(a) Purpose.
The purpose of these regulations is to:
(1) Establish standards for operations and maintenance of the Persigo
Wastewater Treatment Plant, and appurtenant facilities including interceptors,
trunk lines, collectors, lift stations, and other connecting pipes,
easements and rights-of-way therefor, and interconnecting systems
and pipes whether or not owned or controlled by the City or the County
(“the system”).
(2) Implement the agreements between Mesa County and the City of Grand
Junction, i.e., the October 17, 1979 agreement, the May 1, 1980 agreement
(which together constitute “the agreement”). Since the
agreement does not address many issues concerning the system, its
use or operation, conditions and requirements for connection, and
others, the City adopts these regulations to direct and allow the
Manager to exercise, to the fullest extent possible, its discretion
and power, except to the extent limited by applicable law.
(3) Establish financial planning requirements, describe types and restrictions
on the use of the funds of the system, and adopt the accounting and
reporting standards applicable to the revenues and expenditures of
the system. Through such implementation, and pursuant to the general
grant of both power and duty to the Utility Director, acting as the
Manager of the system, and the City Council operate, plan for, extend,
and maintain the system in the manner deemed appropriate by such Manager
so long as not contrary to the terms of the agreement, with regard
to the assets and resources of the system:
(i) Accounting and financial guidelines;
(ii)
Establishment of fund balance requirements;
(iii)
Lending rules, limitations and procedures;
(iv)
Ten-year capital and operating plans based on assumptions and
projections deemed reasonable by the Manager;
(v) Billing and collection rules and rates;
(vi)
Pay scales and positions for employees of the system;
(vii)
Administrative overhead services provided to the system by the
Manager and charges and expenses for such services rendered;
(viii)
Surcharges to residents within special districts which provide
sanitation services, unless prohibited by federal law or the terms
of any EPA grants; and
(ix)
Allocation of revenues received by system customers to the various
capital reserve accounts.
(4) Facilitate the implementation of the annexation policies of the City.
(5) Control and plan any system expansion in the 201 planning area and
expansion of the 201 area.
(6) Not by way of limitation, these regulations are intended to provide for the fullest exercise of: a home rule city’s powers, acting through the Manager, derived from Colorado’s Constitution, Article XX, Section
6; the authority obtained by virtue of the County’s delegation pursuant to §
29-1-203,
C.R.S., the powers stated or implied in §
31-35-101, C.R.S., et seq.; and other applicable law.
(7) To provide a written resource to guide not only the Manager over
time, but also the County as a co-owner of the plant and other interested
parties.
(b) Process to Adopt Existing and New Regulations.
The regulations
adopted this date [December 1, 1993] describe, in part, existing procedures
and rules, i.e., administrative and not legislative which apply to
the system and which have been implemented by the Manager since May
of 1980. From time to time, the Manager may propose to the City Council
supplements or changes to these administrative procedures and rules
with additional existing administrative procedures, rules, and policies
which have been implemented by the Manager since May of 1980.
From time to time, the Manager may propose changes to existing
procedures, rules and policies which are legislative in nature. With
respect to such new or additional changes to existing legislative
procedures, rules, and policies, the following process should be followed:
(1) The Manager shall publish, in a newspaper of general circulation
in the City, the text of the proposed amendment and notice of a meeting
at which the text shall be considered for adoption by the City Council.
The City Council shall, at such meeting provide an opportunity to
interested parties to make comment and to suggest changes. The City
Council shall determine whether the text is adopted or is changed
in whole or in part.
(2) The Manager may immediately implement a new or modified procedure,
rule or decision concerning administrative matters if the Manager
determines such change to be in the best interests of the system or
the Manager may delay the implementation of any such new administrative
procedure, rule or decision until after an appropriate comment period.
(Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95. Code 1994 App.
D § 1)
In the construction of these regulations, unless the context
otherwise requires, the following terms and phrases shall have the
meanings set forth:
Agreement.
Joint Sewerage Service Agreement dated October 17, 1979,
between the City of Grand Junction and Mesa County, as amended and
the May 1, 1980, agreement between the City and Mesa County.
ARIX Study.
A study done by ARIX Engineering in 1985 entitled, “Grand
Junction/Mesa County 201 Wastewater Facility Planning Update.”
The study deals with areas within the 201 planning area that are not
practical to serve with the present facilities.
Backbone system.
The plant and its appurtenances and all of the principal
sewer lines including interceptor sewer lines and trunk sewer lines
as shown on City of Grand Junction drawing No. 02-826, dated December
15, 1993. The drawing, as amended from time to time, is on file with
the City of Grand Junction Public Works and Utilities Department.
Banner study.
A report done by Banner Associates, Inc., in 1987 entitled,
“Report on Preliminary Study of Sanitary Sewer Line Extensions
Within 201 Planning Area for City of Grand Junction, Colorado.”
The report investigates the cost and engineering feasibility of extending
sanitary sewer service to some areas in the 201 planning area.
Basin study.
A study done by HDR Engineering, Inc., in 1993 entitled,
“Comprehensive Wastewater Basin Study.” The study analyzes
and predicts current and future sewer flows in the 201 Planning Area,
delineates drainage basins requiring future trunk extensions and provides
cost estimates for the future extensions.
Board.
The Board of County Commissioners of Mesa County or, as the
context may require, the Utility Director or the City Council of the
City pursuant to the agreement.
Bonds.
Securities issued by the City and the County entitled, “Mesa
County, Colorado, Sewer Refunding Revenues Bonds, Series 1992.”
