GRAVETTE — The Gravette City Council Thursday night heard engineer Jim Ulmer explain the many steps and complications which be involved as a viable solution is found for the city’s sanitary sewer dilemma.
Gravette is under mandate to proceed in finding a solution that will reduce the amount of phosphorus and ammonia that presently discharge from the current treatment system.
Ulmer is with McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, the Fayetteville firm the city retained about five years ago to evaluate the present system and provide alternative solutions. He told the Council the answer is complicated, and more costly, because Spavinaw Creek, into which the Gravette system discharges, is termed a “losing stream”. This means the stream “goes underground” at various points which increases the potential for pollution of the groundwater which is a source for wells, etc.
Explain Time Frame
The firm, in October 2006, provided Gravette an “Evaluation of Gravette Wastewater Treatment and Facility and Losing Stream” study. The almost-50 page document listed numerous problems with the present lagoon system and reported how its continued use will not meet new federal and state standards.
In conclusion that report stated: “It is recommended that the existing treatment lagoons be abandoned in lieu of a new, advanced wastewater treatment system. The existing flow equalization lagoon, after inspection and repair of any leakage, may be utilized for flow equalization purposes. An advanced, site-specific, wastewater treatment system would consistently and adequately meet permit requirements and allow for additional growth of the City.” Fast Forward
Fast forward a year to November 2007 when the firm delivered a 100-page document, “Evaluation of Wastewater Treatment Alternatives and Opinions of Probable Cost”.
That detailed report was filled with statistics that can boggle the layman’s mind. Included were details of the existing system conditions, the need for a project, projections of population, projections of effluent flows, the development of alternative solutions, modification of existing facilities, treatment and disposal of sludge, a summary of potential costs and financing possibilities.
Specific Issues
One important paragraph was included under a subhead, “No Action Alternative”.
“Theoretical design criteria, preliminary data, including plant operating data, indicate that the existing facilities do not have the potential to meet all the future effluent limits set out. Specific issues related to meeting these effluent requirements are addressed in the next section. Under the ‘No Action’ alternative, the existing lagoons would continue to leak, and needed repairs to the effluent filters would likely be delayed. Proper operation of the effluent filters will be needed if the existing treatment plant is to have the possibility to comply with the future effluent limits. For these reasons, the ‘No Action’ alternative is not considered to be a feasible option.”
Fast forward again to last month’s presentation which provided cost estimates for three alternative solutions: Two plans involved construction of a new treatment facility on site. The third involved piping Gravette’s effluent to Decatur for treatment at their new plant.
Solutions Expensive
All three solutions are expensive, the Council learned. Potential costs ranged upward from $6 million to more than $8 million depending on the plan selected. It is consideration of these solutions the Council faces at this time.
As explained, whicheversolution is finally selected will involve the issuance of the bonds and, of necessity, an increase in sewer rates.
Several months ago the city locked-in a 2.75% loan in the amount of up to $9,000,000 which will assist in covering a portion of financing the project. Voters last year also approved a 3/4% sales tax which can also cover a portion of payment of the loan. These will be insufficient and an increase in the rate structure will be required.
“You ought to be raising rates now,” Ulmer warned, in order to build a fund reserve dedicated to the project.
Ulmer explained the complication of the various “hoops” that will have to be jumped through as the project progresses: meeting the complex requirements of multiple state and federal agencies, overcoming any environmental impact concerns, planning for operation and maintenance of the system and, importantly, how to meet the financial obligation of bond repayment.
Hearing Required
A public meeting will be required as well as an official public hearing. If the Decatur solution is approved, securing easements and details of creek and rail crossings are potential problem areas as well as environmental factors.
The required state permit to operate the Gravette sewer plant was issued November 1, 2005. It will expire October 31 of this year. Action must be made by Gravette by that date which shows the city is working toward a solution to meet the new discharge limits.
Determining if the city is working toward that solution will factor into whether the city’s permit will be renewed by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.
Read a brief history of Gravette’s sewer system on page 1B in this issue of The News Herald.
News, Pages 1 on 03/03/2010