07-25-1978 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 21 Minutes of the April 27th, 1978 Council t4eeting Page 4 � 4. That the Metropolitan Council ratify and adopt the letters of I John Boland, Chairman, dated March 31, 1978, and April 20, 1978, as the Council's position and understanding regarding the Metro- politan Urban Service Line, the hietr000litan Sewer Service Aegion Line, and Interceptor Sewer Service Area. . 5. That the Metropolitan Council state that the designed inter- ceptor service area represents the possible area within which service could be provided from the interceptor. The City -of Orono is free to allocate its assigned capacity within the area as it sees fit. 6. Dependent upon the density of development, per capita flows and size of households, the capacity assigned to Qrono �1.14 mgdj may . � not be sufficient to service the entire interceptor service area. I Motion •carried. ; 1145.2.6 MPCA Proposed Amendment to Regulation WPC-34 Regarding Administration of Construction Grants and Loans (Exhibit I) Mr. Page presented the committee report to the Council. He then moved, seconded by Mr. Gas�er 1) Modify, or clarify the definition of "NEEDS" in Section B5 to state that it does not apply to individually owned on-site systems. � 2) � Clearly indicate the way in which the Director is to give consideration to the �our criteria used in the preparation of the List of Segments. 3) Specify the factors to be used by tt�e Director in determining whether a treatir.ent works and/or any portion of sewer system improvements are necessary to insure the integrity and performance of a disposal system. 4) Amend the definition of interceptor sewer to permit eli5ibility for interceptor sewers which meet the Metropolitan Area definition, and/or eliminate public health hazards. 5� Section E3c(2) - The proposed financial measures should not be used in their present form. Priority points should be awarded only to those communities with extreme financial hardships rather than awarding some points to each community. (Thus measuring relative financial conditions.) If, however, the proposed concepts are to be used, then the regulation should state objectives for giving priority points to each of the financial measures, and define specifically how each measure is calculated. - 6) Section E4b(2) (c) should be amended to make replacement of interceptors eligible, if such replacement is necessary and consistent with an approved wastewater manayement plan. 7) The decision making process, sequence, and respc>nsibility involved in the trans- fer of funds between the Metropolitan Area and the outstate area should be clearly specificd. In particular, the process for transfering projects from the rlunicipal Needs List to the Municipal Pro�ect List, using Sections E4b(1) , b(2) , b(3) , and h(4) must be clearly 3efined. If the Metropolitan Area has eligible projects which can be certified, but are of lower priority than outstate treat- ment works, there should be no transfer of funds. 8� Zn speci�ying the trans�.tion from the Municipal Needs List to the yunicipal Project i�ist, incornorate criteria awarainq hi�h state priority and an increased number ; of points to projects that are determined to be of high priority in an approved areawide !•�aster�ater management plan, 9) The basis on which the �irector is to determine that an item is "essential to the efficient and effective o�eration of a disoosal system" should be snecified. - _ �.- i i _ � , �