The bonds were issued for the purpose of refunding outstanding “County
Sewer Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1980A” and “County
Sewer Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 1980B.”
CH2M-Hill study.
A rate study done by CH2M-Hill in 1992 entitled “Wastewater
Utility Rate and Cost Allocation Study.” The study reviews the
financing of the sewer system. A methodology is presented which results
in rates for sewer service that are adequate to meet the financial
needs of the utility and are equitable among the various users of
the system.
City.
The City of Grand Junction, a home rule city.
Code.
The City Code of Ordinances, as amended from time to time.
Collection sewer lines or collection
lines.
All sewer lines, with the exception of private service lines,
which collect sewage from residences, businesses, and other uses,
and convey sewage to a trunk or interceptor sewer line.
Collection system.
All collection lines, trunk lines, pump stations and other
appurtenances, which collect and convey sewage from private service
lines to an interceptor sewer line.
Combined sewer.
A sewer intended to receive and convey wastewater and storm
or surface water.
Council.
The City Council of the City of Grand Junction. The City
Council is the governing body of the City for purposes of §
31-35-701, C.R.S. et seq. and has legislative and other powers.
County.
The County of Mesa, a statutorily created body politic of
the State of Colorado.
District.
A body politic which obtains sewage conveyance and treatment
service pursuant to a contract with the City. Each district is authorized
by and acts pursuant to Title
32 C.R.S.
EQU.
An “equivalent residential unit” as defined in GJMC §
13.04.010.
Facilities plan or 201 facilities plan.
The “Facilities Plan, City of Grand Junction.”
Prepared by NHPQ, September 2, 1975, as amended in the “Summary
Update of 201 Facilities Plan and Predesign” report prepared
by HDR, June 28, 1977, and by ARIX in the “201 Wastewater Facility
Planning Update,” May, 1985, and by HDR in the “Comprehensive
Wastewater Basin Study,” February 4, 1993.
Fund.
City of Grand Junction/Mesa County joint sewer system fund.
HDR predesign study.
A report done by Henningson, Durham and Richardson, Inc.,
of Colorado in 1977 entitled, “Predesign Report for Wastewater
Treatment Facilities and Interceptor Sewers.” The report updated
the 201 facility plan for interceptor sewers and wastewater treatment
facilities serving the designated Grand Junction and Mesa County planning
area. The report provides a recommended plan and an evaluation of
several wastewater management techniques.
Infiltration.
The total extraneous flow entering a sewer system, or portions
thereof, excluding sanitary sewage, because of poor construction,
corrosion of the pipe from the inside or outside, ground movement
or structural failure through joints, porous walls or breaks.
Inflow.
The extraneous flow which enters a sanitary sewer from sources
other than infiltration, such as roof leaders, basement drains, land
drains, and manhole covers.
Interceptor sewer lines or interceptor
lines.
The principal sewer lines which collect and convey sewage
from trunk sewer lines and collection sewer lines to the Persigo Wash
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Interceptor sewer lines are shown on Figure
2-3 of the basin study.
Manager.
Public Works and Utility Director of the City or the City
Manager or the City Council, as the context may require.
Permit.
“Colorado Discharge Permit System” (CPDES permit
CO-0040053), issued pursuant to Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, allowing discharge
of pollutants into navigable waters of the United States or waters
of the State of Colorado.
Plant investment fee.
A fee paid to the City to recover costs of construction of the system as outlined in GJMC §
13.04.280 through
13.04.300, which sections describe payment, amount, and formula for computing the fee.
Sanitary sewer.
A pipeline (also “line”) that conveys liquid
and waterborne wastes from residences, commercial and other buildings,
industrial plants and institutions, and other uses, together with
minor quantities of ground, storm, and surface waters that are not
admitted intentionally.
Series 1980A bonds.
“Mesa County, Colorado Sewer Improvement Revenues Bonds”
originally issued by the City and County in the aggregate principal
amount of $7,420,000.
Series 1980B bonds.
“Mesa County, Colorado Sewer Refunding Revenue Bonds”
originally issued by the City and County in the aggregate amount of
$805,000.
Service charge.
Monthly sewer service charge or rental on each lot, parcel of land, building or premises having any connection to the system as set forth in GJMC §
13.04.250 through
13.04.270 and
13.04.310 through
13.04.340, which sections describe such charges, their computation, and administration.
Service line.
The line from the building drain to the sanitary sewer.
System or sewer system.
City of Grand Junction/Mesa County, Colorado, joint sewer
system including all real, personal, mixed and other property, now
a part of or hereafter acquired by the system through purchase, construction
or otherwise and used in connection with the system. “System”
includes the plant including interceptor lines, trunk lines, collection
lines, lift stations, and other connecting pipes, easements and rights-of-way
therefor, and interconnecting systems, lines, and pipes whether or
not owned or controlled by the City or the County, and used in connection
with the system. Ownership of the system is determined by the agreement.
Trunk sewer lines.
Sewer lines that serve a specific drainage basin which collect
sewage from tributary sewer collection lines and convey sewage to
an interceptor sewer. Trunk sewer lines are shown on City of Grand
Junction Drawing No. 02-826, dated December 15, 1993, which drawing
is on file with the City of Grand Junction Public Works and Utilities
Department.
201 planning area.
The 201 planning area boundary described in the “Comprehensive
Wastewater Basin Study” prepared by HDR, February 3, 1993.
208 plan.
