M e m o r a n d u m - DRCOG
Metro Vision Clean Water Plan
Wastewater Utility Plan
Guidance Document
Updated – March 23, 2007
Prepared by
Denver Regional Council of Governments
4500 Cherry Creek Drive South, Suite 800
Denver, Colorado 80246
With the assistance of the
Water and Environmental Planning Committee
and its
Utility Plan Review Team
ABSTRACT
TITLE Metro Vision Clean Water Plan: Wastewater Utility Plan Guidance Document
AUTHOR Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG)
SUBJECT Wastewater Utility Plan Guidance
DATE March 23, 2007
SOURCE OF COPIES
NUMBER OF PAGES 83
ABSTRACT This guidance document provides information, direction and procedures to utility departments, consultants, planners and wastewater managers that need to produce or update a Wastewater Utility Plan. The guidance document details requirements and general modifications that apply for wastewater works and facilities. Wastewater Utility Service Areas and Clean Water Plan Planning Areas form the linkage with the Metro Vision Plan process. All permitted wastewater treatment facilities in the nine-county Denver metropolitan region are expected to complete a utility plan for site location approval. Wastewater Utility Plans require periodic updating. Only Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans will be used to process state site location approvals within the DRCOG region.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
I. frequent questions 2
What is a Wastewater Utility Plan? 2
Who needs to complete a Wastewater Utility Plan? 3
When will Wastewater Utility Plans be needed? 3
Is there a renewal cycle for Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans? 3
How are changes made to the Clean Water Plan? 3
Are reports required for other wastewater facilities? 4
What information is contained in this guidance document? 4
What is the review and acceptance process? 5
What is the difference between a Wastewater Utility Plan and a Clean Water Plan amendment? 5
II. Metro Vision Plan linkage 6
Geographic context 6
III. USEFUL definitions 7
IV. Role of management agencies 13
V. steps TO start a WASTEWATER utility plan 15
Basic planning requirements 16
Preplanning process 17
VI. Important policies TO CONSIDER IN PLAN DEVELOPMENT 17
Policy on consolidation of facilities 17
Wastewater reuse policy 18
Biosolids policy 18
Wetland policy 18
Policy on adding new treatment plants to the Clean Water Plan 19
Special Exemption service areas policy 19
VII. Wastewater SERVICE AREA CONCEPTS 22
Major service areas 22
Minor service areas 23
CWP Planning Areas 24
Wastewater utility service to semi-urban areas 25
Metro Vision Plan flexibility provisions 26
VIII. RELATIONSHIP TO colorado SITE LOCATION APPROVAL PROCESS 27
IX. Utility plans for EXISTING OR NEW wastewater TREATMENT PLANTS 30
General requirements 30
Environmental components 30
Wastewater Utility Plan components 31
Service area designations 31
Population and employment datasets and forecasts 31
Wastewater flow characterizations 32
Treatment works characterization 34
Odor control considerations 36
Air quality permitting requirements 36
Stormwater management plan 36
Site characterization requirements 36
Collection system 37
Water quality characterization 38
Minimum mapping requirements 39
Alternatives analysis 40
Management and financial plans 41
Management structure and agreements 41
Financial considerations 41
Interest In financial assistance 42
Required checklist for Wastewater Utility Plans 42
Wastewater Utility Plan documents 45
Wastewater Utility Plan Distribution 45
X. Lift Station Report 46
Lift Station Report guidance 46
Review process for Lift Station Reports 48
Lift Station Report distribution 49
Required checklist for Lift Station Reports 50
XI. INTERCEPTOR REPORT 52
Interceptor Report guidance 52
Review process for Interceptor Reports 54
Interceptor Report distribution 54
Required checklist for Interceptor Reports 55
XII. Wastewater utility REPORT for low-growth areas 56
XIII. GENERAL review process 57
Utility plan and site location approval notification guidance 67
Management Agency approval 68
Public participation process 68
XIV. WUP acceptance policy 68
General criteria 68
Renewal frequency 69
Acceptance procedure 69
Documentation sign-off 70
XV. APPENDICES 72
Appendix A – DRCOG Board Guidelines (Adopted January 2005) 72
A. Introduction 72
B. DEFINITIONS 72
Urban Growth Boundary/Area 72
Wastewater Utility Service Area 73
CWP Planning Area 73
C. Relationships 74
UGB and WUSA 74
UGB and CWP Planning Area 76
Planning Area and local comprehensive plans 77
Relationship to legal boundaries 77
D. Roles 78
DRCOG 78
Cities and Counties 79
Wastewater Management And Operating Agencies 79
Appendix B – Water Quality Control Division Consolidation Policy 81
Appendix C - Data Submittal Standards Format, Description and Minimum Mapping Requirements 83
AutoCAD Files (Not recommended but acceptable) 83
GIS or CAD Layers Required 83
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Designated Regional Management Agencies 13
Table 2 Key Contacts 16
Table 3 Clean Water Plan Wastewater Flow Factors 33
Table 4 Required Checklist for WUPS 43
Table 5 WUP Distribution 46
Table 6 Lift Station Report Distribution 49
Table 7 Lift Station Report Checklist 51
Table 8 Interceptor Report Distribution 55
Table 9 Interceptor Report Checklist 56
Table 10 Wastewater Utility Plan Preparation and Review Steps 65
Table 11 Acceptance or Conditional Acceptance Form 71
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
WASTEWATER UTILITY PLANS (WUPS) MEET MULTIPLE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTATION NEEDS AND SERVE AS TECHNICAL APPENDICES TO THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS’ (DRCOG) METRO VISION CLEAN WATER PLAN (“CLEAN WATER PLAN”). WUPS ARE CRITICAL IN DETERMINING HOW WASTEWATER SERVICE IS PROVIDED TO URBAN AREAS AND FOR SPECIAL CASE LOCATIONS THAT HAVE A PERMITTED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY. THE LONG-TERM GOAL WAS TO HAVE A WASTEWATER UTILITY PLAN FOR ALL PERMITTED WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN THE DRCOG NINE-COUNTY REGION BY JANUARY 1, 2003. AT THIS TIME (JUNE 2007) A FEW FACILITIES ARE STILL COMPLETING THEIR FIRST WUP. ACCEPTED WUPS ARE REVIEWED AND UPDATED, AS APPROPRIATE; AT LEAST WHEN WASTEWATER FLOWS TO A TREATMENT FACILITY REACH 80 PERCENT OF DESIGN CAPACITY.
The policy direction for Wastewater Utility Plans is presented in the Clean Water Plan. This guidance document provides detailed technical and procedural information specifically targeting utility departments, consultants, planners and wastewater managers that need to produce a WUP. WUPs are intended to be consistent with the policy direction contained in the Clean Water Plan. WUPs apply to wastewater treatment plants and all associated domestic wastewater treatment works as defined in the Water Quality Control Commission’s (WQCC) site location approval regulation, Regulation No. 22.
This guidance document describes the types of Wastewater Utility Plans and reports, dischargers or wastewater service providers who need to complete a utility plan, the role of the water quality Management Agency, and the timing schedules and documentation requirements. A number of steps in this process are outlined that increase the effectiveness and efficiency of wastewater management planning within the DRCOG region. The process is reviewed by DRCOG’s Water and Environmental Planning Committee and updated as appropriate.
Important definitions are provided early in this guidance document since these definitions are critical for understanding the guidance recommendations. The definitions are consistent with definitions contained in the site location approval regulation and the Metro Vision Plan. These two documents should be referenced for additional definitions.
The Clean Water Plan identifies and defines the geography of two types of wastewater service areas which are termed Wastewater Utility Service Areas (WUSAs) and Clean Water Plan Planning Areas (CWP Planning Areas). These service area concepts provide the necessary linkage with the Metro Vision Plan process. Each WUP shall identify specific service areas and describe how these areas will be served within the context of meeting water quality standards. The WUSA must be consistent with the Urban Growth Boundary/Area (UGB/A) designated through the Metro Vision Plan process.
Long-range wastewater service areas are called CWP Planning Areas. The portion of the CWP Planning Area lying outside the Urban Growth Boundary/Area shall be based on approved local comprehensive plans, comprehensive long-range utility plans, or the area a wastewater service provider intends to serve at ultimate development, as officially adopted in planning documents. A CWP Planning Area may include areas expected to urbanize significantly beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon and may more closely represent the total amount of urban area projected for the ultimate build-out of a utility service area.
WUPs must meet the requirements of the WQCC’s site location approval regulation. As part of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, site location approvals are needed for construction or expansion of domestic wastewater treatment works including lift stations and interceptor sewers. The definitions used in the site location approval regulation should be used in WUPs.
WUPs document the wastewater management strategy for wastewater treatment facilities having design capacities of greater than 2000 gallons per day and the associated service and CWP Planning Area. Individual sewage disposal systems (e.g., septic systems) having a design capacity of greater than 2000 gallons per day must also have a DRCOG Accepted WUP in place. All WUPs shall contain a defined set of minimum information (location, sizing, staging, service area, process system, effluent quality, capital improvements and financial arrangements). The appropriate checklists, as provided herein, should be followed in the preparation of WUPs.
The primary goals in establishing Wastewater Utility Plans are to provide reasonable, feasible and economical wastewater service to an area designated for development within the nine-county DRCOG region. WUPs should consider impacts that the treatment system will have on the water quality of receiving waters. WUPs should include strategies for meeting all applicable water quality standards and classifications. A coordinated watershed approach is preferred.
DRCOG’s Water and Environmental Planning Committee (WEPC) may periodically request confirmation of Wastewater Utility Plan recommendations from DRCOG’s Board of Directors. Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans will be referenced in the Clean Water Plan and function as technical appendices to that plan. Consequently, these WUPs represent the preferred wastewater management strategy for the Wastewater Utility Service Area and the CWP Planning Area. Accepted and conditionally accepted WUPs will be used for the site location approval process and to meet other applicable regulatory requirements.
I. frequent questions
What is a Wastewater Utility Plan?
Wastewater Utility Plans meet several wastewater management documentation needs including, but not limited to, the following five:
□ The primary support document to amend the Clean Water Plan and serve as technical appendices to that plan;
□ Links wastewater utility planning with the Metro Vision Plan and any subsequent regional plans adopted by DRCOG’s Board of Directors. Consequently, an Accepted WUP is one tool for implementation of the Metro Vision Plan;
□ Function as the primary support document for the site location approval process;
□ Act as the support document providing the necessary background and planning information needed by the Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) in the discharge permitting process; and
□ A support document for applications under the water pollution control revolving fund and state domestic wastewater treatment grant programs.
Who needs to complete a Wastewater Utility Plan?
All wastewater service providers within DRCOG’s nine-county region with 1) treatment facilities or plants permitted to discharge more than 2000 gallons per day, as issued through the Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS), and 2) cities, special districts, or other entities with wastewater collection systems that require lift stations or interceptors subject to site location approval.
When will Wastewater Utility Plans be needed?
Prior to any applications for site location approval or as otherwise needed to accurately reflect an entity’s plans for domestic wastewater management.
Is there a renewal cycle for Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans?
WUPs are dynamic documents that can be amended on an as needed basis and require periodic review and renewal. WUPs should be updated when the flows received at the treatment facility reach 80 percent of the design capacity or when a major change occurs in any plan assumption. Major changes are defined later in this document.
How are changes made to the Clean Water Plan?
Clean Water Plan amendments, site application approvals and other approvals under the Clean Water Plan will necessitate an Accepted Wastewater Utility Plan. Wastewater service area forecasts will be maintained consistent with all Metro Vision Plan forecasts and policies. DRCOG will maintain a reference set of Accepted WUPs, developed by Management Agencies or Operating Agencies, for permitted wastewater treatment facilities with active discharge permits.
The Water and Environmental Planning Committee will process WUPs when submitted and as needed to support site location approval applications. WUPs must meet minimum recommendations contained in the Clean Water Plan for WUSA and associated CWP Planning Areas. WUPs for minor treatment plants may be approved if sufficient planning is completed to show that there will not be negative water quality effects associated with the proposed new facility or facility expansion.
Are reports required for other wastewater facilities?
Other wastewater facilities requiring the utility review and acceptance process include lift stations and interceptor sewers, non-growth areas and certain service area adjustments associated with conformity with the Metro Vision Plan. Guidance for special reports for lift stations and interceptor sewers is included in this document.
Some minor wastewater service providers and collection system providers have not completed a WUP. If there is no reason to change the treatment plant capacity, modify the service area, or upgrade the treatment works, a WUP may not be necessary. However, any changes to the treatment works or service area for these minor systems, other than an amendment to an existing site location approval, will require a WUP subject to the Metro Vision Plan Assessment Process.
What information is contained in this guidance document?
This guidance document provides the necessary information and direction to utility departments, consultants, planners and wastewater managers that need to produce a Wastewater Utility Plan. WUPs shall be consistent with the policy direction contained in the Clean Water Plan and replace previous “201 facility plans.”
It is recognized that the amount of detail required in WUPs will vary depending on facility complexity and size. The Water Quality Control Division may require additional support documentation for the site location approval, permitting and financial assistance processes.
WUPs are critical for determining how wastewater service is provided in the region. This includes urbanized areas as well as small locales requiring centralized wastewater service and specialized sites requiring a wastewater treatment plant with a design capacity greater than 2,000 gallons per day (e.g., church camps, truck stops, or restaurants). The level of detail required in WUPs will be kept flexible to accommodate all wastewater service providers.
What is the review and acceptance process?
The review and acceptance of WUPs is a responsibility of DRCOG’s Water and Environmental Planning Committee at the discretion of the Board of Directors. The Utility Plan Review Team (UPRT), a WEPC subcommittee, reviews and provides recommendations on each WUP. WUPs may be accepted by WEPC at any of their regularly scheduled meetings. This guidance document provides the details regarding this review and acceptance process.
One role of DRCOG’s Board of Directors is to assure that the policy directions contained in the Clean Water Plan are incorporated into the Accepted WUPs Copies of the Clean Water Plan are available on the DRCOG web site at . The policy directions were developed in cooperation with the Water Quality Control Division. While the Division uses WUPs as one source of information in its various processes, acceptance by WEPC does not preclude the Division from requiring additional documentation.
What is the difference between a Wastewater Utility Plan and a Clean Water Plan amendment?
WUPs are intended to provide more detailed information about a wastewater treatment facility than can be reasonably contained in the Clean Water Plan. However, a WUP may generate new information that should be amended into the Clean Water Plan. Items that will require an amendment and, therefore, public hearing and action by DRCOG’s Board of Directors include:
□ Identification of a new treatment plant;
□ Relocation of an existing treatment plant to discharge to a different stream segment; or
□ Changes to the WUSA not covered by the UGB/A flexibility provision;
□ Decommissioning of a treatment plant.
II. Metro Vision Plan linkage
Defining the extent of urban development (i.e., the Urban Growth Boundary/Area) is a local planning function reflected in the Metro Vision Plan. The Metro Vision Plan is the long-range land use plan for addressing the future growth of the nine-county Denver metropolitan region. The plan defines the amount of urban development expected to occur within the region for the planning horizon. The Plan outlines strategies and implementation steps to preserve the region’s quality of life while also positioning the region to benefit from growth. The Clean Water Plan is one of the core elements of the Metro Vision Plan and defines the provision of wastewater service within the UGB/A.
Geographic context
The Clean Water Plan defines how wastewater service and water quality attainment can be achieved within specific geographies. The Clean Water Plan identifies and maps two types of wastewater service areas termed Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA) and CWP Planning Area. DRCOG’s Board of Directors has adopted guidance to clarify the relationship of these geographic areas to other Metro Vision geographies. This “Guidance for Metro Vision/Clean Water Plan Relationships” is included as Appendix A of this document. Entities developing WUPs shall use the WUSA and CWP Planning Area concepts. Recognition of these service area types provides linkage with the Metro Vision Plan. Each WUP will identify a specific service area and describe how this area will be served in context with meeting all required water quality limits. Wastewater service areas, whether they are for major or minor wastewater service providers, must include areas requiring urban services through the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. The figure below provides a simplified illustration of the relationships between Metro Vision Plan and Clean Water Plan geographies.
[pic]
Areas that are anticipated to require urban services beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon are mapped as those portions of the CWP Planning Area located outside of the WUSA. These areas are established in locally approved comprehensive plans or other similarly approved local plans. CWP Planning Areas can be converted to WUSA through a set of flexibility provisions established under the Metro Vision Plan process and consistent with local planning processes. The conversion of CWP Planning Area to WUSA cannot be done solely through the Clean Water Plan or by simple inclusion in a WUP.
III. USEFUL definitions
Accepted Wastewater Utility Plan (Accepted WUP) – A complete set of documents or a single document that meets the minimum requirements and is accepted or conditionally accepted by DRCOG’s Water and Environmental Planning Committee (WEPC) and, when required; by DRCOG’s Board of Directors.
Clean Water Plan (CWP) – The areawide water quality management plan adopted by DRCOG under provisions of section 208 of the Clean Water Act and section 25-8-105 of the Colorado Water Control Quality Act.
Clean Water Plan Amendment – A change to the Clean Water Plan adopted by DRCOG’s Board of Directors either through the Metro Vision Plan Assessment Process or as an individual change.
