-------
-------
%
WASTEWATER
TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
U.S-. Efivironm&fatsil "Protection
Library, Room 2404
401 M Street, S.tyi;5
The University of Tennessee
.MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE
-------
Acknowledgements
This report has been prepared by The University of Tennessee Institute for Public Service (IPS) and
Municipal Technical Advisory Service ( MTAS) under grant number T901585-01-0 from the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA).
It was made possible through the efforts of these individuals: Ed Archer, MTAS Utility Management
Consultant; Deborah Elder, IPS Communications and Publications Specialist; Anne Hawkins, MTAS
Information Management Consultant; Andy Jordan, MTAS Senior Public Works Consultant; Alan
Major, MTAS Utility Finance Management Consultant; Pierrette Oppegard, Designer; Sharon Rollins,
MTAS Utility Management Consultant; Cynthia Tschaepe, Director, Tennessee Department of Health
and Environment (TDHE), Division of Construction Grants and Loans; and James E. Word, TDHE
Commissioner.
Special thanks to James Bourne, US EPA Office of Municipal Pollution Control> Planning and
Analysis Division, who provided direction and guidance for this project.
The views, opinions and conclusions contained herein are those solely of the authors and not
necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
WASTE WATER
TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
Table of Contents
Foreword
Matching Needs with Capabilities - 1
How Do MTAS Consultants Interact with Cities on Water Quality Problems?— - 2
The University of Tennessee Municipal Technical Advisory Service - 4
Case Studies - 5
Sparta - 5
Linden — — - — - - — - - — - — - - - - - 6
Mountain City - 7
Atwood - 8
Gibson - 9
Munford - 10
Elizabethton - 1 1
Accomplishments - 1 2
Outlook - 13
Table: - 13
US Environmental Protection Agency and State of Tennessee Wastewater Grants
-------
,
C **'
**->, v,
-Tin-''
* ^ s w
3g?Sb*.&5£
.;) *. o-.,
-------
FOREWORD
Ecological consciousness has risen in America
with the publication of "SILENT SPRING." Reports
of fish kills,'oil spills, nuclear fallout, PCBs and so
on have aroused global awareness of the complexi-
ties of environmental problems. The conservation
ethic that followed was profoundly stated by
Congress in the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 by employing the words that we (govern-
ment) should "use all practicable means ... to
create and maintain conditions in which man and
nature can exist in productive harmony." This is the
charge of the Tennessee Department of Health and
Environment (TDHE) through its Bureau of A 0 • • •
Environment. To that end, we have establis
goal to maintain a high quality of lifeib
jnaggf»»«yj;gel
iission
Jhe
5wed TDHE to
balanced approach to environment
economic development. ^"!/
-------
-------
Matching Needs"
with Capabilities
Water... the state's lifeline and the basis of all
life. Tennessee is blessed with abundant water
resources. The state has 20,000 miles of rivers and
streams, 676,000 acres of lakes and reservoirs, and
700,000 acres of wetlands. With good management,
Tennessee has adequate supplies of water to allow
for growth. Tennessee wants to grow, but in such a
way as to protect environmental resources and to
avoid future costly cleanup.
How do we protect our resources? That's the
question the Select Committee on Clean Water was
asked to answer when it was created in 1983.
Tennessee's former Governor, Lamar Alexander,
convened the committee. It was composed of the
Safe Growth Cabinet, the Tennessee Attorney
General, and key state legislators, including
Tennessee's current Governor, Ned R. McWherter,
who was then Speaker of the House. This
committee was charged with the responsibility of
making recommendations to the governor and
General Assembly for Tennessee's water
management needs.
In their recommendations, the Select Committee
focused on a major source of pollution in
Tennessee's rivers and lakes—improperly treated
municipal wastewater. In 1983, over half of the
state's 252 municipal sewage treatment plants did
not meet discharge requirements. The committee
estimated that it would take $1.8 billion in new
construction over the next 20 years to meet
wastewater treatment and disposal needs.
Meanwhile, federal grants to fund improvements
had declined.
To offset losses from federal cuts, the committee
recommended legislation creating the Tennessee
Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grant
Act of 1984. This legislation provided for $14
million in annual appropriation for wastewater
facility construction. The act also provided that the
Tennessee Department of Health and Environment
( TDHE), which administers the grants program,
could contract for up to $300,000 annually with The
University of Tennessee's Municipal Technical
Advisory Service ( MTAS) to assist cities in
receiving grants.
Why MTAS?
The Municipal Technical Advisory Service has
provided practical, individual solutions to cities'
technical problems since 1949. MTAS has a
legislative mandate to respond to the technical
assistance needs of all Tennessee cities.