Region 11 Water Quality Management Plan, adopted by the Colorado
Water Quality Control Commission in December 1980, assessing water
quality, identifying treatment works, prioritizing water quality problems,
and identifying agencies to implement recommendations outlined in
the plan.
Utility coordinating committee.
A committee consisting of representatives of service providers
within the 201 area, e.g., City, County, Ute Water Conservancy District,
Public Service Company of Colorado, which meets regularly to review
development submittals and coordinate regulation of construction activities.
Wastewater.
Spent or used water which contains dissolved and suspended matter, as defined in GJMC §
13.04.010.
(Ord. 4574, 4-3-13; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95. Code 1994 App.
D § 2)
(a) Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants (Audit).
An audit of the system’s financial statements shall be
completed once each year. Each audit shall be conducted by independent
certified public accountants who shall deliver a copy of the audit
to both the City and to the County. The auditor will express an opinion
as to the financial position and results of operation of the system
and whether or not the Manager is operating the system in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles. The auditors will,
from time to time, provide additional opinions upon instruction from
the Manager and will annually certify in the audit as to compliance
with sewer revenue bond requirements. The Manager shall select the
auditor. The auditor for the system may be the same auditor who audits
for the City.
(b) Basis of Accounting.
The system shall be accounted for
as a proprietary enterprise fund. The name of the fund shall be the
“joint sewer system fund.” The financial statements shall
be prepared on the accrual basis of accounting. A summary of significant
accounting policies shall be outlined in the footnotes of each audit.
All of the funds and accounts described infra shall be maintained
as book accounts in the “joint sewer system fund,” shall
be kept separate from all other funds of the City, and shall be accounted
for and used solely for system purposes.
(c) Budget and 10-Year Financial Plan.
A two-year budget
of the joint sewer system fund (hereinafter “fund”) shall
be used. Such a budgeting and accounting system complies with the
requirements outlined in the County resolution MCM 92-160. County
resolution MCM 92-160 authorizes the sale of sewer refunding revenue
bonds dated January 21, 1993. County resolution MCM 92-190 replaced
County resolution MCM 80-179 which authorized the sale of sewer revenue
bonds dated November 1, 1980. To effectuate the sale of the bonds,
the City adopted analogous ordinances numbered 2626 and 1922.
The Manager shall continue to prepare a 10-year operating and
capital financial plan for the fund, which includes the two-year budget.
The 10-year plan shall be a rolling 10-year plan which is reviewed
and changed annually, by the Manager, to reflect changing operational
and capital needs and economic conditions of the fund.
The 10-year financial plan shall be based on the Manager’s
estimates of system revenues, operation and maintenance expenses,
debt service requirements, bond fund reserves, operation and maintenance
expense reserves, minimum working capital reserves, planned capital
improvements, and capital improvement reserves.
The 10-year plan shall incorporate bond covenant revenue requirement
ratios, current-expense-to-current-revenue ratios, and the Manager’s
anticipated rate changes during the 10-year period to insure that
all requirements of the bond covenants, and the requirements of the
Manager, are met and balanced over each “rolling” 10-year
period.
(d) Budget Submittal.
Prior to October 1st of each year,
the Manager shall submit to the County and to the City Council its
anticipated budget for the following year, including the Manager’s
recommended user charges, tap fees, and plant investment fees. The
County shall adopt such user charges, tap fees, and plant investment
fees.
It is the practice of the Manager to begin preparation of the
fund budget well in advance of October 1st. Submission of each draft
budget in late September typically reflects all changes to date. Additional
review and changes occur after October 1st. Such a process is approved.
The Manager shall endeavor to communicate all changes in a timely
fashion to the City Council and County.
Review and final adoption of the budget and proposed rates may
occur in the following sequence:
(1) Submission of the proposed budget and proposed rates to the City
Council and the County Commissioners.
(2) Resolution of the City Council adopting the rates. The practice of
the Manager is to adopt rates to be effective January 1st of the following
year. To this end any rate change may be adopted separately from an
appropriation ordinance.
(3) Resolution of the County Commissioners adopting the rates.
(e) System Revenue Funds.
The Manager shall continue to
establish and maintain revenue accounts within the fund, coded by
number, for each type of system revenue. A current copy of the account
description and account numbers will be available for inspection at
the Administrative Services Department of the City. From time to time,
as system revenues are received, the Manager shall credit them to
the appropriate accounts. The Manager shall maintain a summary of
each revenue account within the fund. As revenue types change, the
Manager may create, modify or delete appropriate accounts.
The Manager shall, as a part of the biennial budget process,
estimate system revenues by account. Such estimates will be submitted
to and reviewed by the City Council and submitted to the County.
(f) System Facilities Operation and Maintenance Expenditures.
The Manager shall continue its practice of creation and setting aside,
in separate accounts, funds sufficient to pay operations and maintenance
expenses as they become due and payable. Such funds shall be the first
charge against system revenues. These accounts will be known as the
“sewer system facilities operation and maintenance funds.”
The Manager shall provide, within the fund, separate expenditure
accounts for all system operations and maintenance expenses.
A description of system operation and maintenance expenditure
accounts will be kept on file in the Administrative Services Department
of the City. From time to time as expenses are paid, these shall be
charged to the appropriate expense accounts. Summaries will be maintained
on each expenditure account within the fund accounting system.
The Manager shall make annual estimates of system operation
and maintenance expenditures by account as a part of the preparation
of the biennial fund budget. These estimates will be submitted to
and reviewed by the City Council and submitted to the County Commissioners.