CWP Planning Areas – The land areas planned for wastewater services that may include Metro Vision Plan development types such as urban, semi-urban, or special exemption and that are congruent with the same areas in a county or community’s long-range development plan beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. This planning area has a designated Management Agency and preferred management strategy, but may not have a designated time horizon, and comprehensively identifies water quality planning issues. A CWP Planning Area is either equal in area to the associated Wastewater Utility Service Areas or larger. Consequently, no CWP Planning Area can be smaller than a WUSA. That portion of the CWP Planning Area outside of the Urban Growth Boundary/Area is not expected to require urban services until after the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. However, this portion of the CWP Planning Area may be converted into WUSA through the flexibility provisions of the Metro Vision Plan.
Cluster Treatment Systems – These are wastewater treatment systems for small groups of clustered dwelling units with a wastewater discharge capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per day. These systems can be low cost, reliable and easily maintained waste disposal alternatives to individual sewage disposal systems. Such systems can have wastewater effluent from individual septic tanks or grinder pumps transported a short distance to a collective treatment system. Treatment systems can range from a large drain-field to a small treatment plant (i.e., lagoon system or package mechanical plant).
The use of cluster wastewater treatment systems requires a maintenance program and a septic management plan, which can be administered by an established homeowner group, county management agency or other appropriately designated management agency.
Cluster systems with a permitted wastewater treatment facility (>2,000 gallons per day design capacity) require a wastewater utility plan.
Cluster Development — For the purpose of defining development types, cluster development is: the grouping or clustering of residential dwelling units on portions of land tracts to preserve common open space areas and natural resources, and to allow for the more efficient provision of public services by reducing the extension of roads, utilities and other development infrastructure. The overall gross density shall be no more than one dwelling unit per acre, and at least 66 percent of the property shall be restricted to open space, recreation, ranching or agricultural uses that contribute to the regional open space system in accordance with a local or regional open space plan. Clusters of fewer than 200 homes will be considered semi-urban and those having 200 or more homes will be considered urban.
Comprehensive Plan – The Master Plan adopted by a City, Town or County or an amendment to such plan. However, in the event that comprehensive plans overlap the subject property, then the plan developed by the local government having land use jurisdiction over the site shall be given primary consideration.
Design Capacity - The rated capacity (capability) of a treatment plant to meet effluent limitations or other appropriate capacity measure for a treatment works (e.g. hydraulic capacity for an interceptor sewer). For a treatment plant, this rated capacity is comprised of two components, hydraulic capacity and organic loading capacity. The hydraulic capacity shall be given in gallons per day (gpd) or million gallons per day (MGD) that the treatment plant is able to process. The organic loading capacity shall be given in pounds or tons of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) per day that the treatment plant is able to process. Thus, the hydraulic and organic loading capacities define the maximum amount of waste that the facility can reliably treat and be in compliance with effluent limitations. In some cases, the loading of another pollutant, e.g. ammonia, may limit the design capacity of a treatment facility. In these cases, a rated capacity for that pollutant in pounds per day shall also be specified. This rated capacity can be expressed as: (a) maximum monthly average; or (b) another capacity measure deemed appropriate by the Division for the treatment plant.
For facilities also considered in accordance with the WQCD Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems, the design capacity shall be the average daily flow, at full occupancy, prior to the application of the 150 percent design flow factor required by those Guidelines.
Domestic Wastewater - A combination of liquid wastes (sewage), which may include chemicals, household wastes, human excreta, animal or vegetable matter in suspension or solution, or other solids in suspension or solution which are discharged from a dwelling, building or other structure.
Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant - An arrangement of devices and structures for treating, neutralizing, stabilizing, or disposing of domestic wastewater, industrial wastes, and biosolids.
Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works - A treatment plant or facility for treating, neutralizing, stabilizing, or disposing of domestic wastewater, such system or facility has a designed capacity to receive more than two thousand gallons of domestic wastewater per day. Domestic wastewater treatment works also includes appurtenances to such system or facility such as vaults, outfall sewers, interceptor sewers and pumping stations and to equipment related to such appurtenances. The term domestic wastewater treatment works does not include industrial wastewater treatment plants or complexes whose primary function is the treatment of industrial wastes, notwithstanding the fact that human wastes generated incidentally to the industrial process are treated in the system.
Expansion - Any construction that increases the design capacity of any facility meeting the definition of domestic wastewater treatment works. An expansion involves increasing the hydraulic, organic, or other capacity-limiting pollutant (as defined under design capacity for which the treatment facility has a rated capacity) loading to the domestic wastewater treatment works. It does not mean the replacement in kind of facilities or equipment that would be considered ordinary maintenance. If a modification or replacement does not increase design capacity of the domestic wastewater treatment works, it is not an expansion.
Inactive Permit – The Water Quality Control Division may declare a wastewater treatment permit as inactive under specific conditions. Inactive wastewater treatment systems may remain operational without any permitting requirements. Inactive permit holders do not need to complete a wastewater utility plan, if operating.
Interceptor Sewer - A sewer line will be considered an interceptor sewer if it has an internal pipe diameter equal to or greater than 24 inches, if it performs one or more of the following functions as its primary purpose:
□ It intercepts domestic wastewater from a final point in a collection system and conveys such waste directly to a treatment plant;
□ It is intended to replace a treatment plant and transports the collected domestic wastes to an adjoining collection system or interceptor sewer for treatment;
□ It transports the domestic wastes from one or more municipal collection systems to a regional treatment plant;
□ It intercepts an existing major discharge of raw or inadequately treated wastewater for transport directly to another interceptor or to a treatment plant.
Lift Station - A wastewater pumping station that pumps the wastewater to a different point when the continuance of the sewer at reasonable slopes would involve excessive depths of bury or that pumps wastewater from areas too low to drain into available sewers. This definition of lift station does not include wastewater pumping stations for single-family residences or clusters of five or fewer single-family residences or other small buildings, as long as they receive less than two thousand gallons per day of domestic wastewater. Lift stations are appurtenances to domestic wastewater treatment works.
Major Wastewater Service Provider/Treatment Plant - Major wastewater service providers serve over 200 residential equivalents. A major wastewater treatment facility has a permitted design capacity greater than 50,000 gallons per day.
Management Agency - A Management Agency is defined in the site location approval regulations as: . . . a municipality appropriately designated by the governor in accordance with section 208 of the Federal Clean Water Act and State Law, with responsibilities to implement all or part of an approved water quality management plan. Refer to the definition below to see which entities qualify as a “municipality”.
Minor Wastewater Service Provider/Treatment Plant - Minor wastewater service providers generally serve fewer than 200 residential equivalents. A minor wastewater treatment facility has a permitted design capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per day and is not anticipated to be expanded beyond this capacity within the Metro Vision Planning Horizon.
Municipality - Any regional commission, county, metropolitan district offering sanitation service, sanitation district, water and sanitation district, water conservancy district, metropolitan sewage disposal district, service authority, city and county, city, town, Indian tribe or authorized Indian tribal organization or any two or more of them which are acting jointly in connection with a domestic wastewater treatment works.
NEPA Requirements – The National Environmental Policy Act establishes requirements for Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements.
Non-discharging Wastewater Treatment Works – Some wastewater treatment works that do not discharge to surface or groundwater can be designated by the Water Quality Control Division as non-discharging and do not require a permit to operate, but do require a site location approval and wastewater utility plan.
Operating Agency – A city, town, special district or corporation that operates a domestic wastewater treatment plant.
Planning Agency –The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) is the designated Planning Agency for the counties of Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Clear Creek, Douglas, Gilpin, Jefferson, the City and County of Denver and the City and County of Broomfield.
Planning Horizon or Metro Vision Planning Horizon – The forecast year used by DRCOG for long-range planning purposes.
Reclaimed Water - Reclaimed Water is domestic wastewater that has received secondary treatment by a domestic wastewater treatment works and such additional treatment as to enable the wastewater to meet the standards for approved uses as established in the WQCC’s Regulation No. 84. Reclaimed water treatment works having a design capacity of greater than 2,000 gallons per day shall comply with the Wastewater Utility Plan process and with other policies of the Clean Water Plan and Metro Vision Plan.
Semi-Urban – Lands characterized by large-lot residential development at densities greater than 1 and less than 10 acres per dwelling unit, generally characterized by dependence on the urban portion of the region for employment, shopping and services. These areas may have centralized wastewater service although they are located outside of the established Urban Growth Boundary/Area. Semi-urban areas typically are located on the fringe of urban areas, and have only ancillary commercial and service uses for the residents of the immediate area. Working ranching and farming operations are usually absent. Land meeting the semi-urban criteria but surrounded by urban development will be considered semi-urban if larger than 80 acres or if the affected community provides documentation of the subdivision plat.
Site Characterization Report – A requirement of the site location approval process, which describes the content of such reports. Evidence shall be presented in the form of a report, containing soils testing results and design recommendations and prepared by a Professional Geologist and a Geotechnical Engineer, or by a professional meeting the qualifications of both Professional Geologist and Geotechnical Engineer, with an appropriate level of experience investigating geologic hazards, stating that the site will support the proposed facility. 22.4(1)(b)(vii)
Special Exemption – A process to identify and accept small, specialized wastewater service areas (e.g., recreation destinations, golf courses, convents, prisons, truck stops, et al.) that have centralized wastewater service without requiring conformance to the Metro Vision Plan’s Urban Growth Boundary/Area.
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) - The sum of the allowable loads of a single pollutant from all sources – point, nonpoint sources and natural background, and includes a margin of safety to ensure the waterbody can meet designated uses.
Urban Growth Boundary/Area (UGB/A) – Defined through the Metro Vision Plan as the land area planned to urbanize within the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. This land area is planned or designated by local governments and delineated in comprehensive plan documents to require urban services and utilities.
Urban – Land that is predominantly covered by structures and public facilities (roads, power lines, etc.) including residential land use in those areas that have more than one dwelling unit (not including accessory buildings, barns, etc.) per acre. Freestanding or isolated parcels of commercial, office or industrial land use, other than gravel pits and quarries, larger than ten acres or having more than 50 employees will be considered urban.
Utility Plan Review Team (UPRT) – A subcommittee of DRCOG’s Water and Environmental Planning Committee that reviews new and amended Wastewater Utility Plans.
Wastewater Utility Plan (WUP) – A report describing the facilities (treatment plant, lift stations and interceptors) needed to serve a specific area (WUSA) up to the Metro Vision Planning Horizon and meeting the water quality standards of the affected receiving water.
Wastewater Utility Service Area (WUSA) – An area generally defined by the urban growth boundary/area (UGB/A) that requires wastewater service within the Planning Horizon. For special exemptions, the WUSA may extend beyond or be outside of the UGB/A.
Water and Environment Planning Committee (WEPC) – A committee of DRCOG as described in the Committee Policy, Guidelines and Descriptions report.
IV. Role of management agencies
Management Agencies and Operating Agencies, in addition to being responsible for implementing aspects of the Clean Water Plan, decide on the need for and specific characteristics of wastewater treatment processes and the details of implementation within specified parameters in accordance with sections 208(b)(2)(D) and 303(e)(3)(E) of the Federal Clean Water Act. Typically, Operating Agencies have primary responsibility for developing utility plans. Management Agencies are responsible for review and approval of utility plans developed by associated Operating Agencies. When the Management Agency and Operating Agency are the same, the utility plan is considered as being developed by the Management Agency.
Management Agencies may be individual governments, watershed associations and authorities, or general-purpose governments holding Colorado Wastewater Discharge Permits or a Notice of Authorization to Discharge under the WQCC’s Regulation 84, or other special districts responsible for planning and approving permitted facilities. The governor, as recommended by the planning and regulatory agencies, designates Management Agencies. The designated water quality Management Agencies currently recognized in the Metro Vision Plan are listed by watershed, in Table 1.
Table 1 Designated Management Agencies in the DRCOG Region
|Designated Regional Management Agencies |
|Bear Creek Watershed |
|Bear Creek Watershed Association (point and nonpoint) |
|Jefferson County (stormwater) |
|Big Dry Creek Watershed |
|Broomfield (point nonpoint) |
|Northglenn (point nonpoint) |
|Westminster (point nonpoint) |
|Adams, Boulder, Jefferson and Weld counties (point, nonpoint |
|and stormwater) |
|St. Vrain and Boulder Watershed |
|Boulder (point and nonpoint) |
|Erie (point and nonpoint) |
|Longmont (point and nonpoint) |
|Lafayette (point and nonpoint) |
|Louisville (point and nonpoint) |
|Lyons (point and nonpoint) |
|Nederland (point and nonpoint) |
|Superior (point and nonpoint) |
|Boulder County (point and nonpoint) |
|Box Elder and Eastern Plains watersheds |
|Aurora (municipal point source, jointly with Metro Wastewater |
|Reclamation District) |
|Aurora (nonpoint source and stormwater) |
|Bennett (point and nonpoint) |
|Deer Trail (point and nonpoint) |
|Lochbuie (Weld County point and nonpoint) |
|Adams and Arapahoe counties (point, nonpoint, and stormwater) |
|Chatfield Watershed |
|Chatfield Watershed Authority (point and nonpoint) |
|Douglas and Jefferson counties (stormwater) |
|Cherry Creek Watershed |
|Cherry Creek Basin Authority (point, nonpoint, and stormwater) |
|South Platte Urban Watershed |
|Adams County Water Quality Association (point) |
|Aurora (point, nonpoint, and stormwater permit) |
|Golden/Coors (point) |
|Golden (nonpoint) |
|Glendale (point and nonpoint) |
|Littleton/Englewood (point) |
|Littleton (nonpoint) |
|Englewood (nonpoint) |
|Metro Wastewater Reclamation District (point) |
|Centennial Water and Sanitation District (point) |
|City & County of Denver (nonpoint and stormwater permit) |
|Lakewood (nonpoint and stormwater permit) |
|Arvada, Bow Mar, Cherry Creek Village, Columbine Valley, |
|Edgewater, Federal Heights, Greenwood Village, Thornton and |
|Wheat Ridge or any other city or town within the watershed (nonpoint) |
|Adams, Arapahoe, Denver, Douglas and Jefferson counties (stormwater, stormwater permit, point and nonpoint) |
|Upper Clear Creek Watershed |
|Upper Clear Creek Watershed Association (point and nonpoint) |
|Clear Creek, Jefferson and Gilpin Counties (stormwater) |
|Upper South Platte River Watershed |
|Upper South Platte River Protection Association (anticipated point and nonpoint, not designated yet) |
|Douglas, Jefferson, Park, Teller counties (nonpoint, point and stormwater) |
V. steps TO start a WASTEWATER utility plan
Recommended first steps for preparing a Wastewater Utility Plan are outlined below.
□ Determine the type and intended use of the WUP:
• Existing wastewater treatment works (i.e., wastewater treatment plant, interceptor or lift station) with no upgrade or expansion anticipated within five years;
• Existing wastewater treatment works with upgrade or expansion anticipated to be necessary within five years;
• Existing wastewater treatment works with site location approval in progress; or
• New wastewater treatment works.
□ Determine who needs to be involved in the development of a utility plan and the general level of involvement in the process:
• Operating Agency;
• Management Agency;
• Watershed association;
• Local governments;
• Special districts;
• Local health departments;
• Technical support groups (e.g., consultant company, technical experts);
• Citizen groups, homeowner associations and the general public;
• Industries (either through pretreatment program or direct within service area);
• Planning Agency (i.e., DRCOG);
• State agencies (e.g., Water Quality Control Division, State Engineer, Colorado Division of Wildlife); and
• Federal agencies (e.g., EPA, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
□ Collect all existing documentation and compare to recommended outline to determine missing elements and areas requiring revision.
□ Make preliminary contact with potential key informational contacts (refer to Table 2).
□ Obtain information needed in the utility planning process;
□ Determine issues or problems that need to be addressed during the utility planning process; and
□ Develop utility planning process schedule.
Table 2 Key Contacts
|Level |Contacts |Types of Information |
|Local Government |Planning and zoning department; local health department |UGB/A, comprehensive plans, zoning, development plans |
|Management |General-purpose government or a watershed association as the |Wastewater strategy, existing permits, watershed plans, TMDLs,|
|Agency / Operating Agency|management agency |facility plans, existing infrastructure plans |
|Planning Agency |DRCOG staff |Metro Vision policy documents, maps of service areas, urban |
| | |growth boundary/area, population and employment projections, |
| | |wastewater flows, water quality assessments, wastewater |
| | |management policies, monitoring information, committee |
| | |contacts, service area overlaps |
|State Agencies |Water Quality Control Division staff including watershed |Regulations (e.g., site location approval); effluent limits; |
| |coordinator, permit writer, financial assistance staff (if |discharge permits; TMDLs and/or wasteload allocations, water |
| |applicable); State Engineer for well or other water rights |rights, requirements for grants and loans, air quality |
| |issues |permits, and stormwater management plan. |
|Federal Agencies |U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, |Wetlands, floodplains, biosolids application, endangered |
| |Environmental Protection Agency and potentially others |species, national environmental policy act (NEPA) |
Basic planning requirements
A Wastewater Utility Plan can deal with one or more existing or proposed wastewater treatment works. In some cases, joint WUPs between wastewater service providers may be appropriate, because of management requirements or to meet water quality goals. A WUP provides basic planning information for wastewater treatment works in order to meet several objectives:
❑ Meet requirements for site location approval as established in Regulation No. 22 adopted by the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission.