Working with TDHE officials, MTAS developed
a contract for the following services:
—assistance to cities who are on the state's
priority list for wastewater facility grants
—assistance to potential grant recipients in
developing and implementing a project
management approach
—assistance to grant recipients in financial
management, system evaluations, records
management, and other management related
functions as necessary
—education for local officials in wastewater
matters
—assistance to TDHE in areas like policy
development, training, and seminar
development
TENNESSEE'S WASTEWATER
GRANT PROGRAM
$14,000,000
$300,000
f FOR MTAS
i TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
-------
"How Do MTAS Consultants"
Interact with Cities on Water
Quality Problems?
Consultants act as catalysts to aid the flow of
dollars from TDHE to municipalities. There are
currently 336 towns and cities in Tennessee. Sixty-
five percent of these cities have populations of less
than 3,000 and forty percent have populations of less
than 1,000. Many of these small municipalities do
not have full-time administrative and
management staff. MTAS consultants help elected
officials stay informed on funding sources and on
state requirements affecting the city's sewage
treatment facility operations.
Consultants offer ideas, recommendations,
management know-how, and information to help
cities become self-sufficient in financing and
managing their wastewater treatment facilities.
However, one of the most important tasks MTAS
performs is aiding communication flow between
those involved in cleaning up pollution.
Identifying the Need
There are many steps involved in moving from
an overloaded or outdated, poorly performing
sewage treatment system to one which meets
discharge standards. Paperwork and regulation
requirements can be complex when construction is
financed through a grant or loan. Building a new
sewage treatment plant for small cities can be the
single largest undertaking the administration will
accomplish.
Getting Started
One of the first steps, selecting professional
engineering services, is very important. MTAS does
not select the engineer for the city, but will
demonstrate how to solicit and evaluate qualification
SEWAGE TREATMENT IS EXPENSIVE
SEWAGE i
SEWAGE
TREATMENT
PLANT
_TfREAtlDl_.
WASTEWATER
statements and proposals. Then, MTAS professional
staff make recommendations on elements which
should be included in an engineering agreement.
The Planning Phase
After the city's consulting engineer has drafted a
facilities planning document, MTAS consultants
may be requested by the city to provide an objective
third party evaluation.rConsultants help city
officials during the planning process to understand
the need for corrective action, identify problems,
and evaluate the alternatives.
State law requires that planning documents
undergo a peer review process after a facilities
planning document has been submitted to TDHE for
review. MTAS staff on the peer review board serve
along with city officials, state regulators, and
consulting engineers to assure communities the best
solution to their wastewater problems at the lowest
cost.
MTAS field staff also work with various political
groups to formalize intermunicipal agreements.
Intermunicipal agreements are required when
regional solutions to wastewater treatment
problems are proposed.
Funding the Project
Solving pollution problems and meeting sewage
disposal needs is very expensive. Cities must locate
and often combine money from several sources to
construct sewage treatment plants. MTAS consult-
ants maintain up-to-date information on sources of
grants and loans, application procedures, and
contact points within various funding agencies.
Upon request, MTAS will perform comprehensive
financial analyses of the city's utility operations,
-------
perform rate assessments, help cities gauge the
impact of proposed utility system improvements on
sewer bills, and give recommendations on rate
adjustments.
The Construction Phase
Once construction begins, MTAS consultants visit
city hall frequently to assist in records and financial •
management. Helping cities prepare for audit checks
throughout the project is an important detail during
the construction phase. Besides assisting
individual cities on specific issues, MTAS sponsors
workshops on resolving project conflicts and claims
resolution.
After the Project Goes on Line
MTAS staff work one-on-one with city officials in
creating effective organizational structures,
developing ordinances and policies, and perfecting
utility system planning. Professional staff help
arrange workshops in enterprise accounting, sewer
line rehabilitation, contract operations, budgeting,
personnel matters, and general management skills.
Consultants research solutions to operational
problems, consult with the city's engineer and
TDHE staff, and offer recommendations to improve
operations.
Besides technical assistance, MTAS distributes
information on wastewater issues through: the
monthly newsletter Tech Trends, which appears in
Tennessee Town and City: the MTAS library's
wastewater publications; electronic mail; and
technical bulletins and reports.
Communication Link with the State
One of MTAS' roles is to be a communication link
between city administrators and TDHE. Consultants
bring mayor's questions, comments, and needs to the
attention of appropriate state regulatory personnel.
These messages often result in new policies and
regulations. MTAS consultants provide valuable
input to state personnel when representing cities.
For example, MTAS consultants recently served on a
state-appointed task force. Their work resulted in
successful legislation to establish a revolving loan
program to finance wastewater facility construction.