(g) Bond Retirement.
On January 21, 1993, the outstanding
bonds of the system were advance refunded by the issuance of $8,200,000
of Mesa County, Colorado, Sewer Refunding Bonds, Series 1992, issued
by the City and the County.
The bonds and interest on the refunded bonds are payable solely
from net system revenues, after payment of the costs of facility operation
and maintenance.
The Manager shall, as a part of the biennial budget process,
provide for bond payments and expenses, in a separate account within
the fund in a manner consistent with generally accepted accounting
principles and in a manner that meets applicable requirements of the
bond covenants.
The bonds require that gross revenues of the system be sufficient
to “pay the annual operation and maintenance expenses and an
amount equal to 120 percent of both the principal of and interest
on the refunded bonds payable.” This calculation will be made
as part of the annual audit and will be described in the audit footnotes
as to the sufficiency of gross revenues.
(h) Bond Reserve Fund.
The bond reserve fund was created
in 1980 and partially funded from the reserve fund moneys on hand
deposited in connection with the 1978 sewer bonds of the City and
from proceeds of the Series 1980A bonds. Subsequent required deposits
have been made semiannually from system revenues.
The 1992 bond documents require a bond reserve of “...
not less than the average annual principal and interest requirements.”
This reserve was established at the issuance of the 1992 bonds from
the prior bond reserve fund as a reservation of cash and investments,
and as a reservation of fund balance within the fund.
Each audit will provide the auditor’s opinion concerning
the sufficiency of the bond reserve fund and whether bond reserve
requirements have been met.
(i) Capital Reserve Accounts.
The Manager shall continue
to maintain expenditure accounts within the fund for system capital
improvements. These expenditures will be budgeted and made after operation
and maintenance expenditures, debt retirement, and required reserve
fund deposits are made. These capital expenditures are designated
as “backbone capital” and “collection system capital.”
System customers, as part of their monthly service fees, pay
for specific sewer services. These services are described as “backbone
operation and maintenance,” “backbone capital,”
“collection system operation and maintenance,” and “collection
system capital.” Such terms are defined in the definitions section
of these regulations. The monthly service fees shall continue to be
calculated based on the various service fee components provided to
each customer. The components of the monthly service fee collected
for backbone capital and for collection system capital shall continue
to be credited as revenues to special reserve accounts set aside for
planned capital expenditures in these areas.
The establishment of these capital reserve accounts was ratified
by Resolution 98-92 of the City Council on December 16, 1992, which
directs that the Manager reserve all current and future fund balances
of the fund, after all required credits are made and reserves funded,
for future capital improvements and system replacements.
(j) Operation and Maintenance Expense Reserve.
The Manager
shall continue, within the fund, an “unallocated fund balance”
the amount of which the Manager shall determine each year as part
of the two-year budget process. This unallocated fund balance, which
shall be considered in the 10-year plan, represents the amount of
money remaining in the fund after all expenditures and designations
for operations and maintenance, debt retirement, current capital,
bond reserves, and future capital reserves are made. The unallocated
fund balance is and shall continue to be designated as the “operation
and maintenance expense reserve.”
The Manager shall continue the established minimum balance to
be maintained in the operation and maintenance expense reserve. This
minimum balance is, and shall be, known as “minimum working
capital.”
The Manager may use such reserve to pay for or offset any deficiencies
in system revenues required to defray operating and maintenance expenses,
bond retirement expenses, or bond reserve fund shortfalls.
(k) Rate Setting.
The Manager shall establish rates, fees,
and charges sufficient to generate annual revenues to meet the requirements
of the bonds and to fulfill the policies and decisions as evidenced
in the 10-year plan. The Manager will submit to the City Council for
its review, approval, modification or denial, and shall submit to
the County Commissioners, its recommended user charges, tap and plant
investment fees to be charged within the system. The user charges
and fees will be uniform for those similarly situated within the system
as determined by the City Council.
The amount of plant investment fees is intended to recover the cost of construction of interceptor lines and sewage treatment works as described in the Grand Junction and Mesa County predesign report for wastewater treatment facilities and interceptor sewers dated August 1977 (GJMC §
13.04.300).
Rates and fees sufficient to meet the obligations and financial
requirements of the bonds and capital improvement needs of the system
are projected in the 10-year plan. Rates shall be amended from time
to time as deemed necessary by the Manager having considered the policy
that annual incremental rate increases are preferred over larger increases
implemented less frequently.
The Manager shall, in addition to the independent periodic rate
analyses outlined below, annually review and recommend rates to meet
system and bond requirements.
As outlined in Mesa County Resolution MCM 92-160, if the City
or the County deem necessary, the Manager, not less than once every
five years, will cause an independent professional engineer to prepare
an analysis of the rates and fees. A rate analysis was completed in
June of 1985 by ARIX Engineering. In May of 1991 another was completed
by CH2M-Hill Engineers.
Sewer use charges and plant investment fees shall be charged
on the basis of EQUs. An EQU is an “equivalent residential unit”
as defined in the City Code.
(l) Interfund Transfers.
The agreement, section (a)(2),
paragraph 2, allows the Manager to include in its anticipated budget
a line item specifying the amount of money needed to reimburse the
City for expenses incurred by the Manager and other departments of
the City for services provided to the system.
Each budget shall include such a line item, which may be amended
from time to time.
(m) Utility Billing.