❑ Assure that boundaries between adjacent WUSA and CWP Planning Areas, when identified by a wastewater provider and recognized in the CWP, do not overlap.
❑ Assure consistency with the Metro Vision Plan process.
❑ Provide sufficient technical information and data to amend the Clean Water Plan with regards to water quality assessments, watershed management and wastewater management strategies.
❑ Provide wastewater treatment works information, discharge data or other relevant documentation to assist in the preparation of total maximum daily loads, wasteload allocations and other watershed planning efforts.
❑ Provide information for state financial assistance applications, if appropriate.
Preplanning process
A pre-plan review meeting with appropriate Operating and Management Agencies, DRCOG staff, and Utility Plan Review Team members is recommended that specifically targets the service area designations for WUSA and CWP Planning Areas and conformity with the UGB/A as applicable. Draft map(s) supplied by the applicant should provide a preliminary assurance that the WUSA and/or CWP Planning Area do not overlap with those shown by other entities in Accepted WUPs.
VI. Important policies TO CONSIDER IN PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Policy on consolidation of facilities
The Wastewater Utility Plan should identify and evaluate opportunities to consolidate wastewater treatment systems. Often, larger, consolidated wastewater treatment facilities can provide service more effectively while providing a higher degree of treatment than can be achieved through separate treatment facilities. Facility consolidation should be addressed in the utility planning process and the decisions on whether to consolidate or not to consolidate should be based on economics, operation and management efficiency, water quality impacts, physical constraints and water rights. The consolidation policy of the Water Quality Control Division is included as Appendix B.
Wastewater reuse policy
The Metro Vision Plan identifies water supply as a scarce and critical component of future growth and development. Using reclaimed water is an efficient means of preserving water resources. Consequently, the utility plan should explore opportunities for wastewater reuse for non-potable uses, for future potable use, as a method for additional pollutant removal, and as fulfillment of water rights augmentation obligations. Utility plans should identify reuse considerations as part of the alternative analysis. If reuse is determined to be impractical, this should be clearly stated in the utility plan. Reuse facilities that require site location approval will need to be identified in the Clean Water Plan and have an Accepted WUP.
Biosolids policy
Recycling biosolids through land application is the preferred method for disposal of biosolids. DRCOG recognizes and supports the economic and environmental benefits of recycling biosolids. DRCOG's biosolids policy is as follows:
1. Public health and environmental quality are protected under federal and state biosolids regulations. DRCOG encourages member governments not to adopt local public health regulations for biosolids that are more stringent or restrictive than federal and state regulations.
2. DRCOG encourages the practical and beneficial land application of biosolids in the DRCOG region. Member governments with land use authority should regulate biosolids disposal through the zoning and platting processes. Local regulations should focus on transportation, aesthetics and land use issues.
3. DRCOG does not support any biosolids disposal practice that does not attempt to beneficially reuse this valuable resource. A utility plan selecting a biosolids disposal practice that does not include beneficial reuse will not be acceptable to DRCOG.
Wetland policy
If the utility plan could have any effect on wetlands, then the DRCOG wetland policy should be considered in the planning process. Wetlands can have ecological and societal values making them an important regional resource. DRCOG supports the concept of wetland protection and recognizes the importance of wetlands issues as part of each of their planning process. In recognition of the regional significance of wetlands, DRCOG adopted the following position:
DRCOG's policy is no net loss of wetland functions within the region, while encouraging cost-effective use of wetlands in urban design. Development within a designated or delineated wetland should occur only when no other alternative exists. Wetland mitigation should consist of replacement wetlands of a similar type and quality, as determined by appropriate scientific analysis, which results in at least the full replacement of lost wetland functions. Wetland replacement within the same hydrologic watershed, as defined in the Clean Water Plan, is the preferred compensatory mitigation measure. Wetland areas can often co-exist with wastewater treatment plants and provide a buffer area. Utility plans should evaluate the potential of adjacent wetlands for buffering and/or treatment.
The filling of wetlands is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Corps refers proposed actions that may affect a wetland to DRCOG for comment. Through this process, DRCOG evaluates mitigation actions to ensure that they meet the no net loss of wetland functions policy.
Policy on adding new treatment plants to the Clean Water Plan
Minor treatment works (permanent or limited use fixed capacity plants with a capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per day) may be accepted by the Water and Environmental Planning Committee through the wastewater utility planning process without further action of DRCOG’s Board of Directors. New major wastewater treatment facilities (those with a design capacity of 50,000 gallons per day or more) require an Accepted Wastewater Utility Plan and approval of a Clean Water Plan amendment by DRCOG’s Board of Directors. The Metro Vision Plan Assessment Process is the preferred mechanism for gaining approval of new major wastewater treatment facilities.
In order for an amendment request for a new major wastewater treatment plant to be considered out of cycle, it must be justified to DRCOG’s Board of Directors and approved for separate board action. The applicant for out-of-cycle action should expect to pay DRCOG’s reasonable expenses (estimated to be $8,500 for members) for such consideration. The cycle under which CWP amendments are considered by DRCOG is defined in the Metro Vision Plan Assessment Process.
Special Exemption service areas policy
Special Exemption service areas, as identified in the Clean Water Plan, may be provided with wastewater service without being designated as within the Urban Growth Boundary/Area. Special Exemption areas, along with some examples, are outlined below:
A. Special Exemption types
1. Recreational destinations and facilities
□ Day camps
□ Recreation camps, campgrounds or clubs
□ Church facilities and schools
□ Lodges, inns and spas
□ Golf courses and associated club houses
□ Retreats
□ Parks and associated facilities
□ Race tracks
□ Swim beaches
□ Stables and recreational animal operations
□ Ski areas
2. Special use sites
□ Convents
□ Prisons and detention facilities
□ Small air fields
□ Small trailer parks
□ Outdoor laboratories and schools
3. Special use areas
□ Semi-urban places (e.g., St. Mary’s Glacier)
□ Cluster developments meeting DRCOG’s definition for semi-urban
□ Isolated mobile home parks, however, those that produce wastewater discharges of 50,000 gallons per day (typically associated with 200 to 225 units) or more will be considered urban development and not be considered under the Special Exemption process.
4. Commercial, retail and industrial sites smaller than 10 acres and having fewer than 50 employees
□ Truck stops
□ Isolated retail and commercial facilities (e.g., communication stations, Tiny Town, mini golf courses)
□ Restaurants
□ Isolated industrial facilities with domestic wastewater permits
5. Other specialized public facilities
□ Rest areas
□ Water treatment plants
□ Clean-up sites (e.g., Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Rocky Flats)
6. Non-urban areas which received centralized wastewater service prior to the adoption of the Metro Vision Plan in 1997
B. Criteria for making Special Exemption designations
1. Special Exemptions are only accepted with WUPs developed pursuant to the guidance herein and policies of the Clean Water Plan.
2. The designated use requires wastewater service that must be processed through the site location approval program of the Water Quality Control Division (i.e., having a design capacity of greater than 2000 gallons per day).
3. Special Exemption types or areas are identified by the appropriate general-purpose government (i.e., planning and utility departments) and designated Management Agency as not meeting urban criteria.
4. WEPC may approve a proposed WUP to serve a Special Exemption area if the wastewater treatment facility is listed in the Clean Water Plan and the WUP is supported by the appropriate general-purpose government and the designated Management Agency.
5. Areas approved under the Special Exemption process do not need to be consistent with the Urban Growth Boundary/Area and are expressly restricted to the designated uses and areas identified during the approval process.
C. Setting upper capacity limits on Special Exemption designations
1. No upper limits are set on the design capacity of treatment works associated with Special Exemption designations. Sizing will be determined by:
□ Case-by case evaluation through utility planning process
□ Wastewater flows specific to designated use with no excess capacity for service outside of designated area
2. A new wastewater treatment works serving a Special Exemption with a design capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per day (i.e., minor treatment works) may be accepted by WEPC through the utility planning process when consistent with Special Exemption criteria and types.
3. A new wastewater treatment works serving a Special Exemption with a design capacity greater than 50,000 gallons per day (i.e., major treatment works) will need to be processed through the Metro Vision Plan Assessment Process and be approved by DRCOG’s Board of Directors.
D. Process in relation to utility planning and DRCOG review
1. Proposed Special Exemption designation is identified in WUP
□ Requires appropriate general-purpose government and designated Management Agency concurrence
□ Service area is specific to defined use
2. Utility Plan Review Team reviews and makes recommendation to WEPC
3. WEPC
□ Determines support for proposed Special Exemption designation
□ If design capacity with the Special Exemption is less than 50,000 gallons per day, then only WEPC action is required to process utility plan approval.
□ If the proposed facility to serve the Special Exemption is new and design capacity is 50,000 gallons per day or greater or addition of the Special Exemption to an existing facility increases the design capacity to 50,000 gallons per day or greater, then WEPC recommends forwarding utility plan to DRCOG’s Board of Directors for incorporation into the Clean Water Plan.
VII. Wastewater SERVICE AREA CONCEPTS
Major service areas
If a wastewater service provider serves more than 200 residential equivalents and/or the permitted wastewater treatment facility has a design capacity greater than 50,000 gallons per day, then the associated WUSA will be classified as major.
Defining the overall shape or contiguity of Urban Growth Boundary/Area is a function of the Metro Vision Plan and not the Clean Water Plan. Establishing internal boundaries within the UGB/A to create a WUSA is a function of the Clean Water Plan.
The Clean Water Plan establishes the boundaries between adjoining WUSA or CWP Planning Areas to assure that there are no overlaps. WUPs that contain overlapping service areas, whether they are WUSA or CWP Planning Areas, will not be accepted by WEPC. Overlap issues must be resolved through local planning processes before being submitted to WEPC for acceptance. WEPC does recognize that minor variations between the Metro Vision Plan UGB/A and the WUSA may occur due to mapping issues and level of detail.
Sometimes property is included within a provider’s WUSA or CWP Planning Area even though it has not yet been annexed or included in that provider’s legal boundaries. Until that happens, the provider does not have legal jurisdiction over the property. While property within a provider’s CWP Planning Area or WUSA is expected to be served by that provider, if the property has not been annexed or included, other providers may be able to serve the property. Evaluation of options for service shall include referral to the affected local land use entities within the CWP Planning Area and address consistency with any applicable intergovernmental agreements or other arrangements between the responsible local government and wastewater service providers. All affected WUPs shall be amended to reflect the preferred service option, including changes to WUSA and CWP Planning Area boundaries. These changes shall be accomplished through the DRCOG amendment process, including approval by the Management Agency and DRCOG.
Minor service areas
If a wastewater service provider serves fewer than 200 residential equivalents and the permitted wastewater treatment facility has a design capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per day, then the associated WUSA will be classified as minor. If a minor wastewater service provider plans to increase its plant capacity beyond 50,000 gallons per day within the Metro Vision Planning Horizon, the preparation and approval of a new and more detailed WUP will be required before this expansion can occur.
The shape and extent of a minor WUSA is identified through the utility planning process and may or may not match the property owned by a minor wastewater provider. Although the boundaries of a minor WUSA may be defined in the Clean Water Plan and may not be required to meet the Urban Growth Boundary/Area requirements established by the Metro Vision Plan, the area may not overlap with other approved WUSA or CWP Planning Areas. WUPs for minor wastewater service providers may not be required to meet all document requirements. Information required for minor utility plans will remain flexible. If the applicant for a minor utility plan does not intend to meet all requirements for a full WUP, they should schedule a meeting with the Utility Plan Review Team and DRCOG staff in order to discuss which elements may be left out or only summarily addressed.
Wastewater providers serving minor WUSAs must have wastewater treatment facility discharge permits or be operating under Regulation 84. Minor wastewater service providers with inactive wastewater facilities or permits will not be recognized in the Clean Water Plan and they will not be required to complete or maintain a WUP. All active minor wastewater service providers, whether discharging or non-discharging, shall prepare and maintain a WUP. Any minor facility being reissued a discharge permit by the Water Quality Control Division will be treated by DRCOG as a new facility and will be requested to complete a WUP before being incorporated into the Clean Water Plan.
For minor facilities, the capacity and service area shall be limited to those identified during the associated site location approval or discharge permitting processes. The WUSA and the CWP Planning Area for the minor treatment facility will be assumed equal in area unless amended through the Clean Water Plan amendment process.
If a Management Agency or Operating Agency intends to expand the capacity of its minor wastewater treatment facility above 50,000 gallons per day, then the treatment plant will be treated as a major facility for the purposes of the Clean Water Plan planning and approval processes.
CWP Planning Areas
Long-range wastewater service areas identified in the Clean Water Plan are called CWP Planning Areas. The CWP Planning Area encompasses the entire Wastewater Utility Service Area and may also include adjoining areas expected to develop and require urban services beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. The portion of the CWP Planning Area beyond the Urban Growth Boundary/Area should be based on approved local comprehensive plans. To provide this critical link between land use planning and wastewater planning, DRCOG will request that the Management Agency shall obtain confirmation from the affected land use planning agencies that the proposed CWP Planning Area is consistent with the comprehensive plans. The land use agency may use a comprehensive plan, master plan or other planning document to confirm this consistency.
A CWP Planning Area can include a future urban area that can extend significantly beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon. In some cases, the CWP Planning Area may more closely represent the ultimate build-out anticipated within a wastewater service provider’s service area.
The density assumptions and population and employment projections developed through the Metro Vision Plan process and used for projecting growth within a WUSA cannot be applied to those portions of the CWP Planning Area lying outside of the Urban Growth Boundary/Area. Since DRCOG only prepares forecasts and datasets through the Metro Vision Planning Horizon, DRCOG cannot assign population and employment distributions to CWP planning areas. Wastewater service providers are expected to provide their own growth and density assumptions and flow projections CWP Planning Areas, which should be consistent with local comprehensive plans.
The Water and Environmental Planning Committee only recognizes CWP Planning Areas through acceptance of a WUP. This recognition will confirm that the CWP Planning Area is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and does not overlap with other recognized CWP Planning Areas. No amendment to a WUSA that extends beyond an established or recommended CWP Planning Area will be recognized in the Clean Water Plan. The Clean Water Plan may recognize CWP Planning Areas that extend beyond the Urban Growth Boundary/Area through the Metro Vision Plan Assessment process. CWP Planning Area recommendations must be presented to WEPC for review and recommendation as part of the utility planning process. CWP Planning Area designations will be mapped and maintained in the technical appendices to the Clean Water Plan.
Local resolution of overlap issues is required before there is regional recognition of service areas. WEPC, watershed associations and DRCOG staff may provide appropriate technical assistance to help resolve service area overlap issues through a utility technical support process established as part of the WEPC’s annual program. Technical support by DRCOG staff will only be provided on a request basis. If conflict resolution cannot be achieved on a timely basis, then one or both entities having a conflict, or WEPC, may take the issue directly to DRCOG’s Board of Directors for resolution.
CWP Planning Areas may be amended by updating Accepted WUPs based on a current local comprehensive plan or on changes in the expected service areas. In either case, changes to the CWP Planning Area should include a statement from the entity with land use jurisdiction over the revised areas stating that the revisions are consistent with the local comprehensive plan.
Wastewater utility service to semi-urban areas
For some semi-urban and rural areas, it may be determined that it is economically infeasible to provide centralized wastewater service. For these areas, on-site sewage disposal systems, each having a design capacity of 2,000 gallons/day or less, may prove optimal for either the short term or on a permanent basis. If on-site systems are expected to be the long-term wastewater management solution, the service area to be so served should be identified in the Clean Water Plan technical appendices. The Clean Water Plan includes a section describing the preferred “septic management planning process” to address long-term on-site systems.
Within a CWP Planning Area, these semi-urban areas, along with rural, open space and agricultural areas, may be designated as non-service areas. Semi-urban areas may also be designated as being expected to eventually urbanize sometime beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon, after which centralized wastewater services are anticipated to be required. It is also possible that on-site systems for semi-urban areas may prove inadequate, requiring a shift to centralized service. WUPs should address how semi-urban areas within the CWP Planning Area will be served. Projections should be included in the report indicating when centralized wastewater service may become available or otherwise be required.
The nonpoint source Management Agency, watershed association or other responsible agency should assume responsibility for semi-urban wastewater planning. Unless otherwise specified, the county is the nonpoint source Management Agency. The management entity, working with the local health department, should develop appropriate methods to evaluate water quality effects related to individual sewage disposal systems within semi-urban wastewater service areas. Wastewater Utility Plans should map semi-urban and rural developments located within designated service areas.
Metro Vision Plan flexibility provisions
When the proposed WUSA does not match the Urban Growth Boundary/Area, then adjustments of the UGB/A and WUSA must be made through the flexibility provisions included in the Metro Vision Plan. In some cases, Clean Water Plan policies allow for the automatic adjustment of WUSA without requiring a separate amendment to the Clean Water Plan.