MORE ABOUT MTAS
The Municipal Technical Advisory Service is an
agency of The University of Tennessee's Institute for
Public Service. Created in 1949, MTAS provides
technical assistance to cities and towns across the
state. MTAS has offices in Jackson, Nashville, and
Martin. The central office is on the Knoxville campus
of The University of Tennessee. At its creation,
MTAS was given the mission of aiding Tennessee
cities in:
—establishing goals, objectives, and policies
—weighing alternative courses of action
—allocating resources to effectively serve its
citizens
—conducting research on matters of interest to
cities
The Tennessee Municipal League, which
supported legislation creating MTAS, is governed by
cities, with municipal officials serving as board
members. MTAS works in cooperation with the
Tennessee Municipal League to provide technical
assistance in these areas:
Engineering and Public Works—Consultants
provide city officials with information and
operational know-how in the areas of refuse collection
and disposal, drainage management, street and
pavement management, and snow and ice removal,
Environmental Technical Assistance—
Environmental consultants give assistance to
Tennessee cities and counties in hazardous waste
cleanup projects.
Finance and Accounting — Consultants in this
specialty area assist city officals in effective
management and utilization of available fiscal
resources.
Law—MTAS attorneys assist city officials in all
areas of municipal law. Services include writing
legal opinions, preparing and revising city charters,
providing sample ordinances, and updating codes.
Municipal Management—Municipal
management consultants are often the city's first
point of contact with MTAS. These professionals
work one-on-one with city administrative officials in
areas including risk management,financial planning,
strategic planning, municipal organization, and
annexation.
-------
Municipal Technical
Advisory Service
Resource and Information Management—The
MTAS library is a clearinghouse for information
produced by and about cities, providing reference,
information transfer, and research services in all
aspects of municipal government.
Utility. Management Consultants—Utility
management consultants assist cities in management
and operations of their wastewater treatment facili-
ties. The consultants' backgrounds are in engineering,
finance, and management.
MTAS Funding
MTAS' budget for 1988 is approximately $2.2
million. MTAS is funded from three sources:
—from the cities share of the state sales tax—33%
—from the state though UT—45%
—from state grants—22%
State grant funding to MTAS began in 1984 when
TDHE contracted with MTAS to provide utility and
financial management assistance to cities. Since then,
TDHE has contracted with The University of
Tennessee to provide technical assistance to cities and
counties involved in cleanup of hazardous waste
sites.
The Institute for Public Service
and Statewide Division of
Continuing Education
MTAS is one of seven divisions which form The
University of Tennessee's Institute for Public Service
and Statewide Division of Continuing Education
(IPS/CE).
As a federal land grant institution, UT has a three
fold mission of instruction, research, and public
service. IPS/CE is an outreach organization fulfilling
UT's public service mandate through offices in
Johnson City, Cookeville, Knoxville, Nashville,
Jackson, and Martin. The central office for IPS/CE is
on the Knoxville campus of The University of
Tennessee.
Other IPS/CE agencies include the Center for
Government Training, Center for Industrial Services,
County Technical Assistance Service, Center for
Educational Video and Photography, Center for
Extended Learning, and Radio Services.
MTAS ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
1 "*
*
| West Tennessee Cities | | Mid-Tennessee Cities J J East Tennessee Cities |
I ,
| Jackson Office | I Nashville Office j | Knoxville Office |
| _
<
f ,nfn Mnrnil.^rit" 1 Information |—
. Data Managemertt-
fl 1 - J Program Management h"
JIMLJ
| Policy/Applied Research M
• i
^ ' (
^ Administration Support I •— !, f^rector
rH Slandina Work Groups 1 -Current Issues Work Group
H Ad HOC Work Groups | -Iniormation/Data/Publications
Work Group
H Contract Staff 1 -Law Enforcement Management
1 | Organizational 1 -Executive Director
1 Manaaement 1 -Management Policy Work Group
IF
A CTAS
T CIS
CGT State Funds > > >
CE .City Funds ->• >
*
^ 1 The University of Tennessee |
-------
Case Studies
MTAS utility management consultants work on a variety of projects. The following case studies illustrate
some of these projects. Projects represented here usually require several hours work and may span a period of
months.
Sparta Requests a Water/Sewer Rate
Study
Background
In September 1985, Sparta, a thriving middle
Tennessee city of 5,000, was awarded a state grant to
construct a new wastewater treatment plant and
force main. The total construction costs were
estimated at $2.7 million, with the city bearing $1.4
million. The mayor and town board decided to issue
bonds to cover the local share of the proposed
improvements.
The Challenge
The consulting engineer anticipated that Sparta
should increase rates in order to cover debt service
and increased operation and maintenance costs
which the project would generate. The engineer
aske;d MTAS to perform a water and sewer rate
analysis and propose options for increasing rates.