The Manager, unless specifically prohibited
by contract, shall bill all sewer customers for services received
whether those customers are served directly by the system or another
entity, including a special district. The existing arrangement is
approved whereby Fruitvale Sanitation District bills customers who
are not in the City limits.
There shall be included on each bill, and identified as such,
any additional charges made to a customer by any other entity which
provides sewer service.
(Ord. 4574, 4-3-13; amended during 2009 recodification; Res. 80-95 § 1, 9-20-95. Code 1994 App.
D § 3)
The City has a duty, as the Manager of the system and a co-owner,
to plan for, control and restrict, if necessary, future users of the
system so that the needs of the system, including capital, are met.
The Manager’s policy is to require that all development
within the 201 is served by and connected with the system. This policy
promotes the public health, welfare and safety by facilitating the
annexation of urban and urbanizing lands to the City and by reducing
the use of septic systems, package plants and other treatment systems
and by, overall, reducing the costs of sanitary sewer.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4)
There is a finite limit to the capacity of the system. Such
capacity was established in the original planning efforts. When the
201 plan was adopted it determined what capacity was needed. Persigo
was sized to meet that need. The capacity was calculated based on
land use assumptions for a defined area. That area is called the 201
service area. Requests for service outside the 201 service area have
occurred. These regulations establish policies and rules to decide
such requests for service inside and outside of the 201 service area.
Rules may or may not be designated as such.
(a) Facts.
(1) The design capacity of the plant is 25,000,000 gallons per day. Source:
Predesign Report for Wastewater Treatment Facilities, HDR, 1977.
(2) The adopted per dwelling use per day is 263 gallons. Source: Basin
Study, 1993.
(3) The total population equivalent which can be served by the ultimate
design capacity of the Persigo plant per day is 237,650.
(4) The total population equivalent which is presently being served by
the Persigo plant per day is 72,337.
(5) Based on present land use approvals and zoning, the total population
equivalent which are “approved” (this includes all potential
future development) is 260,380. Source Basin Study, 1993.
(b) Policy.
The Manager finds it to be in the best interests
of the citizens of the community, and in the interest of the public
health and welfare of the public in the City and in the 201 service
area, that growth be directed, both in the City limits and in the
other areas of the 201 service area. As indicated in the adopted annexation
plans of the City, it is expected that, over time, the City’s
limits will be coterminous with the boundaries of the 201 service
area.
To meet those goals, sewer availability shall be managed, controlled
and allocated throughout the 201 service area. The method selected
to allocate such availability (which means the plant capacity) as
to a particular parcel or lot is described in the basin study completed
in 1993.
(c) Rule 4.1.
Upon adoption of this regulation, no development
shall be approved which requires sewer service within the 201 service
area until the Manager finds that the proposed development (as that
term is defined in the zoning and development code of the City) can
be served by the existing infrastructure, after having duly considered
the residual capacity of the existing lines, the Persigo plant and
the system. To determine if the development can be served by the existing
infrastructure, the Manager shall examine the sub-basin (as defined
in the basin study) within which the development is located.
(d) Rule 4.2.
The Manager shall maintain a compilation of
the allocated sewer approvals which have been given. At such time
as the calculated allocation of the plant’s ultimate design
capacity has reached 55 percent, and each fifth percentile thereafter,
the Manager may give notice of such calculation to the public.
(e) Rule 4.3.
If any person requests that the Manager modify
the boundary of one or more sub-basins which have been established
(in the 1993 basin study), or the allocations of density that have
been established for each such sub-basin, such person shall deliver
such data and studies as the Manager may require in order to decide
such a request. The Manager may require that such person pay a fee
calculated to reimburse the Manager for the costs and expenses, including
personnel costs, incurred in such review.
(f) Rule 4.4.
The Manager may modify the capacity allocated
to any sub-basin based on other available infrastructure (such as
water, streets, schools, and the like) and based on the Council’s
willingness to provide urban level of services.
(g) Rule 4.5.
The principle of “first come, first
served” shall apply when determining if capacity is available.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(a))
System expansion can occur by providing sewer service to developing
areas, sub-basins, and basins and to developed, unsewered areas, sub-basins,
and basins. Each requires different rules and considerations, and
financing mechanisms or charges.
(a)
(1) Developing Areas.
Typically, system expansion in developing
areas occurs at the time of subdivision or development approval: the
developer pays the costs needed to extend/expand the system to serve
the subdivision or development. This system expansion occurs when
lines are installed within a development or through trunk lines extensions
to a development. The latter circumstance is outlined in Rule 4.8.
(2) Sewer Reimbursement Policy.
The Manager determines that
if a developer extends the system to the benefit of other property
near or adjacent to the extension, the developer should be allowed
to recoup some of the costs of system expansion from the benefited
property when that property receives the benefit of the expanded system.
Additional system expansion which further extends an extension will
not be required to reimburse for the costs of a previous extension.
The extent of property benefited by the system expansion shall be
determined by the Manager.
(3) Rule 4.6.
The Manager, at present, chooses the method
of sewer reimbursement agreement to provide a mechanism to allow a
developer to recoup some of the costs described above. A copy of a
standard form sewer reimbursement agreement is on file in the City
Clerk’s office. The Manager may negotiate different terms as
circumstances may require.
The term of such agreements shall not exceed 10 years. The rate
at which interest shall accrue on the developer’s costs of extension
shall be established by the Manager based on then current conditions.
(b) Developed Areas.
(1) Policy – Provide Sewer.