Under the Metro Vision Plan, a community may go through a self-certification process to modify the Urban Growth Boundary/Area. The community is encouraged to consider the following three topics before notifying DRCOG of a change. If the community is unable to respond to these topics in its self-certification, DRCOG’s Board of Directors will require this analysis as part of a level II revision or through the UGB/A bank request process.
1. An Urban Growth Boundary/Area change should:
❑ Include only those areas within a community’s planned growth area as shown in its adopted comprehensive plan;
❑ The affiliated utility department or Management Agency should determine that it is feasible to provide permanent wastewater service consistent with the Clean Water Plan; and that the revised area does not result in an overlap with other approved WUSA or CWP Planning Areas.
2. Based on quantified analysis, changing the UGB/A should not cause the existing water quality standards to be exceeded.
❑ For the site-specific receiving waters (i.e., streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs or groundwater); and
❑ For downstream water bodies in contiguous watersheds due to cumulative loading of pollutants of concern.
3. The revised area should not change the following treatment works components as identified in the Clean Water Plan or by Accepted WUPs, including but not limited to:
❑ Facility siting;
❑ Facility sizing (i.e., change to design capacity);
❑ Effluent limits; or
❑ Long-range or Planning Horizon population, employment or flow projections.
VIII. RELATIONSHIP TO colorado SITE LOCATION APPROVAL PROCESS
The Colorado Water Quality Control Commission’s Regulation Number 22 provides the regulatory basis for the site location and design approval process for domestic wastewater treatment works (). Additional guidance, policies, forms, and information concerning site location approval are available on the internet at .
Wastewater Utility Plans shall meet the requirements of Regulation 22. Definitions from the site location approval regulation should be used to define terms in the WUP. Only Accepted WUPs will be used by DRCOG for the site location approval process.
As part of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, site location approval is needed for construction or expansion of wastewater treatment works including treatment plants, lift stations, and interceptor sewers. Final action on site location approvals is a function of the Water Quality Control Division after a review by appropriate local entities as set forth in Regulation 22. Section 25-8-702 of the Act lists three items for the Division to evaluate when considering a proposed site location for domestic wastewater treatment works:
1. The long-range comprehensive plan for the area as it affects water quality and any approved regional wastewater management plan for the area;
2. That the facility at the proposed site will be managed to minimize the potential adverse impact on water quality; and
3. Consolidation of wastewater treatment facilities whenever feasible.
In addition, Regulation 22 states that each application for site location approval shall be reviewed to ensure that the following requirements are considered:
❑ Existing treatment works will not be overloaded when connecting new lift stations or interceptors;
❑ Proposed treatment works are developed considering the local long-range comprehensive plan for the area as it affects water quality and any approved regional water quality management plan for the area;
❑ Proposed treatment works will protect water supplies by complying with the discharge permit (where applicable) based on water quality standards and/or appropriate waste load allocation;
❑ Proposed treatment works have been properly reviewed by all necessary local, state, and federal government agencies and the Planning Agency;
❑ Proposed treatment works can be operated and managed at the proposed location to minimize foreseeable potential adverse effects on the public health, welfare, and safety;
❑ Applicants can provide for adequate construction and operational management, including legal authority and financial capabilities, to meet proposed effluent limitations and minimize adverse impacts to water quality over time;
❑ Proposed treatment works are located such that it is not unnecessarily endangered by natural hazards; and
❑ Objectives of other water quality regulations will not be adversely affected.
Site location approval applications that meet Clean Water Plan and Metro Vision Plan policies will be recognized as consistent with the Clean Water Plan and will be forwarded to the WQCD by DRCOG, and so referenced in the site location approval process or to meet other appropriate regulatory requirements.
When a site location approval application for a treatment plant, lift station, or interceptor is submitted for review after approval of a WUP, Lift Station Report, or Interceptor Report, DRCOG staff will review the application for consistency with the approved plan or report. Such review shall consider the siting, sizing and service area of the plant, lift station, or interceptor. If the staff finds the application consistent with the WUP or report, DRCOG staff will recommend approval of the application and forward those findings to the Water Quality Control Division without separate action by the Utility Plan Review Team or WEPC. A list of applications for site location approvals approved by DRCOG staff in this manner will be published in WEPC’s agenda as an informational item following said approval.
If DRCOG staff cannot determine that the application is consistent with the previously approved utility plan or report, the UPRT will review the application. The UPRT may find that the application is consistent, request the applicant to revise the application to make it consistent, recommend that the WUP or lift station/interceptor report be revised to make the application consistent, or recommend disapproval of the application and prepare comments to the Water Quality Control Division documenting inconsistencies with the Clean Water Plan. Recommendations from the UPRT will be forwarded to the WEPC for review and action.
The site location approval regulation allows the Division to enter into agreements with planning agencies such as DRCOG that establish a coordinated review and comment process for site location approval. Although DRCOG has not formally entered into such an agreement, DRCOG works closely with the Division to ensure that the wastewater utility plan process is coordinated with the site location approval process. A formal agreement is still under consideration.
Wastewater Utility Plans are intended to meet the requirements of the site location approval process, and to provide the initial planning information needed by the WQCD for the permitting and financial assistance processes. CWP Planning Areas will be used in the review of site location approval applications where it is necessary to size facilities, such as interceptors, based on a planning horizon that extends beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon in order to provide cost-effective service. In general, treatment facilities and lift stations should be staged to provide for 10-year capacity increments, but may be staged for shorter or longer periods with appropriate operational, economic, or legal (e.g., rights of way) justification. However, wastewater infrastructure designed to only serve sections of a CWP Planning Area lying outside the Urban Growth Boundary/Area will not be accepted under the DRCOG utility planning process
IX. Utility plans for EXISTING OR NEW wastewater TREATMENT PLANTS
General requirements
A Wastewater Utility Plan documents the wastewater management strategy for a wastewater treatment facility having a design capacity greater than 2000 gallons per day and the associated service areas. All WUPs shall respond to appropriate state and federal requirements and contain a defined set of minimum information (e.g., location, sizing, staging, service areas, process system, effluent quality and financial arrangements). WUPs shall provide documentation for both the designated WUSA and the CWP Planning Area, with more detailed information being provided for the WUSA.
WUPs for minor facilities or minor service areas may be approved even though they do not meet all of the recommended planning elements provided that sufficient planning is completed to show that there will not be negative water quality impacts. Entities preparing a WUP for a minor facility should meet with DRCOG staff to determine which planning elements are required. Staff will inform the Utility Plan Review Team of the elements to be included in the minor WUP.
The primary goals in establishing Wastewater Utility Plans are to provide reasonable, feasible and economical wastewater service to an area designated for development within the DRCOG watersheds. WUPs should consider the water quality impact the treatment system will have on receiving waters and include strategies for meeting all applicable water quality standards and classifications while quantifying the potential impact a discharger may have on other dischargers.
DRCOG maintains a file of Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans. The siting and expansion of direct industrial discharges are identified in the Clean Water Plan under special provisions. Direct industrial dischargers who also process domestic wastewater from outside the industrial site are required to have a WUP. Wasteload allocations or total maximum daily load analyses included in a WUP are to be based on population and employment forecasts and wastewater flow estimates developed through the Metro Vision Plan planning process.
Environmental components
If a wastewater service provider intends to apply for financial assistance from the state, then the requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) may apply to the planning and review process (40 CFR, Parts 1500-1517). Integrating the NEPA process early in the planning stages ensures that decisions reflect environmental values, avoid potential delays later in the process and reduce conflicts. The NEPA process can result in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), unless the project qualifies as a categorical exclusion. The utility plan should reference any NEPA processes that are anticipated to be required to implement the wastewater management strategy.
Wastewater Utility Plan components
Service area designations
Two types of wastewater service areas are recognized in a WUP:
□ Wastewater Utility Service Areas (WUSA)
□ CWP Planning Areas,
WUSA are defined as those areas within the Metro Vision Plan Urban Growth Boundary/Area that require urban services within the Planning Horizon.
CWP Planning Areas are based on local comprehensive plans, comprehensive long-range utility plans or the area a wastewater provider intends to service at ultimate development. A CWP Planning Area consists of the associated WUSA and may also include areas outside of the UGB/A. Accordingly, a CWP Planning Area is either equal to the WUSA or larger. That portion of the CWP Planning Area that is outside the UGB/A is not expected to require urban services within the Planning Horizon; but rather is expected to become part of the urban growth pattern after the Planning Horizon.
Since overlaps between service areas are to be avoided, it is encouraged that mapping for the proposed service areas be submitted to DRCOG for preliminary review and comment during the early stages of preparing a WUP.
Population and employment datasets and forecasts
Wastewater Utility Plans shall use the population and employment projections from the DRCOG datasets prepared for air quality conformity. The foundation of water quality planning is the forecast of population and employment levels and the associated wastewater flows and treatment needs. Forecasts define wastewater flow rates and the capacity needed to treat the projected volume of wastewater. Datasets and forecasts for WUSAs, CWP Planning Areas, and for semi-urban service areas defined by Management Agencies must be consistent with the Metro Vision Plan datasets by selected five-year planning increments through the Planning Horizon. The most current DRCOG conformity data sets produced for the Metro Vision Plan air quality conformity process and using transportation analysis zones shall be used. This data is obtainable from the DRCOG Customer Resource and Support Division.
Alternative methods may be used to generate population, employment and wastewater flow datasets provided that an analysis of the effects resulting from both the preferred and alternative forecasting methods is included
Wastewater utility plans will need to provide their own growth and flow projections for those portions of the CWP Planning Area anticipated to urbanize beyond the Planning Horizon. When appropriate for cost-effective utility service, CWP Planning Area forecasts may be used to size certain wastewater facilities (e.g., the size of an interceptor, land area needed for a treatment facility or lift station site).
Wastewater flow characterizations
General
Conversion factors and methodology used to convert dataset information for population and employment into wastewater flow projections shall be described in the WUP and shall be supported by historical operating data (e.g., discharge monitoring reports or DMRs) when available.
Infiltration and inflow analysis
The Water Quality Control Division may require an infiltration and inflow (I&I) analysis for some treatment works. The WUP should contain any I&I study results available for the facility.
Peaking factor
The wastewater flow peaking factor used by DRCOG for reviewing utility plans and for interceptor certification was established in the 1977 regional management plan, and subsequently confirmed through numerous planning processes. It is calculated by the following formula:
Typically, the average total flow is based on a monthly average. Different peaking factors may be used provided that site-specific justification is included in the WUP. The maximum peaking factor of 5.0 generally applies to small treatment works. Although no minimum peaking factor is recommended herein, a factor of less than 1.0 is not appropriate.
Wastewater flow planning factors
Table 3 provides planning factors used to estimate wastewater flows. These numbers are provided for guidance and other factors may be used provided they are identified in the WUP. The Clean Water Plan uses a residential wastewater flow factor of 85 gallons/person/day, which includes a 10-gallon/person/day inflow and infiltration allowance. The average household size in the nine-county metropolitan area is 2.41 people per household. This number may range from about 2.35 to 2.75 in specific locations, based on more detailed local information.
Table 3 Clean Water Plan wastewater flow factors
|Types of Use |Average Wastewater Flow |
|General Population |
| | |
|Single or Multi-family Equivalence – Regional |85 gallons/day/person |
|General Employment |
| | |
|General Employment – Regional |50 gallons/day/person |
|Household Equivalent |
|(Residential development without employment) |
|Households |250 gallons/household/day |
|Site Specific Planning Averages |
|Stores, Offices, Small Business – Employees |25 gallons/day/person |
|Stores, Offices, Small Business – Guests |8 gallons/day/person |
|Hotels/Motels – Employees |50 gallons/day/person |
|Hotels/Motels – Guests (24-hrs) |20 gallons/day/person |
|Cabins – Guests (24-hrs) |50 gallons/day/person |
|Dining Facilities (Per Meal) |10 gallons/day/person |
|Schools (no showers) – day use (8-hrs) |12 gallons/day/person |
|Schools (showers) – day use (8-hrs) |25 gallons/day/person |
|Tourist/Trailer Camps – Employees |50 gallons/day/person |
|Tourist/Trailer Camps – Guests (24-hrs) |85 gallons/day/person |
|Recreational Facilities – Employees |50 gallons/day/person |
|Recreational Facilities – Guests |20 gallons/day/person |
The Clean Water Plan also recognizes a wastewater flow associated with employment of 50 gallons/employee/day as a regional average. Generally, these 85/50 wastewater flow factors provide a good projection and their general reasonableness has been verified using compliance monitoring reports submitted to the Water Quality Control Division. Lacking employment data, a factor of 100 gallons/person/day may be used as the residential equivalency. Local data documenting flow generation rates may serve as justification for alternate flow factors. A safety factor (e.g., 20%) may be applied to the population/employment based flow estimates.
Character of influent
The character or strength of wastewater influent can affect treatment plant design and operation. Any special connectors or other unusual circumstances that could alter the influent quality should be addressed in the WUP. The basis of the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) values should be documented in the WUP.
Industrial pretreatment
The term pretreatment refers to the requirement that industries discharging pollutants treat their wastewater before discharge to municipal sewer systems. The U.S. EPA administers the National Pretreatment Program under the General Pretreatment Regulations which were first adopted in 1978. Management and Operating Agencies must meet specific requirements under the General Pretreatment Regulations.
Wastewater Utility Plans should indicate if the wastewater treatment facilities are subject to pretreatment regulations and describe any unique or unusual features of their pretreatment program.
Treatment works characterization
Location and siting of treatment plant
The location of existing and planned wastewater treatment plants, lift stations and interceptor sewers that serve areas within the WUSA and CWP Planning Area shall be shown in the Wastewater Utility Plan. The treatment plant footprint (site shape and total acreage) shall be described or mapped. The minimum footprint shall accommodate all appropriate infrastructure anticipated to be required through the Planning Horizon.
Existing facilities and facilities to be built within two years shall be shown at specific locations. New facilities planned for beyond a two-year horizon may be shown/mapped at a specific location (if known) or as lying within a general area as long as water quality issues are essentially the same within that general area.
Wastewater infrastructure designed to serve areas within the WUSA can be physically sited outside of the UGB/A. Lift stations may be sized to serve the CWP Planning Area but should be staged to reflect the flows generated within the WUSA when practical. Since interceptors are often sized to last beyond 20 years, they may have excess capacity more appropriate to ultimate build-out of a designated area. WUPs should include a reasonable rationale for sizing interceptors.
Existing process system
The Wastewater Utility Plan shall include a summary of the major system processes and types of treatment for the existing treatment works including:
❑ Level of treatment (i.e., secondary, advanced for phosphorus removal, etc.);
❑ Analysis of existing system performance, deficiencies and positive attributes;
❑ Size of system components; and
❑ Biosolids processing system and method of beneficial reuse or disposal.
Schematic of treatment works
The WUP shall contain a schematic drawing of the treatment works in sufficient detail to characterize the flow processes, capacities and operations along with infrastructure sizing and staging plans.
Include current capacities and projected future capacities for all treatment plants, lift stations, and interceptors that are needed to serve the WUSA. In addition, include those facilities needed to serve the CWP Planning Area, if appropriate. For facilities that need to be constructed within five years, the location, staging and capacity shall be described with detailed flow projections. Implementation details for the five-year capital improvement program, including anticipated construction schedules with critical time or capacity-based milestones, shall be outlined. A lower level of detail may be appropriate for infrastructure scheduled for beyond five years. The level of detail should be based on the following considerations:
❑ Six to 10 years - planning for major infrastructure with projections and capacities based on best professional judgment;
❑ 10-20 years - include only anticipated major expansions with capacities consistent with DRCOG Planning Horizon forecasts; and
❑ Beyond 20 years - concepts only as related to local comprehensive plans or predicted ultimate development.
Sizing and staging of the wastewater treatment facility are tied to the DRCOG’s projections of population and employment. This size, or hydraulic capacity, is based upon two factors: the rate of flow (annual average daily) produced by the sewered customers and the staging of construction or expansion.
The policy direction in the Clean Water Plan is to have wastewater treatment plants designed for a 20-year period. Local population projections used to generate wastewater flow projections should be documented with any differences between regional and local projections explained.
Odor control considerations
Odor control is a significant issue at many wastewater treatment plants and may be an important component of the system design and alternative selection processes. Odor considerations, including any odor control studies, strategies or abatement programs should be addressed in the WUP. Wastewater treatment facilities are required to address odor control in their site location approval application. The Water Quality Control Division has adopted Policy No. WQSA-7 to describe odor control and mitigation measures including suggested setbacks from habitual structures.
Air quality permitting requirements
Some wastewater treatment plants have processes that are identified as stationary sources of air pollutants. Consequently, wastewater treatment plants with a design capacity of 10 million gallons per day or greater may require an air quality permit. The Air Pollution Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment should be contacted for air quality permitting requirements. The utility plan shall identify any air quality permitting requirements.
Stormwater management plan
Wastewater treatment plants with a design capacity over 1 million gallons per day and any plant with a pretreatment program are required to prepare a stormwater management plan as part of the stormwater permitting process. The Water Quality Control Division should be contacted for specific stormwater permitting requirements. The utility plan shall include a summary of the approved stormwater management plan, if completed at the time of submission, that includes how the facility will deal with malfunctions resulting in spills.