How MTAS Helped
MTAS worked closely with the City of Sparta's
utility manager to obtain water and sewer billing,
rate schedule, audit, and budget information. This
information was compiled, and a computerized
assessment of the city's current rate picture was
generated. From this basic model, several alternative
adjustments to the existing rate structure were
performed to:
—achieve equity between cost of service and
revenue generated
—budget for immediate and future capital
expenditures
—plan a strategy for targeting increases in rates
As a result of this work, the city decided to
institute a two-step increase. Since several utility
districts purchase water from the city, they negoti-
ated with the utility districts to increase rates. Later,
the city plans to raise rates for all other users
through a uniform percentage increase.
The estimated increase in new revenue to the
City of Sparta from MTAS' recommendations was
$34,000 a year. Cost to MTAS for this analysis was
$3,625.
-------
Linden Seeks Improvements for
Wastewater Facility
Background
The new administration which came to the City
of Linden in 1986 was forced to deal with the city's
sewage treatment problems. Linden is currently
served by a 300,000 gallon sewage treatment plant
which performs very poorly. The plant was built in
1972 and is approaching the end of its design life.
The plant is certainly inadequate to serve Linden's
future growth.
The Challenge
The new administration found itself facing a
commissioner's order to implement expensive
sewage system improvements. Because the
commissioner's order cited only the collection
system problems of inflow/infiltration, the city was
not placed on Tennessee's priority list for federal or
state aid. The commissioner's order required that
corrections be made to Linden's sewage collection
system, but they were not eligible for grants to help
defray costs. The mayor asked MTAS for advice on
how to proceed.
How MTAS Helped
A MTAS utility management consultant worked
intermittently with the city on this issue over a two
year period. During that time, services performed
for Linden included:
—attendance at city council meetings to help
members understand state enforcement
correspondence, outline options, and plan how
to overcome sewage treatment plant problems
—demonstrations on how to select professional
engineering services
—reviews of engineering agreements
—facilitation of meetings between city officials
and TDHE officials
—reviews of engineering reports at city council
meetings
—research of financing options
—inspection of the sewage treatment plant and
formulation of recommendations for
improvements
—frequent communication with the mayor and
consulting engineer on the status of plant
improvements
Because of Linden's willingness to work through
the state regulatory system and move ahead with
needed improvements, they were placed on the state
priority list in October 1987. Thus, Linden became
eligible to receive grant funding. Linden was one of
the last cities in Tennessee to receive a planning
grant to develop a 201 Facilities Plan. The consulting
engineer has submitted a 201 Facilities Plan.
Hopefully, Linden will be awarded a grant early in
FY1989.
Thus far, MTAS consultants have invested
approximately 25 hours in this project for a total cost
of $1,250 to aid Linden in improving its sewage
treatment system.
-------
Mountain City Confronts
Sewage Problem
Background
Mountain City, a picturesque community of 2,300
located in upper east Tennessee, serves its citizens'
sewage treatment needs through an oxidation ditch
sewage treatment plant.
The Challenge
The city asked MTAS to help evaluate a solids
handling problem at the sewage treatment plant.
Although the plant was fairly new, operators were
concerned that a backlog of solids would result in
permit violations. Also, the city sought recommend-
ations on ultimate disposal of sewage sludge.
How MTAS Helped
An MTAS utility management consultant visited
Mountain City's sewage treatment plant to talk with
city officials and sewage system operators. After a
study of plant operating records and plant design
plans, and discussions with the city's consulting
engineer and state regulatory personnel, MTAS
made several recommendations to Mountain City on
handling of sewage solids.
Included among MTAS recommendations were:
—the city should contract for portable belt
dewatering of sewage sludge to immediately
reduce the solids inventory prior to winter
weather. MTAS helped locate and cost compare
this service
—more digester volume would be desirable to
increase sludge detention time, provide volatile
solids reduction, and to increase stabilization.
Since volume was available in an unused basin
(part of the old plant components), MTAS
recommended the city consider converting it to
an aerobic digester/sludge holding tank
—reducing grease would enhance solids
concentration and sludge dewatering
—polymer should be added to enhance sludge
dewatering
—the depth and characteristics of the sand used
on the sand drying beds was questionable and
needed evaluation
Regarding the problem of ultimate sludge
disposal, the MTAS consultant evaluated four dis-
posal alternatives for cost effectiveness and
outlined how to obtain state regulatory approval on
the best two options.
Prior to MTAS involvement, Mountain City
officials were considering an expenditure of about
$200,000 for a sludge dewatering press. MTAS'
evaluation recommended that the city pursue some
inexpensive alternatives instead. Potential savings to
the city could be as much as $100,000.