Some areas have already
developed as individual lots and uses without sewer service, however,
it is the policy of the Manager as confirmed by the Persigo agreement
that sewer should be provided whenever and wherever practicable. Specific
circumstances when sewer must be provided to such individual lots
and uses include:
(i) A residential unit served by an ISDS (individual septic disposal
system) which fails and the property is within 400 feet of a sewer;
and/or
(ii)
The expansion or subdivision of an existing residential or nonresidential
use or property.
The property owners in both of these circumstances must pay
the cost of sewer extension and appurtenant sewer service facilities.
The Manager finds that the system should not pay for such costs, except
as provided for herein.
|
The costs of retrofitting an area for sewer service is typically
much higher than if sewer is connected/constructed at the time of
development and many times construction/connection after the fact
means that the costs attributable to each lot, especially residential
lots or parcels, is high. The Manager finds that some form of financing
may be required, under certain circumstances, to promote providing
sewer service and thereby protecting the public health.
|
(iii)
An improvement district is a useful financing tool which allows
for payments over time of the costs of retrofitting an area. The Manager
endorses and approves the use of improvement district(s).
Typically, an improvement district is used when a neighborhood
or other identifiable area needs sewer service and the owners in the
area can garner sufficient owner consent to form a district. For areas
within the City limits, the City improvement district process is available.
For areas not wholly within the City limits, other improvement districts,
requiring the oversight and consent of the County Commissioners, may
be available.
(iv)
In an area where insufficient owners consent to form a district,
other mechanisms are needed to allow the continuing use of a property
which does not have sewer service available, but for which sewer service
is required. Such a situation may arise in an area generally served
by ISDS where one septic system fails or does not meet current standards.
(c) Rule 4.7.
(1) In the case of subsection
(b)(1)(i) of this section (a residential unit served by an ISDS (individual septic disposal system) which fails and the unit is within 400 feet of a sewer) if a property owner demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Manager that the following two conditions exist:
(i) The construction of a sewer line is impracticable; and
(ii)
Adequate disposal and treatment facilities exist as defined
by current regulations (generally by the repair/reconstruction of
a failed ISDS);
Then the Manager may authorize the continued use of an ISDS.
|
That approval/permit shall be issued on the following terms
and conditions, which shall be specifically agreed upon by the property
owner pursuant to a written agreement in advance of repair/reconstruction
of an ISDS.
|
(2) Examples of when sewer construction may be “impracticable”
include but are not limited to:
(i) There is a low likelihood of a local sewer improvement district being
formed in the near future based on the Manager’s discussions
of the formation of the same with the benefiting owners, and the number
and location of POAs to form a district is insufficient to create
the same; or
(ii)
The sewer line, to be constructed by the property owner, is
in a location or with grades such that few if any other nearby properties
can be efficiently served by the new line; or
(iii)
The location of the closest (within 400 feet) sewer line is
in a different drainage basin or is across a major street, waterway
or similar impediment to the construction of a line such that the
expense of the new line is wholly out of proportion to the average
cost of extending residential service; or
(iv)
To construct pumping facilities and a force main would be too
great an expense compared to participation in a future local improvement
district.
Adequate disposal and treatment facilities means
that a local package treatment plant is or will be made available
and functioning or that the ISDS may be regularly pumped and disposed
of at the plant.
|
Repair/reconstruction of a failed ISDS means
that the property owner meets all State and County Health Department
regulations for ISDS repair or replacement.
|
(3) Terms and Conditions of the Written Agreement.
(i) The property owner shall deliver an executed power of attorney for
formation of a future sewer improvement district; and
(ii)
The property owner shall pay that amount of money which the
Manager calculates to be the proportionate share of the sewer line
construction costs, as defined by the Manager, attributable to the
development or property, plus an administrative charge of six percent
of the principal amount of such proportionate share (the “payment”);
and
(iii)
The Manager may authorize the payment, described in Rule 4.7
(subsection (c) of this section), over a term of years, not to exceed
10, upon the execution and delivery by the developer of a promissory
note and mortgage or deed of trust sufficient, in the judgment of
the Manager, to reasonably ensure that the payment will be timely
made; and
(iv)
Interest shall accrue on the payment at a rate established by
the City Council, by resolution, or in the absence of such a resolution,
at a rate which is equal to the rate of return on City investments
obtained by the Finance Director of the City on the City’s long-term
investments; and
(v) The obligation to pay the payment, in addition to the mortgage or deed of trust, shall constitute a lien upon the property and shall be equivalent to the lien provided for in the City Code establishing a water lien, presently GJMC §
13.08.090. All remedies available pursuant to GJMC §
13.08.090 shall equally apply to the lien described and created herein; and
(vi)
In the event that an improvement district is formed and some
or all of the payment has been paid, the assessment which would otherwise
be payable shall be reduced by the amount of principal of the construction
cost which has been paid; and
(vii)
The property owner shall dedicate, at no cost to the City, such
right-of-way or easements as the Manager shall deem necessary to construct,
operate, and maintain the system, in accordance with City specifications
and standards. In the event that insufficient information is available
to determine the legal description of the required rights-of-way or
easements at the time of approval or permit issuance, the developer
shall promise and covenant to make such a conveyance or grant at such
time in the future as the Manager shall require.