Site characterization requirements
The site location approval process for new wastewater treatment works and new lift stations requires evidence of the suitability of the site. The site shall be characterized in relation to soils, geological hazards, floodplains and other natural hazards. Specifically, the WUP shall identify flood hazard issues and geological suitability issues related to the proposed site and the measures to be taken to mitigate any identified problems or risks. For all new sites, the WUP shall include a report prepared by a professional geologist and a geotechnical engineer, or by a professional meeting both of these qualifications, that contains soils testing results and design recommendations.
Collection system
Interceptor sewers
The WUP shall list and show pipelines that qualify as interceptor sewers. The definition of an interceptor sewer provided in the list of definitions herein is consistent with the site location approval regulation (WQCC Regulation No. 22).
The Colorado Water Control Quality Act provides special procedures for review of some interceptors. At least ninety days prior to the construction of an interceptor line, the responsible entity shall notify DRCOG and the WQCD. This notification shall include a certification, along with sufficient technical support, that the associated wastewater treatment facility has the capacity to treat the projected flows from the interceptor. Within 30 days of receiving the certification, DRCOG is required to certify to the WQCD that the interceptor line has the capacity to carry the projected flows and is consistent with the Clean Water Plan. If the certification cannot be provided, the entity must apply for a site location approval. The information for such an approval should be contained in the WUP or, if no WUP has been accepted, an Interceptor Report.
Projections for interceptors shall be developed on a case-by-case basis for use in this certification process. The steps in the certification process include:
1. Determine consistency of interceptor service area with WUSA and CWP Planning Area.
2. Calculate contributing population and wastewater flows based on Metro Vision Plan projections and Planning Horizon.
□ If the interceptor’s capacity is less than projected flows, review with responsible entity. Such review may indicate differences in design assumptions or other parameters. If these issues are resolved, a certification of adequate capacity may be provided.
□ If the interceptor’s capacity is significantly greater than flows projected within the Planning Horizon, then the review will be based on design assumptions listed in the WUP:
• If the interceptor is designed for flows projected within the Planning Horizon, then DRCOG policy regarding review of growth assumptions will be used.
• If the interceptor is designed to serve a population projected beyond the Planning Horizon, DRCOG can only certify that the interceptor has adequate capacity to carry flows projected to occur within the Planning Horizon.
Lift stations
For utility planning, any lift station requiring a site location approval shall be mapped and characterized. Wastewater service providers are encouraged to evaluate and map all major lift stations as part of the planning process. The minimal recommended mapping of major lift stations should include those systems that have an average pumping capacity that is 1/5 or greater of the existing treatment works capacity (i.e., a 100,000 gallon per day treatment facility will list all lift stations at or greater than 20,000 gallons per day) or any lift station over 0.5 million gallons per day.
Site location approval applications for lift stations that are identified in an Accepted WUP may be forwarded by DRCOG staff to the Water Quality Control Division without additional review by the Utility Plan Review Team or WEPC.
Water quality characterization
Water quality limited receiving water
For all treatment facilities, the utility plan shall identify whether the receiving waterbody, or any downstream waterbody affected by the discharge, is currently water quality limited. This applies to all constituents to be discharged by the facility. Additionally, if there is a potential for a water quality limited segment within a 10-year period, based on the current 305(b) report, modeling or other water quality data, this shall be discussed in the WUP.
If the effluent quality is or reasonably could be controlled by a water quality limited waterbody, then an identification of the constituents of concern and source identification of water quality limited designation (e.g., 303(d) list, 305(b) report or watershed association planning and implementation effort) shall be included in the WUP. The WUP shall identify any wasteload allocation (concentration, poundage and/or other alternatives) by constituent as they apply to the treatment plant. The WUP shall contain the following information:
□ For treatment plants that will not be built or expanded within ten years, a general discussion of the constituents to be controlled and the availability of sufficient allocations for the waterbody. Exact concentration or poundage estimates are not necessary unless there is a conflict with an existing total maximum daily load (TMDL) or wasteload allocation (WLA).
□ For wastewater treatment plants to be built or expanded within the next ten years, a recommended treatment strategy and treatment plant configuration to meet the projected discharge permit limitations and an evaluation of alternative technologies. The WUP shall demonstrate that achieving the projected effluent limitations is technically and economically feasible.
Level of treatment for new and expanding facilities
The WUP shall list the effluent discharge quality necessary to meet receiving water quality classifications and standards, including:
❑ A list of projected discharge permit limitations based on state effluent standards (copy of letter from Water Quality Control Division), receiving water classifications and established water quality standards;
❑ Effluent quality necessary to meet any total maximum daily loads or wasteload allocations as listed or recognized in the Clean Water Plan; and
❑ Other effluent limits or criteria recommended in the Clean Water Plan and/or necessary to meet state requirements.
TMDLs and wasteload allocations
WUPs shall document any approved or proposed total maximum daily load studies or wasteload allocations. The receiving waters need to be checked against the Water Quality Control Division’s 303(d) List and the 305(b) Report. Wasteload allocation requirements can affect effluent limits and treatment options.
Watershed issues
WUPs shall document any watershed programs and implementation strategies. Since the watershed protection approach is advocated in the Clean Water Plan, conformity of the Wastewater Utility Plan with the watershed program shall be discussed.
Minimum mapping requirements
Mapping requirements differ between minor and major WUPs. Either electronic or hard copy maps will be acceptable for WEPC review. Electronic maps should meet the criteria described in Appendix C. Hard copy maps that are of sketch quality or excessively small will not be acceptable. The minimum features to be included on maps include, but are not limited to, drainage basin and watershed, service areas (WUSA and CWP Planning Areas), wastewater treatment works, lift stations and force mains, interceptors, water features (stream segments, lakes, reservoirs), discharge points, water well fields, sanitary sewer tributary areas (if available) and local comprehensive plan features. The use of color to identify features is preferred.
Maps should also meet the requirements of Regulation 22. The WQCD guidance states:
The relationship of the proposed outfall sewer to other water and wastewater treatment works in the area should be depicted on a map, as requested on the application form, as well as in the utility plan in narrative form. The narrative should address issues that may not be contained on, or evident by the map. These may include issues of topography, geology, endangered species habitat, development patterns, wetlands, and other factors that may contribute to decisions regarding consolidation feasibility or potential water quality conflicts, i.e. multiple discharges within a stream segment or the physical relationship between water supply intakes and effluent outfalls. (page 35.)
Based on mapping efforts included in recent WUP submittals, some additional specific minimum map details are strongly recommended:
❑ County lines and names
❑ Municipal boundaries with areas clearly labeled
❑ Local urban growth boundaries
❑ Major and minor roads with labeled names
❑ All sewage treatment plants, lift stations and water supply intakes within a 5-mile radius
❑ Habitable buildings, location of public and private potable water wells, and an approximate indication of the topography within a 1-mile radius
❑ Scale and north orientation
❑ Reproducible map quality (final submittals)
❑ Area covered by soils characterization report for the site
WUSA and CWP Planning Areas shall be identified by watershed as defined in the Clean Water Plan. When more than one treatment plant is operated as a part of coordinated system (e.g., satellite plants), show all plant locations. Maps should identify areas to be served by gravity sewers and those served through one or more major lift stations.
Alternatives analysis
For new wastewater treatment works, the WUP shall provide an alternatives analysis which addresses the potential for consolidation with other treatment works. The utility plan needs to list the criteria used to select the preferred alternative. Additionally, the selection of a preferred alternative should have a public review and comment component. Any consolidation analysis shall be consistent with the Water Quality Control Division’s policy on consolidation (refer to Appendix B).
Management and financial plans
Management structure and agreements
The WUP shall identify the Management Agency, Operating Agency and, if applicable, the associated watershed association; along with applicable agreements or memorandums of understanding and a list of key contact information. Other entities (e.g., metropolitan or sanitation districts) that are responsible for the collection or conveyance of wastewater to the wastewater works shall be identified.
The WUP shall be consistent with requirements in the site location approval regulation. Regulation No. 22 requires that the WUP describe the “Management capabilities for controlling the wastewater loadings within the capacity limitations of the proposed treatment works, i.e., user contracts, operating agreements, pretreatment requirements and/or the management capabilities to expand the facilities as needed (subject to the appropriate, future review and approval procedures).” (Section 22.4(1)(b)(ix))
The WUP shall list significant industrial dischargers and discuss arrangements providing for compliance with their pretreatment responsibilities. Procedures to limit industrial or commercial discharges with the potential to overload the treatment plant hydraulically or to upset the treatment process due to excessive organic loading, toxicity or other issues should also be discussed.
Financial considerations
For:
❑ New wastewater treatment agencies;
❑ Any wastewater treatment facility that is in repeated noncompliance with significant permit requirements; or
❑ Treatment agencies expecting to increase the volume of wastewater treated by more than 100 percent in the following 10 years,
capital costs shall be estimated for all wastewater treatment plants, treatment plant expansions, new lift stations, lift station expansions, and interceptors that will be built within the next ten years.
Changes in operating costs and total expenditures necessary to carry out the wastewater system improvements planned for within the next ten years shall be estimated with a discussion of the sources of revenue available to meet those expenditures. A wastewater treatment agency that relies on anticipated new customers to provide revenue to build facilities shall have a financial management plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following items:
❑ Rates and charges structure;
❑ The financial solvency of the agency if the projected growth should not occur;
❑ Institutional arrangements to guarantee payment of charges from any large connectors (i.e., those providing more than ten percent of the total projected revenue) and from governmental connectors;
❑ Interest in applying for state financial aid,
❑ Significant industrial user(s) under pretreatment regulations, arrangements for meeting pretreatment responsibilities; and
❑ Industrial or commercial sewer connections with the potential to overload the treatment plant hydraulically or with organic loading, a description of the methods for controlling rates of flow to the treatment facility.
The utility plan shall be consistent with requirements in the site location approval regulation. Regulation No. 22 requires that the utility plan describe the “financial system which has been developed to provide for necessary capital and continued operation, maintenance, and replacement through the life of the project. This would include, for example, anticipated annual budget and the fee and rate structure.” (Section 22.4(1)(b)(x))
Interest In financial assistance
The WUP shall identify if there is any interest in financial assistance from the state. DRCOG may recommend to the Water Quality Control Division that funding for wastewater treatment works consistent with an Accepted WUP be included on the state’s eligibility list. If there is an interest in financial assistance, the WUP shall include a user charge study. A financial plan is required if any type of payback system (loan, bonds, etc.) is utilized. A developer may be required to provide evidence of their ability to finance the project and similar information.
Required checklist for Wastewater Utility Plans
The outline of preferred chapters in the Wastewater Utility Plan is shown in Table 4. A WUP can be prepared using a different format provided that the revised structure is explained in the document’s introduction. The Utility Plan Review Team consists of volunteer members from WEPC who desire a smooth and timely review process. Consistency in document preparation can help expedite the review process. The applicant and Management Agency should use the checklist in their review processes.
Table 4 Preferred Checklist for WUPs
|Chapter |Includes |Check-List |
|I. Executive Summary (Required) | |
|II. Introduction |Background & History | |
| |Implementation Schedule & Timing Issues (Required) | |
| |Summary of any Differences in the Structure of the WUP from the Recommended Outline | |
|III. General Planning |Consolidation Of Facilities (Required) | |
| |Wastewater Reuse | |
| |Applicable Compliance Schedules Or Consent Decrees | |
| |Environmental Components Evaluation (Required) | |
| |Summary Of Environmental Information Or Special Studies (e.g., NEPA EA or EIS) | |
|IV. Wastewater |Service Area Designations - WUSA & CWP Planning Areas (Required) | |
|Characterization | | |
| |Population & Employment Datasets & Forecasts (Required) | |
| |Wastewater Flow Projections (Required) | |
| |Infiltration & Inflow Analysis | |
| |Character Of Influent | |
| |Industrial Pretreatment Program | |
| |Treatment Works | |
| | Existing Process System | |
| |Infrastructure Sizing & Staging | |
| |Location & Siting | |
| |Site Envelope | |
| |Biosolids Handling | |
| |Schematic Of Treatment Works | |
| |Odor Control Considerations | |
| |Air Quality Permit, If Appropriate | |
| |Stormwater Management Plan | |
| |Site Characterization Report Summary | |
| |Collection System | |
| |Major Lift Stations | |
| |Interceptors | |
| |Maps (Required) | |
| |Treatment Plant Site Envelope | |
| |Service Areas | |
| |Collection System | |
|V. Water Quality |Water Quality Of Receiving Water (Required) | |
|Characterization | | |
| |TMDLs And/Or Wasteload Allocations (if Applicable) | |
| |Watershed Issues | |
| |Level Of Treatment (Required, Existing Permit Limits Or Preliminary Effluent Limits) | |
| |Watershed & Receiving Waters (Required) | |
| |Impaired Waters | |
|VI. Alternative Analysis |Treatment Works (Required) | |
| |Levels Of Treatment (Required) | |
| |Public Participation In Selection Process | |
|VII. Management & Financial |Management Structure & Agreements (Required) | |
|Plans | | |
| |Wastewater Management Plan | |
| |Financial Management Plan (Required) | |
| |Interest in State Financial Assistance | |
| |User Charge Study Summary | |
|VIII. References |Reports & Special Studies | |
|IX. Technical Support |Legal Description & Evidence Of Site Ownership (Required) | |
|Appendices | | |
| |Agency Contacts (Cover letters or checklist) | |
| |Special Surveys (e.g., Endangered species) | |
| |NEPA Process | |
| |Site Characterization Report and Floodplain Map | |
| |Existing Effluent Limits | |
| |Preliminary Effluent Limits (from WQCD, for new and expanding treatment works) | |
| |Planning & Zoning Information (e.g., Portion of local comprehensive plan) (Required) | |
| |Intergovernmental Agreements | |
| |User Charge Study | |
| |Air Quality Permit | |
| |Odor Control Studies | |
| |Stormwater Management Plan | |
| |Summary Of Public Hearings & Process | |
| |Infiltration and Inflow Study | |
|X. Referrals |Document Notification For All Referral Agencies | |
Wastewater Utility Plan documents
A Wastewater Utility Plan may consist of one or more documents and may be prepared by a single agency or a combination of agencies. Multiple documents can provide separate geographical detail and/or facility detail as long as all required information is included. All documents comprising the original WUP shall be submitted to WEPC as a set at the time of initial submission, including all appropriate maps. Thereafter, only those documents that are updated or amended need to be submitted to WEPC for acceptance. Following acceptance, all documents comprising the WUP, including all subsequent support documentation provided during the review process, will be filed and maintained by DRCOG as the Accepted WUP.
Accepted WUPs will need to be amended from time-to-time. WUPs will need to be updated when flows reach 80 percent of design capacity or when a “major change” occurs in any plan assumption. Determination of the 80 percent criterion will be based on the capacity shown in the discharge permit and the maximum monthly average flow from the discharge monitoring reports. A “major change” in plan assumptions includes any of the following:
□ A new TMDL or revised TMDL that sets a wasteload allocation for the facility, which will require new or modified treatment facilities within five years,
□ An addition or deletion of area to the WUSA resulting in at least a 15-percent change of the projected flows to the facility,
□ A discharge permit compliance schedule that requires changes to the design or construction of the facility, or
□ Other factors considered by DRCOG to significantly impact an Accepted WUP.
Update or amendment documents may be appended to the previously Accepted WUP without reissuing all documents that comprised that previous plan. A database will be maintained by DRCOG that lists all documents that comprise the Accepted WUP.
Wastewater Utility Plan Distribution
It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide copies of the WUP to the Management Agency (if other than the applicant) and other review agencies and to obtain their approval prior to submitting copies to DRCOG. The applicant shall provide copies of the WUP, with associated maps and requested supplemental documents, to DRCOG staff for its use and distribution to the Utility Plan Review Team (refer to Table 5). The total number of required copies varies depending on the service area size and location, complexity of issues, and other factors; and applicant shall coordinate this with DRCOG staff. Two complete copies of the utility plan are needed by DRCOG staff to begin the review process. In addition, copies with maps and the site application form are needed for distribution to the Utility Plan Review Team. Copies for the UPRT do not need to include technical appendices unless this is specifically requested. After approval, the applicant shall provide three copies of all final documents that comprise the Accepted WUP to DRCOG for distribution to the WQCD (two copies to be accompanied by the acceptance or conditional acceptance letter from DRCOG) and as a permanent record set for DRCOG (one copy).
Table 5 WUP Distribution
|Review Process | |
| DRCOG Staff |2 |
| WEPC Utility Plan Review Team |10 |
| Other Sign-off Agencies |Varies, maximum of 4 |
| Adjacent Cities, Towns or Counties |Varies, case-by-case basis |
| Local Health Department |1 |
|Accepted Wastewater Utility Plan | |
| WQCD |2 |
| DRCOG Permanent Record |1 |
X. Lift Station Report
Lift Station Report guidance
This guidance is provided when site location approval for a lift station is being sought separately from the approval process of a Wastewater Utility Plan. The policy direction is contained within the Clean Water Plan. A Lift Station Report is intended to support documentation contained within a WUP and, upon acceptance, to be incorporated into the associated Accepted WUP. Information provided within a Lift Station Report shall be consistent with guidance contained herein and policies in the Metro Vision Plan and the Clean Water Plan.