-------
Atwood's Commitment Results in
Success
Background
The town of Atwood is located on U.S. Highway
79 approximately six miles northeast of Milan in west
Tennessee. The community has shown a steady
growth since 1950, and it currently has a population
of 1,200. This growth spurred commercial and
residential development. The town provided water
to those new developments with a city owned and
operated water system. However, sewers were not
available. On-site septic tank/drainfield systems
were installed for each homeowner and commercial
development. These on-site systems began to fail
shortly after they were installed.
The Challenge
The new mayor and board of aldermen, which
were inaugurated in September 1981, faced many
problems. The most pressing problems were health
risks caused by raw sewage in ditches. This condition
was due to an 85% septic tank/drainfield system
failure rate. The mayor and aldermen immediately
sought funds for construction of a new sewer system.
Because of the high septic tank system failure rate,
Atwood was placed high on TDHE's priority list for
EPA funding.
How MTAS Helped
During application processing by TDHE, Atwood
faced another obstacle. TDHE determined that the
engineering agreement was not acceptable to EPA
because the town had not procured engineering
services in accordance with EPA requirements. The
mayor and board asked MTAS to guide them in their
acquisition of an engineer. With MTAS aid, the
mayor appointed a selection committee. After
qualifications and proposals were received, MTAS
assisted the committee in the review of the contract
and in negotiations with the engineer.-
The selected engineer began preparation of plans
and specifications immediately. Plans and
specifications were completed and submitted to
TDHE for approval in 1985. While those documents
were being processed by TDHE, the town began
easement acquisition. Since the project was a small
diameter collection system utilizing individual
homeowner septic tanks for treatment, easement
acquisition was a major undertaking. MTAS worked
with town officials and the consulting engineer to
develop an acceptable easement acquisition method.
MTAS also guided town officials in arranging local
share financing for the project.
Bids were taken for the proposed project in July
1986. The bids were higher than project estimates.
However, the mayor, board, and citizens of Atwood
again pledged their support to the project by
applying for and receiving additional funds from
EPA. Finally, a contract for construction of a $1.7
million project was awarded in October 1986. The
project is underway and will be finished in 1988. The
cost to MTAS for providing technical assistance was
$2,000.
-------
Gibson Meets ChaNenges in
Developing Innovative Process
Background
The Town of Gibson is located between
Humboldt and Milan in west Tennessee. The
population of 458 has remained relatively stable
over the last several years.
Gibson was one of the first towns in west
Tennessee to receive EPA funding to upgrade its
wastewater treatment system. Local share financing
was through a loan from the Tennessee Local Devel-
opment Authority (TLDA). In 1982, the town began
construction of an innovative sewage
treatment system. The treatment system consisted of
a lagoon and spray irrigation. No discharge to
surface water was anticipated.
The Challenge
From 1982 through mid-1987, several problems
developed with Gibson's new sewage treatment
system. When a new town administration was
inaugurated in July 1987, the system status was
surveyed. The following deficiencies were noted.
—the spray irrigation system was malfunctioning.
Parts of the application site did not have sod
coverage. This allowed overland flow with
subsequent discharge to a stream
—there were questions about whether the lagoon
capacity could accommodate inflow and
infiltration flows
—the contract time on the project had been
exceeded by the contractor
—the town still owed the contractor $13,000. The
contractor had threatened to sue for the balance
and interest
—the town still owed the engineer $7,700. Since
the engineer had not been paid, he had ceased to
render services to the town
—Gibson had no funds with which to pay these
bills
How MTAS Helped
MTAS consulted with the mayor. The mayor took
decisive action to eliminate problems associated
with the town's sewage treatment system. The
following has been accomplished:
—the mayor is administering the operation of the
plant. Improvements have been made to prevent
effluent from entering the stream
—a meeting was held with the engineer to discuss
the project and to review his fee. An agreement
was reached, and the engineer helped to verify
the amount owed to the contractor
—the mayor and board have agreed to pay
outstanding balances to the engineer and
contractor
—the town requested an additional loan from
TLDA. TLDA agreed to provide additional
funding if the town adopted rates to cover
operation and maintenance indebtedness, and
depreciation
MTAS is developing a financial assessment of the
town's water and sewer operations. The assessment
will propose rates to satisfy TLDA's requirements.
Cost to MTAS thus far is $3,800.
-------
Munford Pursues Cost Effective
Solution
Background
The City of Munford, which is north of Memphis,
is experiencing rapid growth. The existing population
is 2,600. The population by 1995 is expected to be
3,900. The 201 facilities plan for the area proposed a
dual collection system for Munford and Atoka, a
small neighboring town. One treatment plant, to be
located at Munford, was planned to serve both
municipalities.
The Challenge
The project became stalled because of unresolved
issues between the two municipalities and because
Munford leaders did not concur with the 201
facilities plan's selected alternative. The city needed
a plan to move the sewage treatment project forward.