If adequate disposal and treatment facilities do not exist or
a failed ISDS cannot be repaired so that such a system can adequately
serve a property during an interim period before sewer lines are constructed,
then the property shall be abandoned or vacated until adequate treatment
or disposal is available. Adequate disposal may include regular and
periodic pumping and disposal of accumulated waste at the plant.
|
(4)
(i) In the case of subsection
(b)(1)(ii) of this section (the expansion or subdivision of an existing residential or nonresidential use or property) if a property owner/developer demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Manager and the County that the following two conditions exist:
(A)
The construction of a sewer line is impracticable; and
(B)
Adequate disposal and treatment facilities exist as defined
by current regulations (generally defined as the construction of an
engineered ISDS);
Then the Manager and the County Commission may authorize expansion or subdivision of the property however that approval or permit, if any, shall be issued based on the conditions in Rule 4.7, subsections (c)(3)(i) through (vii) which shall be specifically agreed upon by the property owner/developer pursuant to a written agreement.
|
The Manager and the County Commissioners may deliberate and
act separately but the concurrence of both is required to grant an
exception to the sewer construction requirement.
|
Application for an exception to the requirement that sewer be
constructed shall be made prior to submission of development/subdivision
plans on forms provided by and with detail determined by the Manager
and shall not be made for more than two lots in any subdivision or
use expansion.
|
That approval/permit shall be issued on the following terms
and conditions, which shall be specifically agreed upon by the property
owner pursuant to a written agreement in advance of construction of
an ISDS on any lot of for any expansion.
|
(ii)
Examples of when sewer construction may be “impracticable”
include but are not limited to:
(A)
There is a low likelihood of a local sewer improvement district
being formed in the near future based on the Manager’s discussions
of the formation of the same with the benefiting owners, and the number
and location of POAs to form a district is insufficient to create
the same; or
(B)
The sewer line, to be constructed by the property owner, is
in a location or with grades such that few if any other nearby properties
can be efficiently served by the new line; or
(C)
The location of the closest (within 400 feet) sewer line is
in a different drainage basin or is across a major street, waterway
or similar impediment to the construction of a line such that the
expense of the new line is wholly out of proportion to the average
cost of extending residential service; or
(D)
To construct pumping facilities and a force main would be too
great an expense compared to participation in a future local improvement
district;
Adequate disposal and treatment facilities means
that a local package treatment plant is available and functioning
or that an ISDS may be constructed, regularly pumped and disposed
of at the plant in accordance with all State and County Health Department
regulations;
|
(F)
To construct pumping facilities and a force main would be too
great an expense compared to participation in a future local improvement
district.
Adequate disposal and treatment facilities means
that a local package treatment plant is or will be made available
and functioning or that the ISDS may be regularly pumped and disposed
of at the plant.
|
(5) Terms and Conditions of the Written Agreement.
(i) The property owner shall deliver an executed power of attorney for
formation of a future sewer improvement district; and
(ii)
The property owner shall pay that amount of money which the
Manager calculates to be the proportionate share of the sewer line
construction costs, as defined by the Manager, attributable to the
development or property, plus an administrative charge of six percent
of the principal amount of such proportionate share (the “payment”);
and
(iii)
The Manager may authorize the payment, described in Rule 4.7, subsection
(c)(5)(ii) of this section, over a term of years, not to exceed 10, upon the execution and delivery by the developer of a promissory note and mortgage or deed of trust sufficient, in the judgment of the Manager, to reasonably ensure that the payment will be timely made; and
(iv)
Interest shall accrue on the payment at a rate established by
the City Council, by resolution, or in the absence of such a resolution,
at a rate which is equal to the rate of return on City investments
obtained by the Finance Director of the City on the City’s long-term
investments; and
(v) The obligation to pay the payment, in addition to the mortgage or deed of trust, shall constitute a lien upon the property and shall be equivalent to the lien provided for in the City Code establishing a water lien, presently GJMC §
13.08.090. All remedies available pursuant to GJMC §
13.08.090 shall equally apply to the lien described and created herein; and
(vi)
In the event that an improvement district is formed and some
or all of the payment has been paid, the assessment which would otherwise
be payable shall be reduced by the amount of principal of the construction
cost which has been paid; and
(vii)
The property owner shall dedicate, at no cost to the City, such
right-of-way or easements as the Manager shall deem necessary to construct,
operate, and maintain the system, in accordance with City specifications
and standards. In the event that insufficient information is available
to determine the legal description of the required rights-of-way or
easements at the time of approval or permit issuance, the developer
shall promise and covenant to make such a conveyance or grant at such
time in the future as the Manager shall require.
If adequate disposal and treatment facilities do not exist or
cannot be constructed that such a system can adequately serve a property
during an interim period before sewer lines are constructed, then
the property shall be abandoned or vacated until adequate treatment
or disposal is available. Adequate disposal may include regular and
periodic pumping and disposal of accumulated waste at the plant.
(6) Rule 4.8.
No development within a basin or sub-basin in the 201 service area for which inadequate or no lines exist, as determined by the Manager, shall be permitted to proceed to final plat or other final approval, whichever is earlier, until the developer thereof has paid to the Manager, for retention by it within an appropriate fund, the trunk line fee established pursuant to subsection
(c)(7) of this section. Nothing contained herein shall limit the obligation of the developer to pay for additional costs required to provide sewer service to the development, such as but not limited to the costs of collection lines.
The Manager shall collect such amount from each such developer in accordance with subsection
(c)(7) of this section.
Should the developer desire to extend a trunk line before the
Manager is prepared to build such trunk line, the developer may request
approval from the Manager to do so at the expense of the developer.