Even when there is an Accepted WUP that identifies the subject lift station, a Lift Station Report is necessary to accompany a site location approval application to the Water Quality Control Division. A Lift Station Report without an associated Accepted WUP shall be a comprehensive document. A Lift Station Report with an associated Accepted WUP need only address specific information not addressed in the earlier plan and then reference where remaining checklist items are addressed in the earlier plan.
A Lift Station Report is sufficient for submittal to and approval by the Water and Environmental Planning Committee as a component of a WUP for use in the site location approval process. A Lift Station Report can precede acceptance of a WUP as a separate document for future incorporation into a final WUP, if it meets the following criteria:
□ The Operating Agency, as designated in the Clean Water Plan, agrees by letter to incorporate by reference or entirety the Lift Station Report into a final WUP. The Operating Agency shall confirm by letter that the treatment works has the capacity to treat flows generated by the lift station when fully developed as listed in the site location approval application. The Management Agency, if different from the Operating Agency, shall also provide a letter indicating their support of the Lift Station Report.
□ The lift station, as phased, will serve an area entirely within the current UGB/A as shown in the Metro Vision Plan. Modification of the UGB/A is a local government process and must precede consideration by DRCOG or the designated Management Agency of a Lift Station Report. WEPC will not resolve service area conflicts. WUSA, CWP Planning Area, or UGB/A conflicts may be referred to the DRCOG Board of Director for action. The Lift Station Report shall demonstrate consistency with the Metro Vision Plan; WEPC will not accept an inconsistent report.
The minimum planning information to be included in a Lift Station Report is summarized below. Any changes of report format that would result in information not being addressed must be accepted by the Management Agency and DRCOG staff through a pre-planning meeting process. A modified checklist shall be included with these alternate style Lift Station Reports.
1. Executive Summary (Standalone one-page summary that can be used in agendas).
2. Contact list that includes owner, engineer, Management Agency and any other contacts that need to be notified of issues, concerns and approval.
3. Introduction and general planning information, which summarizes, as a minimum, the following topics:
□ Background and history
□ Operating Agency
□ Management Agency, along with notice of their approval
□ Ownership of lift station
□ Operational agreements and/or management plans
□ Financial responsibility
□ Lift station location (general site location map)
4. Lift Station characterization - Describe the need for the lift stations in the report. Do they eliminate the need for a treatment plant? Was a gravity alternative considered? Are they permanent or temporary?
5. Detailed map showing current service area of lift station, wastewater provider service areas (WUSA and CWP Planning Area) and lift station planning area, if appropriate (e.g. anticipated service area beyond the Metro Vision Planning Horizon), and relationship to collection system. Good quality maps are required that provide all requested information. Failure to provide adequate maps will stop the review process. Criteria for mapping are provided in Appendix C.
6. Description of current and anticipated population, employment and wastewater flow projections through the Metro Vision Planning Horizon and/or build-out of service area. Use DRCOG conformity data sets, with information obtainable from the DRCOG Customer Resource and Support Division.
□ For lift station service area
□ For treatment plant service areas (address capacity and staging)
7. Lift station design and features.
□ Capacity and type
□ Sizing (average and peak) and staging
□ Odor control or aesthetic considerations
□ Program for repair/replacement
□ Construction schedule and timing
□ Issues that affect construction
□ Emergency response and spill prevention
8. Wasteload Allocation Characterization - Provide a brief discussion of any relevant wasteload allocations or total maximum daily load requirements for the associated treatment plant. The Management Agency may provide this information or it might be addressed in the Accepted WUP for the associated treatment plant.
9. Management Structure and Financial Plans
10. Technical Support Appendices
□ Site legal description and evidence of site ownership
□ Site characterization report
□ Planning and zoning support information
□ Any appropriate agreements
□ Letter of approval from Management Agency
□ Design data or information
Review process for Lift Station Reports
The review process has three distinct phases:
1. Management Agency;
2. Regional Planning Agency (i.e., DRCOG); and
3. the State review process through the Water Quality Control Division.
A Lift Station Report that cannot reference an Accepted WUP is subject to the full review process, which includes the Utility Plan Review Team and WEPC. Remember to allow adequate time for review at the local, regional and state levels; which occur sequentially and not concurrently. This complete review process may take three to five months.
Lift Station Report distribution
It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide copies of the Lift Station Report to the Management Agency (if other than the applicant) and other review agencies and to obtain their approval prior to submitting copies to DRCOG. The applicant shall provide copies of the Lift Station Report, with associated maps and requested supplemental documents, to DRCOG for distribution to the Utility Plan Review Team (refer to Table 6).
The total number of required copies varies depending on the location of the lift station and other factors. The applicant shall coordinate this with DRCOG staff. Copies for the UPRT do not need to include technical appendices unless this is specifically requested. After approval, the applicant shall provide three copies of all final documents that comprise the accepted Lift Station Report to DRCOG.
DRCOG will distribute two copies to the WQCD along with the acceptance or conditional acceptance letter from DRCOG. One copy will remain on file as a permanent record set for DRCOG.
Table 6 Lift Station Report Distribution
|Review Process |Number of Copies |
|Local Agencies |
| Management Agency |1 |
| Adjacent Cities, Towns or Counties |Varies, case-by-case basis |
| Local Health Department |1 |
|Regional Agencies |
| DRCOG Staff |2 |
| WEPC Utility Plan Review Team |10 +/- |
| Other Sign-off Agencies |Varies, maximum of 4 |
|Accepted Lift Station Report |
| WQCD |2 |
| DRCOG Permanent Record |1 |
Required checklist for Lift Station Reports
The outline of chapters to be included in the Lift Station Report is shown in Table 7. A Lift Station Report may be prepared using a different format provided that the new report structure is explained in the introduction and pre-approved by the Management Agency and DRCOG staff. The Utility Plan Review Team members are volunteers from WEPC who desire a smooth and timely review process. Consistency in documentation preparation can help expedite the review process.
The applicant and Management Agency should use the checklist for their review processes. The UPRT will use the checklist to assess the completeness of the Lift Station Report. If a topic area is viewed as not relevant, the Lift Station Report should explain this. The review process and planning elements are designed to be flexible, but simply using the term “not applicable” is insufficient justification not to address a topic area. Case-by-case considerations should be made through the pre-planning process.
Table 7 Lift Station Report Checklist
|Chapter |Includes |Page |
|I. Executive Summary | |
|II. Introduction and General|Background & History (e.g., associated WUP, wastewater service provider, needs assessment, ownership | |
|Planning |statement, agreements, financial responsibility, statement on involvement of Management Agency and local| |
| |planning department) | |
| |Implementation Schedule & Timing Issues | |
|III. Lift Station Design and |Service Area Designations - WUSA & CWP Planning Areas | |
|Features | | |
| |Population & Employment Datasets & Forecasts | |
| |Wastewater Flow Projections | |
| |Sizing and Staging | |
| |Lift Station Design and Features | |
| |Odor Control and Aesthetic Considerations | |
| |Site Characterization Report Summary | |
| |Maps | |
| | Service Areas (WUSA and CWP Planning Area) | |
| | Lift Station location related to collection system | |
| |Description of programs for repair/replacement of lift station infrastructure; and emergency response or| |
| |spill prevention processes | |
|IV. Wasteload Allocations |List applicable TMDLs and Wasteload Allocations that apply to the associated wastewater treatment plant | |
| |or as listed in an accepted Wastewater Utility Plan | |
|V. Management & Financial |Management Structure & Agreements | |
|Plans | | |
| |Financial Management Structure | |
|VI. Technical Support |Legal Description & Evidence of Site Ownership | |
|Appendices | | |
| |Contact List | |
| |Treatment Agency Capacity Certification | |
| |Site characterization report | |
| |Planning & Zoning Information (e.g., Portion of local comprehensive plan) | |
| |Agreements | |
| |Odor Control Studies | |
| |Manufacturers’ Equipment Information | |
| |Approval from Management Agency and Operating Agency (by letter or as evidenced by signatures on the | |
| |site location approval application) | |
XI. INTERCEPTOR REPORT
Interceptor Report guidance
This guidance is provided for situations where an interceptor sewer is being proposed separately from the Wastewater Utility Plan approval process. The policy direction is contained within the Clean Water Plan. An Interceptor Report is intended to support documentation contained within a WUP and, upon acceptance, to be incorporated into the associated Accepted WUP. Information provided in an Interceptor Report shall be consistent with guidance contained herein and the policies contained within the Metro Vision Plan and Clean Water Plan.
In many cases, an interceptor can be certified by DRCOG and the treatment agency and forwarded to the WQCD for official acknowledgment. An Interceptor Report will be needed in those cases where certification is not possible and site location approval is required.
An Interceptor Report for an interceptor that is not identified in an Accepted WUP must be a comprehensive document. On the other hand, when the interceptor is designated in an Accepted WUP, the Interceptor Report needs only to identify said designation, and reference where in the Accepted WUP the information is addressed. The report should also provide additional details (e.g., scheduling) needed for permitting and reference the remaining checklist in the Accepted WUP.
An Interceptor Report is sufficient for submittal and approval by WEPC as a component of a WUP for use in the site location approval process. An Interceptor Report may precede acceptance of a WUP as a separate document for future incorporation into a final WUP, if it meets the following criteria:
❑ The Operating Agency, as designated in the 2020 Clean Water Plan, agrees by letter to incorporate by reference the Interceptor Report into a final WUP and agrees that the planning information provided in the report is anticipated to be correct and consistent with the future WUP.
❑ The Operating Agency confirms by letter that the treatment works has the capacity to treat flows generated by the interceptor when fully developed.
❑ The Management Agency, if different from the Operating Agency, confirms by letter its support of the Interceptor Report.
❑ The interceptor serves only areas entirely within the current Urban Growth Boundary/Area as shown in the Metro Vision Plan. Modification of the UGB/A is a local government process and must precede consideration by DRCOG or the designated Management Agency of the Interceptor Report. The Interceptor Report shall demonstrate consistency with the Metro Vision Plan; WEPC will not accept a report that is inconsistent. WEPC will not resolve service area conflicts. WUSA or CWP Planning Area conflicts may be referred to the DRCOG Board of Directors for action.
The minimum planning information to be included in an Interceptor Report is summarized below. Any changes to eliminate information must be accepted by the Management Agency and DRCOG staff through a pre-planning meeting process.
❑ Executive Summary (stand alone one-page summary that can be used in agendas)
❑ Introduction and general planning information, summarizing at a minimum, the following topics:
• Background and history
• Wastewater service provider (Operating Agency)
• Management Agency
1. Notice of approval
2. Ownership of interceptor sewer
3. Operational agreements and/or management plans
4. Financial responsibility
• Collection system or interceptor maps (includes locator map and layout map as necessary)
❑ Interceptor Characterization
• Detailed map showing current service area of collection system or interceptor, service areas (WUSA and CWP Planning Area) and collection system or interceptor planning area, if appropriate (e.g. anticipated service area 25 years in future or longer), and interceptor and collection systems.
• Description of current and anticipated future population, employment and wastewater flow (Metro Vision Planning Horizon or build-out)
1. By collection system or interceptor service area
2. Treatment plant capacity and staging
• Interceptor design and features
1. Capacity
3. Sizing
4. Program for repair/replacement
5. Construction schedule and timing issues
❑ Environmental Concerns in Right-of-way (The management agency can provide this information)
❑ Management Structure and Financial Plans
❑ Technical Support Appendices
• Summary of legal description and evidence of collection system or interceptor ownership, if appropriate
• Contact list
• Planning and zoning support information
• Any appropriate agreements
• Letter of approval from Management Agency and Operating Agency
• Design data or information, as appropriate
Review process for Interceptor Reports
The review process has three distinct phases: Local Management Agency,and local health department; regional Planning Agency (i.e., DRCOG); and state review by the Water Quality Control Division. An Interceptor Report that cannot reference an Accepted WUP is subject to a full regional review process, which includes the Utility Plan Review Team and the WEPC. Remember to allow time for the review process at the local, regional review, and WQCD levels; which occur sequentially and not concurrently. This complete review process may take three to five months.
Interceptor Report distribution
It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide copies of the Interceptor Report to the Management Agency (if other than the applicant) and other review agencies and to obtain their approval prior to submitting copies to DRCOG. The applicant shall provide copies of the Interceptor Report, with associated maps and requested supplemental documents, to DRCOG for staff use and for distribution to the Utility Plan Review Team (refer to Table 8). The total number of copies required varies depending on the location of the interceptor and other factors and applicant should coordinate this with DRCOG staff. Copies for the UPRT do not need to include technical appendices unless this is specifically requested. After approval, the applicant shall provide three copies of all final documents that comprise the accepted Interceptor Report to DRCOG for distribution to the WQCD (two copies, to be accompanied by the acceptance or conditional acceptance letter from DRCOG) and as a permanent record set for DRCOG (one copy).
Table 8 Interceptor Report Distribution
|Review Process |Number of Copies |
|Local Agencies |
|Management Agency |Varies (case-by-case basis) |
|Adjacent Cities, Towns or Counties |Varies (case-by-case basis) |
|Local Health Department |1 (Required for Review) |
|Regional Review Process |
|DRCOG Staff |2 (Required for Review) |
|WEPC’s Utility Plan Review Team |10 +/- (Required for Review) |
|Other Sign-off Agencies |Varies (maximum 4) |
|Accepted Wastewater Utility Plan |Complete Set of Documents |
|WQCD |2 (Required for Submittal to WQCD) |
|DRCOG Permanent Record |1 |
Required checklist for Interceptor Reports
The outline of chapters to be included in the Interceptor Report is shown in Table 9. An Interceptor Report can be done using a different format provided that the new structure is explained in the document introduction and pre-approved by the management agency and DRCOG staff through a pre-planning process. The Utility Plan Review Team members are volunteers from WEPC who desire a smooth and timely review process. Consistency in documentation preparation can help expedite the review process. Criteria for maps and data submittal are provided in Appendix C.
The applicant and management agency should use the checklist for their review processes. The Utility Plan Review Team will use the checklist to assess the completeness of the Interceptor Report. If a topic area is viewed as not relevant, the Interceptor Report should explain why the element is not relevant. The review process and planning elements are designed to be flexible, but simply using the term “not applicable” is not sufficient justification for not addressing a category area. Case-by-case considerations will be made through the pre-planning process.
Table 9 Interceptor Report Checklist
|Chapter |Includes |Pages |
|I. Executive Summary | |
|II. Introduction and General |Background & History (e.g., associated utility plan, wastewater provider, needs assessment, ownership| |
|Planning |statement, agreements, financial responsibility, involvement of management agency and local planning | |
| |department) | |
| |Implementation Schedule & Timing Issues | |
|III. Interceptor |Service Area Designations WUSA & CWP Planning Areas | |
|Characterization | | |
| |Population & Employment Datasets & Forecasts | |
| |Wastewater Flow Projections | |
| |Sizing and Staging | |
| |Collection System and Interceptor Design and Features | |
| |Maps | |
| | Service Areas (WUSA and CWP Planning Area) | |
| | Collection System and Interceptors | |
| |Program for Repair/Replacement of Interceptor and Collection System Infrastructure | |
| |Emergency Response and Spill Prevention | |
|IV. Environmental Concerns |Environmental concerns associated with the right-a-way | |
|V. Management & Financial |Management Structure & Agreements | |
|Plans | | |
| |Financial Management Plan | |
|VI. Technical Support |Legal Description and Evidence Of Interceptor Ownership | |
|Appendices | | |
| |Contact List | |
| |Planning & Zoning Information (e.g., Local Comprehensive Plan) | |
| |Agreements | |
| |Letters of Approval from Management Agency and/or Operating Agency Accepting Flow, Signed Site | |
| |Location Approval Applications | |
XII. Wastewater utility REPORT for low-growth areas
For some communities, preparation of a full Wastewater Utility Plan is not warranted since there are existing wastewater facilities sufficient to serve current and anticipated population within the service area. For these low growth areas, a Wastewater Utility Report as described below may be sufficient for submittal and approval as a WUP. These Wastewater Utility Reports may be submitted in letter format (with attachments) or as a consolidated report. As with WUPs, these Wastewater Utility Reports should be reviewed if flows exceed 80 percent of the treatment works design capacity.
Wastewater Utility Reports should include the following:
1. Map showing current Wastewater Utility Service Area and CWP Planning Area.
2. Description and capacities of current wastewater facilities
□ Treatment Plants
□ Lift Station
□ Interceptors
3. Description of current and anticipated population, employment and wastewater flows for each listed facility
4. Certification of 10-year capacity for each listed facility
5. Description of program for repair/replacement of facilities
6. If any construction is anticipated, a financial plan describing the ability to build, operate and maintain the facility
7. Other items as determined by the Utility Plan Review Team
XIII. GENERAL review process
The general review process for Wastewater Utility Plans is listed in Table 10. The policy on Clean Water Plan consistency requirements is outlined in the Metro Vision Plan and included in Appendix A.