How MTAS Helped
Munford's mayor requested MTAS help. MTAS
recommended that a project management committee
be formed by the mayor to address the issues that
had stagnated the project. The committee was
appointed and became active in December 1985. It
consisted of key city officials, the consulting
engineer, and MTAS as an ex-officio member.
The committee directed the engineer to re-examine
alternatives for treatment. Specifically, they
requested that the alternative for pumping effluent
from the city's existing conventional lagoon to a
discharge point in the Mississippi River be
re-evaluated.
In early 1986, the engineer presented his
evaluation to the committee. Based on cost
effectiveness, the committee recommended to the
mayor and board that the best treatment alternative
for the city would be to upgrade their existing
lagoon and pump flow from that system to a dis-
charge point in the Mississippi River. The mayor
and board accepted the recommendation and
authorized the engineer to proceed with plans and
specifications.
Next, MTAS worked with the committee to
develop an intermunicipal agreement for Munford
to present to Atoka. The intermunicipal agreement
has been presented to Atoka, and the two
municipalities have conducted discussions.
However, an agreement has not been finalized.
Disagreements over the route of the force main
and the discharge point have brought the project to
a halt. The city is now working with the U.S. Army
Corp of Engineers and TDHE to resolve these issues.
MTAS has worked 39 hours on this project over
the past several months. Total cost to MTAS has
been $1,950. The city will save $80,000 if the revised
selected alternative is implemented.
-------
Elizabethton Overcomes Odds
Background
Elizabethton, the seat of Carter County, is located
in upper east Tennessee at the confluence of the
Watauga and Doe Rivers. Organized under a
modified city manager-council form of government,
Elizabethton has a population of more than 12,000.
When Elizabethton requested MTAS assistance in
1987, the city was under a commissioner's order for
industrial and commercial pretreatment violations.
The city was faced with funding $35,000 in fines for
these pretreatment violations. It was also evaluating
improvements to its 30-year-old sewer treatment
plant.
The Challenge
Looking for both immediate and long term
solutions to pretreatment and wastewater issues, the
city manager appointed a wastewater task force. The
eleven members appointed to this task force repre-
sented city staff, city council, legal staff, MTAS,
TDHE, area businesses, and the city's consulting
engineer. The task force was asked to:
—determine options that the city had in dealing
with their commissioner's order
—identify methods of payment for new
wastewater construction
—provide recommendations on how the city
should proceed
How MTAS Helped
Local legislation was enacted to encourage and
enforce pretreatment compliance. MTAS, working
with the city's consulting engineer, reviewed planned
design and management options to improve the
efficiency of the existing sewer treatment plant. Plant
improvements were estimated at $2.3 million.
After solutions to the pretreatment violations
were identified, and improvements to the sewer
treatment plant were designed, the main issue
became—how would Elizabethton pay for these fines
and improvements?
MTAS was requested to complete a financial
analysis of the city's wastewater system. This
analysis included an examination of audited financial
statements from 1984 through 1987. By projecting
financial statements from 1987 through 1991, the city
council was able to make informed budgetary
decisions.
Task force recommendations outlined options for:
dealing with the commissioner's order; engineering
plans for facilities improvements; and financing
solutions. Council accepted these recommendations
and sought a 10% increase in utility rates.
Elizabethton is pursuing a $1.6 million EPA grant
and a $500,000 Community Development Block
Grant.
Cost to MTAS for work completed was $6,200.
11
-------
Accomplishments
During the past few years, Tennessee has been
very successful in providing quality wastewater
treatment service to a growing population. A
combination of efforts— enforcement of water quality
standards and National Pollution Discharge
Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits, the
availability of grant and loan dollars, growth
pressures, and MTAS' wastewater technical
assistance efforts—have all contributed to this
success. In many ways, it has been a team effort.
In 1984, when MTAS wastewater technical
assistance came on the scene, 87 of the state's 252
publicly owned wastewater treatment plants were
not in compliance with their NPDES permits. By
1986, TDHE had issued 23 commissioner's orders to
some of those violators; 27 systems had moratoriums
preventing further sewer connections. At the end of
1987,142 systems had commissioner's orders and 16
of those 142 had been put on court mandated
compliance schedules (judicial orders) to make
improvements and 23 systems still had moratoriums.
Fortunately, during this period, EPA and state
grant dollars were available to assist many
municipalities seeking to upgrade their treatment
systems. In FYs 1985,1986, and 1987, $107 million
were granted to 91 different municipalities and utility
districts to improve wastewater facilities.
