting. Additionally, a letter was sent to approximately 1,200 households in Somerton, providing factual information about the project and inviting them to the public meeting.



REPORT TO BECC

As required by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) criteria for community participation, we submit this report documenting the activities covered under our Comprehensive Community Participation Plan and its results. Ultimately, the report and supplementary attached materials should demonstrate the support demonstrated by our community for a new Wastewater Treatment facility.

In our original Community Participation Plan, develop, submitted, and approved by the BECC in the fall of 1995, we outlined four major tasks. This report will provide summary results for each of the four tasks: Local Steering Committee, Meetings with Local Organizations, Advertising, and Public Meetings.

Local Steering Committee

A local steering committee was created to educate community leaders about the need for a new treatment facility for the City. The steering committee was named the Somerton Infrastructure Development Committee and included the representatives from the local community.

A meeting of the committee was held on December 6, 1995, at 5:30 pm. The committee's discussion focused on the need to bring adequate facilities to Somerton that would ensure compliance with state and federal regulatory agencies, as well as provide the City with the ability to meet growth in the community.

Committee members included several of the Main Street Merchants, the Somerton Action Committee, Somerton Senior Nutrition Center, Jesus Name Church, local developers, including Reidel Construction and Housing America, and community leaders.

Developers expressed concern with the cost of the facilities (originally $2.7 million). The consensus of the group was that Somerton needed to grow and would be able to do so upon the completion of expanded facilities.

The committee was genuinely in favor of the new wastewater facility, recognizing above-all the benefits to the community. In particular, the committee recognized the link between an expanded facility and economic development. Presently, the City cannot develop in new areas due to the lack of capacity at the existing facility.

Meetings with Local Organizations

In order to effectively educate the community, and bring the project to the community, meetings were be held with local organizations on the project. Met with City Council, City staff, public works department, and developers.

Recognizing the importance of reaching out to organizations outside of Somerton, and before certification consideration by the BECC, we plan to contact local Arizona-based non-governmental organizations (including Arizona Toxics Information and Border Ecology Project) to provide a briefing on the project, describe the benefits to the environment and health of the community as a result of the project, and answer any questions they may have.

Advertising

Advertising was a useful tool to reach out to the Somerton community on the proposed project. We used a number of different media tools to let the community know about the project and to encourage them to participate in the public hearings.

Advertisements were placed in the Yuma Daily Sun promoting public hearings on December 19, 1995 and August 27, 1996.

Additionally, two separate press releases were sent to the local media and provided directly to media representatives in the area announcing the project and public hearings.

A radio commercial was also developed promoting the December 19^th public meeting and the project, and aired on the local radio stations.

The City of Somerton also sent a direct mail letter to 1,200 households, providing factual information about the problem and project, in order to educate as many people possible about the proposed wastewater treatment facility.

Public Meetings

To understand the success of the public outreach program, it is important to look the progression throughout the planning of the project.

The first public hearing on the proposed project was held on Friday, November 15, 1995, at the Senior Nutrition Center. Although the meeting was announced publicly in the local newspaper, only two members from the public attended the meeting.

In order to solicit needed communication with the public on the project (due to the lack of participation at the first public hearing), a special public meeting was held on December 19, 1995, in City Council Chambers. Before the meeting was conducted, the City Managers met with Somerton's infrastructure committee and advertised heavily in various local media avenues. As a result of an aggressive outreach campaign, this public hearing had record attendance ever , according to Mayor Vivian Robinson.

After a presentation of the project during this meeting, meeting participants expressed concern about raising rates. However, they were largely in favor and understood the need for the project.

The Border Environment Cooperation Commission also made a presentation during the public meeting. They urged the residents, City Council, and Somerton management to take a good "hard look" at the proposed project to ensure that was indeed the most cost-effective project for the City. This presentation sparked a conversation with City Council about looking at other options and ultimately lead to a BECC-supported study of alternative technologies for Somerton's treatment facility.

After analyzing a number of options, the City selected a new technology, at a lower cost to the residents, which resulted in the third public meeting on August 27, 1996. The new proposed facility was described in detail by Dr. Jewell of Cornell University. City Council members asked about the benefits and drawbacks of selecting this option. Local residents and developers expressed support for the project. The City Council was encouraged by the lower cost of the proposed facility.

Finally, on September 3, 1996, the City Council voted unanimously to direct the City Manager to go forward with the project and seek BECC certification, and EPA and RECD grant funding. The City Council expressed their enthusiasm and support for the project.

Meeting announcement, agendas, and minutes for the public hearings are attached as well as all other appropriate documenting information including media announcements and newspaper articles.

Post Certification Participation Plan

A preliminary post-certification plan was developed by the community outlining mechanisms to include the public during the construction phase and throughout the life of the project. The Plan consists of three major tasks:

Task 1: Continue Local Steering Committee: The local Somerton Infrastructure Advisory Committee will continue to meet during construction phases of the project and as needed thereafter. The Advisory Committee will serve to advise the City Manager on issues related to the wastewater treatment plant and future infrastructure projects.

Task 2: Continue Meetings with Local Organizations: Additionally, the City Manager will continue to meet with local organizations during the construction phases of the project and as needed thereafter. Again, this will allow the Managers to bring the project to the community.

Task 3: Additional Public Outreach: Additional public outreach and advertising will be conducted to ensure that the public continues to be aware of the status of the project. Special outreach efforts will be made in the event of a rate increase or other related impact on users. Press releases will be sent periodically updating local media on project status.

7. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

A. STARTUP OPERATION PROGRAM

Lagoons Nos. 1 and 3 of the existing treatment plant will continue to operate through construction and startup of the new facility in the space now occupied by Lagoon No. 2. Each unit operation will be tested upon completion to assure it complies with design criteria before acceptance from the contractor. Inoculation of media for the FEB digesters and the propagation of selected local plants (cattails) for the NFTs will begin soon after project funding at a site to be selected. The media and plants will be transported to the facility and put in place. Raw sewage will then be diverted to the new system stepwise over a period of days until essentially all of the flow is to the new system. The small remaining flow will continue to Lagoon Nos. 1 and 3 system to keep it viable and to allow natural degradation of any sludge present to occur before further plans are made for their use or closure.

B. CONTINGENCY PROGRAM

If unforeseen problems occur during startup, the raw sewage will be diverted to the existing treatment system. Problems can then be corrected and the startup resumed. The project will have dual treatment trains, with one normally off-line as a spare; critical equipment will be installed in duplicate to provide for standby use. An inventory of critical spare parts and supplies will be maintained. A small standby generator will be available on-site for use during power outages, as needed.

C. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Operation and Maintenance manual to be prepared by BSI design professional with support from construction contractor and equipment manufacturers. Contents will include:

1. Description of the Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System and related support equipment.

2. Warnings for safety, process, and equipment operation.

3. Description of operations.

4. Troubleshooting Guide.

5. Laboratory procedures.

6. Operating and maintenance logs and data records.

7. Process and instrumentation drawings.

8. Equipment drawings.

9. Manufacturer's data sheets, operation and maintenance instructions.

D. SAFETY PROGRAM

A safety program will include the following:

1. Safety training relating to Occupational Safety and Health Agency requirements, personal hygiene, safety clothing, material data sheets, emergency procedures relating to personal injury or health events. Training to take place immediately before startup, with refresher training to occur periodically (semi-annual minimum frequency) to review and update information.

2. Practice emergency procedures periodically.

3. Inspect safety clothing and equipment monthly and replace as needed.

4. Maintain first aid supplies at site.

5. Establish procedures that assures contact with all personnel at the treatment plant site. All employees and visitors will log times of entrance and exiting the site.

E. POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM

Not applicable.

8. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

A. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES

See project Sustainable Development Characteristics below.

B. INSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN CAPACITY BUILDING

The Microgen system will help the community's long-term support and maintenance by reducing the debt load to the City and allowing funds to be used on other community needs rather than sinking them into a high priced wastewater system.


PROJECT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

A. Ecosystem Management: Few, if any, other wastewater systems available today with the possible exception of wetlands offer the degree of natural resource management as the Microgen system. The system works with nature to treat wastewaters by the use of anaerobic digestion followed by the use of a thin film nutrient system.

B. Source Reduction:

C. Recycling: Recycling is a key component of the system. The system has the potential to generate energy by the capture of the methane gas produced by the anaerobic system as well as the potential sale of crop products that can be raised in the thin film hydroponic system.

D. Project Life Cycle Planning: The product life cycle reduces residuals such as sludge that plague other wastewater systems. Thus allowing a cost savings in sludge management.

TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY

A. Project Life Cycle Costs: The general goal of the proposed Resource Recovery Wastewater Treatment System is to meet effluent water quality requirements with a minimum of energy, operating labor, and no chemicals. The preliminary estimate of the 20 year life-cycle cost of this project is $2.5 million, compared to $3.6 to $4.3 million reported for the other options considered. Resource recovery in the form of salable nursery plants and/or electricity generated on-site have the potential to further reduce the life cycle costs.

B. Energy Production Efficiency: Not applicable to this project.

C. Energy End-Use Efficiency: The O&M budgets for conventional options considered have electrical power costs up to $50,000 a year more than the proposed project.

NATURAL RESOURCE PRESERVATION

A. Habitat Preservation or Enhancement: The use of the Microgen system enhances the natural environment by reducing the impacts of needing additional and large areas of land for other types of wastewater treat that could reduce wildlife habitat.

B. Creation or Improvement of Parks or Reserves. The system can be designed into a park like setting.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

A. Prevention and Compliance: The project will reduce excess BOD and suspended solids which will bring the city into compliance with its NPDES permit. It will reduce concerns for endangered species in this area and not hinder agricultural use of the effluent by Mexico.

BENEFITS TO LOW-INCOME RESIDENTS

A. Jobs: The Somerton area has a high rate of unemployment and even a few new jobs help the local low income populace. The Microgen system will on occasion, especially at startup, require the use of low income labor to plant the thin film raceways. These raceways will require some maintenance and low income labor can be used for these jobs as well. The Somerton area is an agricultural area and there is an abundance of people with agricultural knowledge

B. Better Environmental or Health Services: The Somerton area's environment and health will be enhanced by the consistent discharge of compliant waters into the Yuma Main Drain.

C. Other Community Enhancements: Affordable housing and developer contributions in the form of public facilities, including a fire station, parks and sorely needed schools. Economy of scale in establishing user fees.

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

A. Education Program: Due to the unique nature of the Microgen system school groups and other education groups will be very interested in touring the facility.

Post-Certification Plan: One of the main goals of the Microgen company is to help achieve public awareness of the need to treat wastewater in a sustainable, environmentally sensitive manner. This concept will be encouraged.