The threshold planning and consistency questions to be answered prior to WEPC’s review of WUPs, requests for site location approval, and/or Clean Water Plan amendment requests are listed below:
❑ Has the responsible point source Management Agency approved the proposal in writing? Forwarding the WUP or site location approval application without the formal recommendation of the Management Agency does not meet the intent of the CWP and WEPC will not consider WUPs that are not recommended by the Management Agency.
❑ Does the proposal require DRCOG Board approval of an amendment to the Metro Vision Plan or can the proposal proceed with WEPC approval of the WUP?
❑ Will the service area require service within the Metro Vision Planning Horizon and does the type of development require that the service area be within the Urban Growth Boundary/Area as determined by the appropriate local government? If the initial service area is subject to the UGB/A requirements, is it within the current UGB/A? WEPC will only consider utility plans when the service area is not subject to the UGB/A requirements or if it is already included in the UGB/A.
❑ Is the service area identified in the utility plan consistent with the comprehensive plan(s) of the general-purpose governments as evidenced by written concurrence by those general-purpose governments? (Note: If the utility plan is not consistent with the comprehensive plan(s) or a similar document adopted by the general-purpose government(s), the utility plan should not be considered by WEPC.)
❑ If the WUP proposes a new or changed CWP Planning Area, has the local land use entitlement agency confirmed that the area is consistent with its comprehensive plan? If more than one land use entitlement agency is affected, has each confirmed this consistency? WEPC will not consider CWP Planning Areas that are not consistent with local comprehensive plans.
❑ Are there overlaps between the proposed WUSA or CWP Planning Area with those areas identified in an Accepted WUP? If an overlap exists, then the question of responsibility for wastewater utility planning must be resolved prior to WEPC taking action. If there are no overlaps, then WEPC consideration of the utility plan may proceed provided the service area is consistent with the applicable comprehensive plan(s).
Table 10 Wastewater Utility Plan Preparation and Review Steps
|Steps |Action |Involved Agency/Entity |Estimated Timing |
|Preliminary concept |Applicant reviews issues with management agency |Applicant & Management Agency |At least 60 days prior to UPRTmeeting |
|Land use review |Determine consistency of service areas with UGB/A and |Applicant & local government responsible for | |
| |comprehensive plan |comprehensive plan | |
|Pre-plan meeting |Hold a pre-plan review meeting to discuss consistency with the|Applicant, Management Agency & DRCOG | |
| |Clean Water Plan (e.g., service areas) | | |
|Local referral |Applicant requests review and comments from local referral |Land use agencies, other wastewater service |At least 45 days prior to UPRT meeting |
| |agencies |providers | |
|Local review |Applicant solicits comments from the designated management |Management Agency; local health department |At least 30 days prior to UPRT meeting |
| |agency and local health department | | |
|Management agency forwards to DRCOG|Designated management agency forwards a copy of the wastewater|Management Agency & DRCOG |At least ten days prior to UPRT meeting |
| |utility plan (or Lift Station Report, Interceptor Report, | | |
| |Wastewater Utility Report) to DRCOG with letter of support | | |
|Initiate WEPC review |Applicant provides additional copies to DRCOG Staff for |Applicant & DRCOG | |
| |distribution to UPRT | | |
|Utility Plan Review Team |UPRT reviews documents and notifies applicant of any missing |UPRT, appropriate local governments & agencies, |Ten days prior to UPRT meeting |
| |elements |DRCOG | |
|Urban Growth Boundary/Area |Determine conformity of service areas with UGB/A, land use |UPRT, DRCOG staff and WEPC |During UPRT meeting |
|concurrence |issues, and non-overlap policy | | |
|Utility Plan Review Team |Develop recommendation and set WEPC action date |UPRT & DRCOG staff |First Wednesday of the month |
|Recommendation | | | |
| WEPC Action |Acceptance, conditional acceptance or rejection of WUP |WEPC |Fourth Friday of the month |
|Forward to WQCD |Staff to forward two copies of Accepted WUP to WQCD along |DRCOG Staff |Week following WEPC meeting |
| |with letter on DRCOG action | | |
Utility plan and site location approval notification guidance
Two sets of entities need to be notified of pending Wastewater Utility Plan review and/or site location approval actions:
❑ Those entities that should be notified that the Utility Plan Review Team of the Water and Environmental Planning Committee has begun review of a WUP and of the date that WEPC will consider action on the plan; and
❑ Those entities that should be notified when DRCOG begins processing a site location approval based on an accepted or conditionally accepted Wastewater Utility Plan.
Those entities identified in the site location approval process as having the opportunity to sign-off on the application are expected to be signatories. Signature agencies include the Management Agency, city or county where facilities are sited, treatment agency, local health department and DRCOG as the Planning Agency.
The Colorado Site Location Approval Application Form requires that several entities be notified before DRCOG takes action on a site location approval for consistency with an Accepted WUP. The following guidance will be used to identify those entities that should receive a notification letter and be kept on record in the Site Location Approval Notification Checklist.
❑ Adjacent general purpose governments (cities, towns and counties);
❑ For new or expanded treatment works - all general-purpose governments within a three-mile radius of the treatment plant;
❑ For new or expanded lift station - all general-purpose governments within a one-mile radius of the lift station or located within three miles downstream;
❑ Downstream Surface Water Diverters – all surface water diverters within five miles downstream from the treatment plant or lift station site (notification restricted to owners of the diversion headworks); and
❑ If TMDL and/or 303(d) listed stream segment – all publicly owned treatment works dischargers and appropriate industrial or general permit dischargers on stream segment.
Management Agency approval
The designated water quality Management Agency must recommend approval of a WUP before review by the Utility Plan Review Team. The review process will not start without the Management Agency’s written support. The applicant is responsible for obtaining approval from the Management Agency to begin the review process. In addition, the Management Agency should not provide its approval letter until it has obtained approval from the local health department.
Public participation process
Public participation is an integral part of the water quality management process in the DRCOG region. An opportunity for public input should be provided through informational hearings or public meetings. Local governments and DRCOG (as the regional Planning Agency) are required to provide opportunities for public input into their deliberations regarding water quality issues, including acceptance of WUPs. All meetings of WEPC are open to the public. An important aspect of the increasing trend toward a watershed approach for water quality management is to ensure a full opportunity for stakeholder input and participation in watershed planning and management activities. Consequently, WUPs should carefully document those opportunities that were provided for public participation or comment. At a minimum, the Operating Agency and/or the Management Agency should hold one public meeting concerning the WUP.
XIV. WUP acceptance policy
General criteria
Accepted and conditionally accepted Wastewater Utility Plans will be referenced in the Clean Water Plan and these plans will represent the preferred wastewater management strategy for the WUSA and CWP Planning Area. Accepted WUPs and conditionally accepted WUPs will be used for the site location approval process, as Clean Water Plan amendments and to meet other appropriate regulatory requirements.
WUPs or a set of utility plan documents may be submitted to WEPC at any time after review and approval by the appropriate Management Agency. WEPC will not modify a WUP; only the applicant may do this. WEPC will take formal action on presented documents within three-months following submittal of all necessary information. WEPC may make one of the following three recommendations related to WUP acceptance:
❑ Accept;
❑ Conditionally accept, with the conditions listed; or
❑ Refer back to the submitting agency or the designated Management Agency for additional actions, analyses or information.
The Utility Plan Review Team is comprised of WEPC members and alternates. The UPRT typically consists of eight to ten participants who are confirmed by WEPC action. The UPRT has a rotating membership that may be altered in order to facilitate reviews. The UPRT reviews Wastewater Utility Plans and associated reports and documents for consistency with adopted policy and minimum requirements. The UPRT summarizes its findings for consideration by WEPC at its regularly scheduled meetings.
Those entities that are expected to sign a site location approval application related to the WUP may be requested to comment at the same WEPC meeting that the UPRT summarizes its findings.
Renewal frequency
The review and acceptance frequency for Wastewater Utility Plans is based on the flows to the treatment facility and other factors. An update to an Accepted WUP should be processed when influent flows reach 80 percent of the design capacity. A WUP that has not been updated will be flagged as such in the technical appendices to the Clean Water Plan and will not be used in the site location approval process. Any significant changes in a local comprehensive plan or other major changes as discussed earlier should trigger a local review and, if needed, revision of the WUP.
Acceptance procedure
The following procedure will apply to the WEPC review and acceptance.
❑ Applicant delivers the required number of copies of the Wastewater Utility Plan to DRCOG staff and local review agencies;
❑ DRCOG staff distributes review copies to Utility Plan Review Team members;
❑ Meeting is scheduled within 45 days of distribution to review final WUP with UPRT and other interested agencies. Other interested agencies will be requested to identify any issues or concerns prior to this review meeting (generally a 30-day response time);
❑ At the review meeting, the UPRT will mark-off a checklist of minimum requirements, assure that there are no overlapping service areas, review assumptions and provide appropriate comments;
❑ Based on the UPRT comments and those of other interested agencies, DRCOG staff may prepare a written response and/or recommendation for inclusion in the following WEPC meeting agenda; and
❑ WEPC takes formal action at their meeting - acceptance, conditional acceptance or referral back to applicant. Depending upon the action, the appropriate sign off forms may be filled out by DRCOG staff and forwarded to the Water Quality Control Division.
Documentation sign-off
The site location approval process identifies a list of agencies that are given an opportunity to make a recommendation on an application for construction of new, modified or expanded domestic wastewater treatment plants (Table 11). Until a memorandum of understanding is established between DRCOG and the WQCD, the WUP plan applicant is responsible for obtaining signatures on the site location approval form. The signed site location approval application is considered a part of the Accepted WUP that is submitted to the WQCD by DRCOG.
Those agencies identified by the site location approval process signoff on all Accepted WUPs. As appropriate, these signature agencies will also have the opportunity to attach and file any comments with their signature.
WEPC will sign-off on Accepted Wastewater Utility Plans using a separate form entitled “Water and Environmental Planning Committee, Acceptance or Conditional Acceptance Form” (refer to Table 11).
Original copies of the site location approval application and of WEPC’s sign-off form will be kept on file at DRCOG and the Water Quality Control Division as part of the site location approval process and for other documentation needs.
Table 11 Acceptance or Conditional Acceptance Form
XV. APPENDICES
Appendix A – DRCOG Board Guidelines (Adopted January 2005)
Guidance for Metro Vision/Clean Water Plan
RELATIONSHIPS
A. Introduction
The planning activities of the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) cover many topics. This paper focuses on the relationship between two of those topics: land development planning and wastewater utility planning. DRCOG’s Metro Vision Plan addresses both of these topics and recognizes the key linkages between land activity, water quality and wastewater utility planning. In addition to the Metro Vision Plan, the Metro Vision 2020 Clean Water Plan element further documents the relationship with much more detail on the wastewater planning process. However, the details of this relationship have not been adequately described in the plan documents themselves. As the planning processes have evolved since 1997, a number of adjustments have been necessary facilitate wastewater planning requirements.
In the time since the plan was adopted in 1997, DRCOG and its member governments have discovered the need to better describe this relationship. The definitions of urban development and areas needing wastewater service have evolved as particular issues have arisen. The process of developing utility plans, which all wastewater providers must complete, has also identified the need to clarify the relationship with the land development plan.
The paper is structured to provide definitions of the relevant terms from the two planning areas. The second section describes the relationships among these various terms. The third section identifies the roles of DRCOG and other organizations in this planning process.
B. DEFINITIONS
There are three main geographical areas involved in the land development/water quality planning process.
Urban Growth Boundary/Area
The UGB distinguishes between land that is urban and that which is unimproved, protected open space or rural and defines land that is planned by local governments to urbanize by a specific horizon year, currently the year 2020. It is intended to encourage contiguous and orderly urban development and deter leapfrog development that places a greater burden on utility and infrastructure systems.
Urban land is defined as residential development at a density of 1 unit per acre or higher and similar non-residential land. More specific definitions have been developed to provide for uniform recognition of urban land across the region. These address parks and open space, airports, golf courses and other uses that may have both urban and non-urban characteristics. A detailed list of definitions related to UGB/A is available from DRCOG.
The region currently has about 500 square miles of land identified as urban and is planning for a total of about 750 square miles of urban land in the year 2020. Maps have been prepared for each community showing their 2000 urban areas and the expected 2020 UGB/A.
Wastewater Utility Service Area
Over 100 wastewater treatment facilities have been identified in the DRCOG Clean Water Plan. In order to anticipate the treatment needs in the year 2020, each management agency in the region must prepare a “utility plan” for their facility. As part of each wastewater utility plan, a specific service area is identified with a description of how this area will be served in context with meeting all required water quality limits. Wastewater treatment plants are sized to serve the specified service area.
Wastewater utility service areas (WUSA), whether they are for major or minor wastewater providers, must include the area requiring urban area services through the planning horizon of 2020 or any subsequent planning horizon established by the Metro Vision Plan process. Service areas may not match legal boundaries. A major provider is defined as having a hydraulic capacity of greater than 50,000 gallons per day. The hydraulic capacity is based on the 20-year forecast of development within the WUSA. Some components of the facility may be sized for a longer period of time and the footprint, or parcel of land, for the treatment facility should be adequate to meet the ultimate needs of the service area.
Permitted minor wastewater providers can be defined as either of fixed capacity (not expected to expand during the forecast period of the Clean Water Plan or expandable. Expandable minor providers usually have an assigned service area consistent with the UGB/A. Fixed minor providers often serve non-urban development such as campgrounds or truck stops and have an assigned service area consistent with their state issued discharge permit.
CWP Planning Area
Areas requiring urban services beyond the planning horizon are identified as cwp planning areas. In order to be included in a cwp planning area, these areas must be included in a locally approved comprehensive or master plan. Because many wastewater facilities or their components are sized to serve populations expected in as many as fifty years from the present, the 2020 horizon may not adequately define the longer-range service area. The cwp planning area provides a commonly defined geography for developing these longer-range forecasts and sizing wastewater collector systems. Wastewater interceptor pipes can be sized larger to accommodate expected wastewater needs beyond the 2020 horizon. Areas beyond cwp planning areas are not expected to need centralized wastewater service.(
C. Relationships
While the definitions for the three major geographic areas are relatively straightforward, the relationships among the three are more complicated. Some of this complication is due to the different goals of land development plans and wastewater plans. Other complications are due to the ongoing understanding of the development pattern of the region. This section describes the relationships among these three areas.
UGB and WUSA
The UGB and WUSA have a very direct relationship, since urban areas are expected to be served with centralized wastewater facilities. Expressed mathematically,
WUSA = UGB + Special exemptions + served “semi-urban”.
Special exemptions include a number of land development activities that are not considered “urban” but often require centralized wastewater service. The CWP Guidance Document includes a list of such special exemptions. They include items such as open space, small commercial developments, parks, truck stops, campgrounds, park toilets, golf course clubhouses, etc. If a utility plan identifies a land development activity not covered by the urban definition or contained within the list of special exemptions, the Water and Environmental Planning Committee determines if it should be considered either urban or added to the list of special exemptions. The current list of special exemptions is attached to this document for reference.
Figure 1 provides a generic example of the relationship of the UGB to the WUSA. Since the UGB mapping excludes major open space areas, which can be served with wastewater facilities, the WUSA is a “smoother” map that includes open space areas
Figure A-1 [pic]
with wastewater service. However, all UGB areas must be included in some WUSA. If an existing developed area is identified during the utility planning process as urban but not within a UGB, DRCOG and the affected local government will need to amend the UGB/A map to include this area.
Some communities have elected to use an urban growth area rather than a mapped boundary. This has created a complication for the utility plans. In these communities, they have defined a “committed area” that has reached a certain stage of community approval, for example, subdivision platting. This committed area is smaller than the area recognized by DRCOG in the regional UGB table. As areas reach that level of approval, they are added to the committed area but the community pledges to keep the committed area below the UGB. This still leaves DRCOG and the wastewater provider without information about the expected areas that will also urbanize by 2020 and difficultly in determining wastewater treatment plant size and collection system sizing.
To meet this regional need, DRCOG maintains an “unofficial” 2020 map for these communities. This map will be used to define the WUSA and to prepare regional growth forecasts (for use in utility plans and other DRCOG planning) even though it is not used locally to identify urban lands. However, this service area information becomes incorporated into the discharge permits of these jurisdictions and becomes “official” from a state perspective. Once pipes are in the ground, an area is considered wastewater serviceable. Even if this area later wished to be flexed out of a committed area, the area could still be served and remains as WUSA. Therefore, it would need to remain part of the UGB.
DRCOG has recently amended the Metro Vision Plan to recognize “semi-urban” development. These are residential areas that have lot sizes between one and 35 acres. This semi-urban development is not included in the UGB mapping and a working group is attempting to create a semi-urban map. While semi-urban development is usually served with on-site wastewater systems (as well as individual water supply wells), there are situations where centralized service is or may be more appropriate. The Board of Directors asked the Water and Environmental Planning Committee to develop criteria for relating semi-urban development to the water quality planning process. The Board approved new wastewater definitions in January 2001. These definitions in relation to the new “semi-urban” definition will require additional clarification. In the interim, individual utility plans will need to consider semi-urban development that exists or is planned as they define their 2020 WUSA.