As the case studies presented here illustrate,
MTAS utility management consultants were key
elements in TDHE's grants success story. The success
of MTAS' local government technical
assistance program can be linked directly to a
results oriented emphasis. What has set the UT/
MTAS technical assistance experience apart from
other types of outreach programs? Observers believe
that it is the ability to acquire staff with proven local
government field experience and to provide this staff
with the technical resources required to produce
these results: client trust, professional credibility, and
cost effectiveness.
Client Trust
MTAS has developed a unique relationship
through the years with Tennessee cities. It is a
relationship based on confidentiality, trust, and
reliability. This relationship has enabled MTAS to
play a critical role in small to medium-sized cities.
Professional Credibility
MTAS consultants have become like staff
consultants to Tennessee municipalities. The MTAS
consultant is seen by cities as a credible, neutral
third party advisor whose recommendations are
based on professional experience.
Cost Effectiveness
MTAS tracks cost effectiveness through a
management information system which documents
the value added or cost saved to the municipalities
for MTAS services rendered.
Table 1 lists municipalities which received federal
and state grants for wastewater facility construction
in 1985,1986, and 1987. MTAS utility management
consultants provided technical assistance to 93% of
those municipalities. The estimated cost savings (or
value added) as a result of MTAS involvement was
8.4 million dollars.
In all, MTAS utility management consultants
worked in 130 different municipalities in 1985, in
177 in 1986, and in 162 in 1987 on a variety of
wastewater problems. In addition, these consultants
provided training in sewer system rehabilitation,
construction claims and conflicts resolution,
financial capability evaluation, enterprise
accounting, budget workshops, and general
management. This training was open to all
Tennessee municipalities.
MTAS utility management consultants provided
16,000 manhours of service and documented a total
of 21.7 million dollars in cost savings (or value
added) during this three-year period. TDHE's
investment for MTAS' services during 1985-87 was
$700,000. The ratio of dollars added or value saved
to dollars expended was 32:1.
While it is important to be able to show
accomplishments in statistical terms, a significant
impact of MTAS' work with cities is often evident in
less tangible ways. These less tangible ways include:
improved communication between state regulatory
officials and municipal officials, improved
management at the city's sewage treatment plant,
increased environmental awareness, and a
willingness of city officials to become involved in
finding resolutions to environmental issues.
The future of technical assistance in Tennessee
and in the nation is dependent upon this principle:
service to, and in the best interest of, the client first,
not the state. In Tennessee, as in other states, the
interest of local government is not always the same
as the state's. Technical assistance efforts funded by
state government must be designed to insure that
the contractor has a clear understanding of whose
interest or authority they represent. This can only be
done by clearly written contracts or legislation.
12
-------
Outlook
Although the MTAS Wastewater Technical
Assistance Program has made great strides during
its first three and one-half years, many challenges
remain. The future for technical assistance or
outreach programs is tremendous. There is a
demand for objective advice and assistance. With
industrial and population growth, cutbacks in
federal funding, and the current condition of our
infrastructure, local government simply must work
smarter. In addition to keeping on track with
wastewater technical assistance delivery, MTAS is
challenged to provide assistance to municipalities in
other environmental areas. Municipalities must be
prepared to address on-site sewage disposal systems
in unsewered areas, stormwater discharge,
groundwater protection, and solid and hazardous
waste disposal.
These environmental problems are complex. They
cross political boundaries and require a variety of
expertise. MTAS, working in co-operation with
local and state government and the resources of The
University of Tennessee, can make a positive impact
on a better environment for Tennessee.
Tables
FY1985 Grants for Wastewater Facilities
CITY
ATOKA
BETHEL SPRINGS
BOLIVAR
BRENTWOOD
BRIGHTON
BRISTOL
CLARKSBURG
CLEVELAND
COWAN
GALLAWAY
CLEASON
HENDERSON
HOHENWALD
JELLICO
LAVERGNE
MANCHESTER
MASON
MOUNT CARMEL
MUNFORD
OB1ON
PARSONS
RI DCELY
RIPLEY
ROGERSV1LLE
SARDIS
SELMER
SPARTA
TREZEVANT
TYPES OF GRANTS
EPA & STATE
EPA & STATE
STATE
EPA
El'A & STATE
EPA
STATE
EPA
STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA & STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA
STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA & STATE
EPA
STATE
EPA
AMOUNT
5 912,569
938,726
591,093
478,077
1,943,206
4,389,963
567,640
6,655,338
1,066,567
295,745
158,088
729,801
1,508,323
730,797
•2,991,743
2,995,100
151,652
2,556,994
498,493
113,867
742,066
313,868
3,621,070
516,441
477,992
1,426,252
1,476,015
274,386
539,121,872
SAPPED OR SAVED
$ 70
930
330
1,000,375
155
4,400
325 .
650
250
165
570
80
2,770
1,567,635
4,715
2,000
145
348,170
83,785
670
270
320
505
93,485
5,170
1,170
6,000
2,28
$3,127,390
FY1986 Grants for Wastewater Facilities
CITY
ADAMSVILLE
ALAMO
ARLINGTON
ELAINE
BOLIVAR
BROWNSVILLE
BRUCETON
CARYVILLE
CHAPEL HILL
CHEROKEE-HAKTSH
CLEVELAND
CLIFTON
COOKEVILLE
CUMBERLAND U.D.
DECATURVILLE
TYPES OF GRANTS
STATE
EPA
EPA & STATE
El'A
EPA
STATE
EP
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA
EPA & STATE
EPA & STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
AMOUNT
S 312,872
615,342
458,468
943,637
43,779
1,895,978
424,900
1,802,18!
1,404,126
88,212
366,727
729,326
1,175,681
2,021,377
758,303
SAPPED OR SAVED
$ 220
725
360
6,650
0
2,250
335
215
575
0
3,531,770
190
. !45
0
!35
13
-------
FY1986 Grants for Wastewater Facilities ... continued
CITY
DUNLAP
EAGLEVILLE
ERIN
ERWIN
ETOWAH
FAIRVIEW
FAYETTEVILLE
GLEASON
GREENFIELD
HARR1MAN
HENDERSON
HENNING
HUMBOLT
JOHNSON CITY
KINGSTON
LAFOLLETTE
LAWRENCEBURG
LEWISBURG
LUTTRELL
MARTIN
MEDINA
MCKENZIE
MILAN
MILLERSV1LLE
NASHVILLE
NEWBERN
NEW JOHNSONVILLE
OLIVER SPRINGS
ONEIDA
PARIS
PARSONS
I'URYEAR
RIPLEY
ROCKWOOD
RUTHERFORD
RUTLEDGE
SHARON
SOUTH FULTON
TENNESSEE RIDGE
TRIMBLE
WH1TEVILLE
TYPES OF GRANTS
STATE
STATE
EPA
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
STATE
EPA
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
EPA
STATE
EPA
STATE
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA
STATE
STATE
STATE
EPA
EPA & STATE
EPA
EPA
STATE
EPA
EPA
STATE
EPA
EPA
STATE
STATE
STATE
EPA
EPA
EPA & STATE
STATE
AMOUNT
$ 979,686
966,110
597,053
1,655,297
143,121
1,346,185
1,996,409
22,521
361,697
1,482,289
398,073
365,856
2,512,118
358,038
1,591,789
4,419,769
1,614,337
631,926
2,655,757
22,162
322,833
209,306
586,295
1,169,220
5,448,794
865,800
842,006
149,905
1,245,189
408,564
62,865
622,367
175,065
192,377
168,979
232,739
358,935
645,609
545,357
443,209
245,353
$51,788,997
SAPPED OR SAVED
$ 740
325
160
500,735
4,650
265
935
570
825
495
80
740
710
2,745
11,395
315
1,255
570
2,240
570
200
0
1,410
205
4,225
3,180
410
610
390
135
1,400
3,450
3,850
0
180
177,130
1,040
580
2,320
615
680
$4,275,680
FY1987 Grants for Wastewater Facilities
BAXTER
CARYV1LLE
CEL1NA
COWAN
DAYTON
DRESDEN
ETOWAH
FAIRVIEW
GREENBKIEK
HUNTSVILLE
MCMINNVILLE
MANCHESTER
MEDINA
MIDDLETON
OLD HICKORY U.D.
ONEIDA
RED BANK
SPARTA
SOUTH FULTON
WARTRACE
TYPES OF GRANTS
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA •
EPA
EPA
EPA
AMOUNT
$ 645,424
2,680,662
1,060,138
104,182
1,108,268
47,075
896,406
1,943,541
567,014
527,134
3,582,819
818,668
24,525
282,693
1,287,130
102,760
1,033,466
146,638
126,249
642,178
$17,626,970
SAPPED OR SAVED
$
3,200
215
235
280
400
5,210
1,130
665
825
31,335
125
985
245
3,390
0
390
81,740
456,827
423,500
1,750
$1,009,247
14
-------
The University of Tennessee does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, age,
handicap, or veteran status in provision of educational opportunities or employment and benefits.
The University does not discriminate on the basis of sex or handicap in the education programs and
activities which it operates, pursuant to the requirements of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,
Public Law 93-112; respectively. This policy extends to both employment by and admission to the University.
Inquiries concerning Title IX and Section 504 should be directed to Mrs. Mary H. Taylor, assistant to
the director. Institute for Public Service and Statewide Division of Continuing Education, 109 Student Serv-
ices and Administration Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0212, (615) 974-6621. Charges of violation of the
above policy should also be directed to Mrs. Taylor. R14-1050-21-002-89
-------
------- |