UGB and CWP Planning Area
Because the CWP Planning Area extends beyond the planning horizon of the UGB, it is expected to be equal to or larger than the UGB. Again, mathematically,
CWP Planning Area = WUSA + lands expected to urbanize after 2020 or flexed into a WUSA.
CWP Planning Area can be converted to WUSA through the DRCOG plan amendment process and also through the UGB/A Flexibility Process. The Flexibility Process provides a mechanism for a community to self-certify a UGB change as long as there is no change in the total urban area and other criteria are met. It could be anticipated that such changes will be moving an area from the CWP Planning Area to a WUSA.
Planning Area and local comprehensive plans
Since CWP Planning Areas extend beyond the UGB, wastewater utilities needed some other criteria to ensure that they are consistent with locally adopted land development goals. Therefore, the Clean Water Plan requires that a CWP Planning Area be consistent with local comprehensive plans or master plans. This is easy to achieve when the land planning entity (city or county) is also the wastewater provider. When those are two separate political entities, this requires coordination between jurisdictions. Before DRCOG recognizes a utility plan, the land planning entity must certify that the CWP Planning Area is consistent with their comprehensive plan.
Relationship to legal boundaries
The boundaries for UGB, WUSA and CWP Planning Areas are all designed to anticipate the future. Therefore, it is only coincidence when they are the same as legal boundaries of cities, towns, counties or special districts. The relationship between planning and legal boundaries is still being defined but the following statements can be made:
□ Legal boundaries for cities and districts are a statement about the willingness to provide services but do not have a time element,
□ UGB and WUSA boundaries have a very definite time element, defined by DRCOG’s planning horizon, currently the year 2020,
□ Annexation agreements have often committed a government to respond with services whenever a developer makes the request, which makes it difficult to stage municipal services,
□ While a wastewater provider may be legally committed to provide services within its legal boundary, the UGB defines the area expected to need services by a certain date such as 2020,
□ DRCOG has encouraged local governments to include the planning boundaries in future annexation agreements but has found this difficult to apply retroactively, and
□ 2020 urban areas often extend beyond the current corporate limits of cities and districts, which make the planning areas involve the counties as well.
□ CWP Planning Areas may not have a definable planning horizon, depending on the local plan. Therefore, DRCOG does not assume a date for CWP Planning Areas.
The extension of municipal plans into unincorporated areas creates a potential tension with county plans. In addition, it is possible that two or more municipal plans can include the same areas. The CWP tries to deal with this situation by not allowing wastewater service to WUSA or CWP Planning Areas that overlap. However, this requires that any city/county or city/city overlaps be reconciled. Since state law does not give priority to either party in such situations (and, in fact, considers plans as advisory documents only), this reconciliation process requires willing parties to come together voluntarily. DRCOG has been encouraging cities and counties to enter into “co-management” agency agreements to deal with these overlapping responsibilities. The Board approved new management agency definitions in January 2001 that encourage co-management in overlap areas.
D. Roles
In carrying out the integration of Metro Vision and Clean Water Plan planning activities, the several parties have specific roles to play. For example, DRCOG is responsible for maintaining the regional plan but local governments implement those plans. This section highlights some major roles in the UGB/WUSA process.
DRCOG
The DRCOG Board adopts the Metro Vision Plan under its responsibilities as a regional planning commission. The Clean Water Plan is recognized in both the Federal Clean Water Act and the Colorado Water Quality Act. DRCOG has established processes for both these planning efforts to ensure that they recognize local goals and needs.
The UGB is a core element of the Metro Vision Plan and the regional UGB total as well as individual community UGBs are adopted as part of the regional plan. This involves reviews by several committees, a public hearing and adoption by a majority of the DRCOG member governments. DRCOG maintains a regional composite map of all the community UGBs and regularly reviews the regional assumptions supporting the UGB.
The Board has also adopted a flexibility process to provide local governments with a mechanism for keeping their UGB current. If a city or county wishes to change their UGB without affecting the total area, they can self-certify the revision, acknowledging that they have considered a number of factors in the change. If a community needs to make a change that affects their total UGB area, the process provides a review by other communities and an action by the DRCOG Board. In addition, the Board has established a biannual review process to keep the UGB up to date.
DRCOG also has an adopted process for accepting wastewater utility plans, including the definitions of WUSA and CWP Planning Areas. The Board has delegated review and acceptance of utility plans to the Water and Environmental Planning Committee. The committee has prepared a guidance document to assist wastewater agencies in preparing utility plans.
The Water and Environmental Planning Committee has formed a utility plan review committee to ensure that utility plans are consistent with the Clean Water Plan. This review includes an evaluation of the WUSA and CWP Planning Area maps. To help ensure that these are consistent with the UGB/A, the review committee includes local planners familiar with the UGB/A and other Metro Vision elements.
Cities and Counties
Cities, towns and counties have the responsibility for managing land development under Colorado law. Therefore, they have primary responsibility for the mapping of the UGB/A and other land development features of Metro Vision. DRCOG has a stated policy that that each community maintains the official UGB/A map for their community. The composite map at DRCOG is only a general representation of the official UGB/A maps.
The linkage of the CWP Planning Area to adopted comprehensive plans requires coordination between the wastewater management agency and the cities, towns and counties it serves. DRCOG does not have a composite map of local comprehensive plans, therefore, CWP Planning Areas must rely on local mapping efforts. As noted earlier, cities often include unincorporated areas in their comprehensive plans to anticipate areas that they might annex in the future. Colorado law does not give preference to either the city or county plan so an area may be recognized as potentially urban in one plan but non-urban in the other. The wastewater service provider cannot provide service in such areas until this overlap is coordinated between communities.
Wastewater Management And Operating Agencies
Wastewater management agencies are defined by the federal Clean Water Act and named by the Colorado Governor, based on DRCOG recommendations. Their role is the creation of utility plans and, through the plans, the protection of the state’s water quality. A wastewater operating agency is the political entity or private company that operates a wastewater treatment facility. Often, the management and operating agencies are the same entity, but there are several examples in the region of several operating agencies grouped under a coordinated management agency. For example, the Cherry Creek Basin Water Quality Authority is the management agency for 8 operating agencies in that watershed. Some management agencies coordinate efforts of special collection agencies that are also considered as operating agencies by the state. For example, the Metropolitan Wastewater Reclamation District represents over 45 collector agencies, including both cities and special districts.
It is expected that the wastewater management agency will prepare the utility plan and, during that process, prepare the WUSA and CWP Planning Area maps.
Appendix B – Water Quality Control Division Consolidation Policy
POLICY NUMBER 5: CONSOLIDATION OF DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS
PURPOSE: TO ENSURE THAT THE DIVISION IS CONSISTENTLY APPLYING THE REQUIREMENTS OF BOTH THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL ACT AND SITE LOCATION AND DESIGN APPROVAL REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS.
PROCEDURE: THE FOLLOWING FACTORS WILL BE USED TO EVALUATE THE FEASIBILITY OF CONSOLIDATION.
SERVICE AREA - If the site or wastewater treatment service area of a proposed facility is within the wastewater treatment service area (as defined in an adopted local comprehensive plan, or approved 208 water quality management plan) of a district or municipality providing wastewater treatment service, the applicant should be that district or municipality and the application should provide for consolidation of either treatment facilities or management and operation of the separate facilities. An exception may be granted if the proponent is an existing district or municipality also identified in the respective plan(s).
DISTANCE - If the distance to the closest existing/proposed wastewater treatment works, or from a sewer line capable of carrying the proposed flows to an existing treatment works, is less than five miles, an analysis of the cost effectiveness of consolidation with that treatment works is to be prepared. If the distance is in excess of five miles, no further analysis of consolidation is required.
WATER QUALITY IMPACTS – Subject to the above factors, where consolidation can improve the level of wastewater treatment and thereby result in improvements to surface and/or groundwater quality, further analysis of consolidation should be explored.
STREAM FLOW - If the consolidation of treatment works would alter flows in a stream or stream segment or transfer a sufficient amount of water to another stream or stream segment so as to result in (i) overwhelming adverse environmental effects on either stream, or (ii) the lowering of the effluent limits of other treatment works so as to cause the need to install additional advanced secondary or tertiary treatment processes, no further analysis of consolidation is required.
THREATENED or ENDANGERED SPECIES - If threatened or endangered species inhabit or utilize the only site which could serve a consolidated treatment works or a site through which interceptor lines would have to pass to reach a consolidated treatment works site, such evidence shall be presented and no further analysis of consolidation is required.
WATER RIGHTS - If the consolidation of treatment works would alter the discharge of effluent in a manner which would impair the water rights of one of the parties to the consolidation, evidence of the same shall be presented and no further analysis of consolidation with those parties is required.
LOCAL PLANS - If consolidation is in direct conflict with a specific recommendation of the county’s or city’s Comprehensive Plan or an approved 208 Water Quality Management Plan, and the entity responsible for the development of the respective plan recommends against consolidation, no further analysis of consolidation is required.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS - Unless another factor contained in these criteria results in a determination that consolidation is not feasible, an analysis comparing the cost of consolidating the treatment works versus the cost of constructing separate facilities shall be prepared. The analysis shall include the following costs: land acquisition, capital construction (including such unique construction expenses as flood-proofing, water rights compliance, and wetland mitigation), interceptors and lift stations, treatment plant expansion and/or upgrade, debt retirement expenses, and operation and maintenance costs for a minimum period of 20 years for each alternative. Other unique costs specific to one or more of the alternatives under consideration may also be appropriate for consideration, i.e. value of water for reuse either by the applicant or through sales to another party. Cost comparisons shall be made on the basis of cost per 1,000 gallons treated as well as net present worth. If the cost of consolidation exceeds the cost of separate plant construction by more than 30%, no further analysis of consolidation is required.
Background: The Colorado Water Quality Control Act [C.R.S. 25-8-702 (2)] states, “in evaluating the suitability of a proposed site location for a domestic wastewater treatment works, the division shall:
(C) ENCOURAGE THE CONSOLIDATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES WHENEVER FEASIBLE.”
Reference: “Colorado Water Quality Control Act” 25-8-702, “Approval for commencement of construction”. Regulation No. 22 “Site Location and Design Approval Regulations for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works,” Colorado Water Quality Control Act, 5 CCR 1002-22, 25-8-702 C.R.S.
Appendix C - Data Submittal Standards Format, Description and Minimum Mapping Requirements
GIS Files and Metadata
FORMAT: ESRI ArcGIS Geodatabase version 9.x, Shapefile
PROJECTED COORDINATE SYSTEM
❑ State Plane, Colorado Central Fips Zone 0502
❑ Planar Distance in Survey Feet
❑ Horizontal Datum: North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83)
❑ Vertical Datum: NAVE 83
❑ Ellipsoid Geodetic Reference System 80 (GRS 80)
AutoCAD Files (Not recommended but acceptable)
FORMAT: dxf, dgn, or dwg files version 2000 or greater. A separate layer for each type of data; colored uniquely, with data layer labeled, and attribute information included
GIS or CAD Layers Required
1. Drainage basin and watershed;
2. Water features (stream segments, lakes, and reservoirs);
3. Floodplain delineation;
4. Urban Growth Boundary as prescribed in Metro Vision Plan;
5. Service Areas:
WUSA and CWP;
6. Treatment Plant and Works in an Excel or Dbase table format:
include address,
GPS point in lat/long,
point in DRGOG Projection;
7. Force mains, interceptors, lift stations;
8. Discharge Point in an Excel or dbf table format:
GPS point in lat/long and in DRGOG Projection;
9. Water well fields, sanitary sewer tributary areas (if available);
10. Planning Information (Comp Plan) with attributed land use designations.
( The Clean Water Plan also contains a provision for a geographic area beyond the CWP Planning Area. The “regional envelope” is used to define the drainage area about a wastewater treatment facility in the plan. If new development is proposed within an identified regional envelope, the first option for providing wastewater service to that development will be the identified facility.
-----------------------
Wastewater Utility Plan requirements for minor wastewater service providers will remain flexible and be determined on a case-by-case basis.
The goal is to have an accepted Wastewater Utility Plan for all permitted wastewater treatment facilities in the nine-county DRCOG planning region.
Wastewater Utility Plans replace “201 facility plans.”
Clean Water Plan amendments, site location approvals and other approvals under the Clean Water Plan will require an accepted Wastewater Utility Plan.
A community going through a self-certification process to modify the UGB/A is required to consider several topics.
Planning for semi-urban areas should identify the most appropriate type of wastewater service (centralized or on-site).
A Wastewater Utility Plan may consist of a set of linked documents provided that all documents are filed in the reference library as the Accepted WUP.
Estimate 10-year capital costs and summarize sources of revenue.
The WUP shall identify the Management Agency and applicable agreements.
Maps should be of sufficient detail that it is clear which portions of the wastewater service areas are inside or outside of the UGB/A.
If available, provide preliminary effluent limits from the WQCD.
Is the receiving waterbody water quality limited?
Wastewater Utility Service Areas may include semi-urban areas
Overlapping WUSA or CWP Planning Areas will not be recognized in the Clean Water Plan.
The location of all major lift stations shall be shown in the WUP
The WUP shall contain maps showing all existing and planned interceptors to serve the WUSA or CWP Planning Area.
Water and Environmental Planning Committee
WASTEWATER UTILITY PLAN
ACCEPTANCE OR CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE FORM
(Original copies of the sign-off forms are to be kept on file at the Denver Regional Council of Governments and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Control Division as part of the site location approval process).
Utility Plan Document(s): {Report title(s), date, prepared by}
Prepared for: {Operating or management agency}
Wastewater Treatment Facility: {Name of treatment works as shown in permit}
Management Agency: {Recognized management agency}
Operating Agency: {if different from Management Agency}
Acceptance Date: {WEPC review date}
Utility Plan Action (circle one): Accepted Conditional Accepted
Motion: {List actual motion including conditional acceptance requirements used by WEPC}
The Denver Regional Council of Governments, through its Water and Environmental Planning Committee, certifies that the above referenced Wastewater Utility Plan was reviewed by WEPC in accordance with the Wastewater Utility Plan Guidance Document, that it conforms to the policies contained in the Metro Vision Clean Water Plan, and that it was accepted or conditionally accepted as indicated above.
____________________________________ __________
WEPC Co-chair Date
_____________________________________ __________
Denver Regional Council of Governments Date
CWP Planning Areas may represent the ultimate build-out of a service area.
Applicant is responsible for obtaining signatures consistent with the site location approval regulation 22.
A 20-year planning period should typically be used for wastewater treatment plant flow projections.
Interceptors and lift stations may be staged for ultimate build-out with appropriate justification.
The maximum level of detail is required for capital improvements anticipated within a five- year period.
Major wastewater utility service areas have more than 200 residential equivalents or a plant with a design capacity of greater than 50,000 gallons per day.
WEPC maintains a Utility Plan Review Team.
Only Accepted WUPs will be referenced in the Clean Water Plan.
Wastewater service areas include Wastewater Utility Service Areas (WUSA) and CWP Planning Areas. A WUSA is included within the Urban Growth Boundary/Area. A CWP Planning Area includes the associated WUSA along with areas projected to need urban services after the Metro Vision Planning Horizon.
Peaking Factor = 3.65 / (Average Total Flow MGD)0.167
(The maximum peaking factor used in any assessment should be 5.0)
Describe and provide the design capacity of all major treatment processes.
CWP Planning Areas are either equal to or larger than the WUSA
Minor treatment facilities that expand capacity beyond 50,000 gallons per day become major treatment facilities.
The location and site characteristics of treatment plants and related infrastructure shall be shown in WUPs.
Some industries discharging pollutants must pretreat their wastewater before discharging into municipal sewers.
Some minor wastewater service areas may not be contained within the Urban Growth Boundary/Area.
Consolidation of wastewater treatment facilities is encouraged
Site location approval is required for construction or expansion of wastewater treatment works
The adopted regional wetland policy states …no net loss of wetland functions within the DRCOG region.
The Clean Water Plan is a core element of the Metro Vision Plan.
Minor wastewater service providers serve fewer than 200 residential equivalents and have a treatment plant with a capacity of less than 50,000 gallons per/ day
DRCOG generates and maintains population and employment forecasts for development anticipated within the WUSA. DRCOG does not generate this information for portions of CWP Planning Areas outside the WUSA
The shape and extent of a Wastewater Utility Service Area is defined through local planning processes.
Operating Agencies must certify that the treatment works will not be overloaded by the addition of wastewater flow from new lift stations or interceptors.
Utility plans define location, sizing, staging, service areas, treatment process, effluent quality, and financial arrangements and comply with appropriate state and federal requirements.
Wastewater Utility Plans provide information for watershed planning efforts.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- m e tools and methods
- unscramble d m e n c i
- samples of m e framework
- cms e m guidelines 2019
- 2019 e m documentation guidelines
- 2019 cpt e m guidelines
- e m medicare rules for 2019
- 2019 e m documentation changes
- e m documentation guidelines for 2019
- medicare e m guidelines 2019
- d u m b s underground bases
- d u m b map