Upon completion and acceptance by the Manager of the extension, the
developer may apply to the Manager to be reimbursed for the cost of
the extension (less any trunk extension fees required of the developer).
Any such reimbursement by the system shall apply only to a trunk extension
which the Manager has planned, as approved in the current two-year
budget, to construct within 24 months of the developer’s completion
of such work. The developer would then, with approval of the Manager,
be reimbursed from the trunk line extension fund. Interest on the
cost of construction would not be included as a part of the reimbursement.
(7) Sewer Trunk Line Extension Fund.
(i)
Establishment of Fund.
A separate fund will be
established within the joint sewer fund for the purpose of financing
trunk lines and collecting fees and charges for said trunk lines,
said fund to be known as the “sewer trunk line extension fund.”
The amount of $1,150,000 from the joint sewer fund balance shall be
appropriated and deposited in the sewer trunk line extension fund.
(ii)
Budget.
Each fiscal year as a part of the approval
of the joint sewer system budget, a separate accounting of the sewer
trunk line extension fund shall be provided to the City Council. Such
accounting shall include all revenues, expenditures and fund balance
associated with the sewer trunk line extension fund. Each year as
a part of the joint sewer system budget, the Manager (as described
in the agreement) shall prepare a recommendation on any trunk line
projects to be considered for construction during the budget year.
In making its recommendation, the Manager shall seek advice from the
Mesa County Planning Department, Mesa County Health Department and
interested homebuilders and realtor groups.
(iii)
Project Criteria.
In determining if a trunk line
construction project is eligible for the sewer trunk line extension
program, the Manager shall consider the following:
(A)
The trunk line must be included in the sewer lines shown in
Figure TM 4-5 of the Black and Veatch 2008 Comprehensive Wastewater
Basin Study Update.
(B)
The trunk line shall be located in an area of the 201 Sewer
Service Area that is developed or developing.
(C)
At least 15 percent of the total cost of the trunk line shall
be committed by property owners within the basin area prior to construction
of the trunk line. This commitment may be in the form of prepaid development
fees/escrow or contracts to pay upon the award of contract to construct
the trunk line. The Manager may waive this requirement if the best
interest of the sewer system is served by constructing a trunk line
in an area that does not meet these criteria.
(D)
The Manager may determine that, based on subsections
(c)(7)(iii)(A) through
(C) of this section, a particular trunk line request is not financially in the best interest of the sewer trunk extension fund. Notwithstanding that determination the property owner(s) in the basin may propose to construct the trunk line with the owner(s) funding an amount greater than 15 percent of the project cost. With consent of the Manager the owner(s) may fund up to 100 percent of the project cost. Should the requesting property owner(s) costs be greater than the trunk extension revenues there will be no credit or reimbursement made to the owner(s).
(E)
The financial objective of the sewer trunk line extension fund
shall be to collect sufficient development fees to recover trunk line
construction costs and finance further trunk line project on a self-sustaining
basis.
(F)
In the event the Manager denies an extension, the property owner(s)
may (1) request that the Manager provide its calculation/evaluations
of the revenue anticipated to be received if the trunk line project
is constructed and/or the financial projections on which the decision
is based and (2) the property owner(s) may appeal any denial first
to the City Manager and if the project continues to be denied to the
Commissioners and City Council sitting in joint session as the Persigo
Board. Appeals shall be timely made and decided; an appeal shall be
in writing and must be filed within 10 days of the Manager’s
denial. The City Manager shall hear and decide the appeal, in writing,
within 10 business days after it is filed with him. If the denial
is not overturned or terms established that are acceptable to the
Manager and the property owner then the Persigo Board shall hear and
decide the appeal within 30 days unless the property owner agrees
to a later decision date.
(iv)
Development Fees.
The cost of constructing trunk
lines shall be reimbursed to the sewer trunk line extension fund by
all properties which connect either directly or indirectly into the
trunk line. The following fees and charges shall be assessed to all
properties within the trunk line basin to reimburse the sewer trunk
line extension fund for the cost of constructing the trunk line:
(A)
Subdivision Development.
The development of any
platted lot or the platting of any land within any basin in which
a trunk line has been funded and constructed by the sewer trunk line
extension fund shall be charged an extension fee per lot as follows:
Density
|
Extension Fee per Lot
|
---|
1 Unit/Acre or less
|
$750
|
>1 <3 Units/Acre
|
$675
|
≥ 3 Units/Acre
|
$500
|
(B)
New Construction.
Any building permit requiring
a sewer clearance and connection to any public sewer line within the
trunk line basin will also require payment of an extension fee as
follows:
Density
|
Extension Fee per EQU*
|
---|
1 Unit/Acre or less
|
$1,750
|
>1 <3 Units/Acre
|
$1,500
|
≥ 3 Units/Acre
|
$1,000
|
* Equivalent Residential Unit – As defined by GJMC § 13.04.010.
|
The above fees are in addition to the plant investment fee charged
for new sewer connections.
|
(Amended during 2009 recodification; Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94; Res. 47-93 (as
amended by Joint Persigo Board, 4-30-14), 8-4-93. Code 1994 App. D § 4(b))
Those standards adopted by the Manager concerning development
and infrastructure shall apply throughout the system.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(d))
(a) Rule 4.10.
Sewer service outside the 201 service area
is prohibited, unless the Manager determines, by resolution of the
City Council:
(1) That the area proposed to be served is urban or urbanizing, i.e.,
the City is willing to provide urban services to such area, in the
reasonable future; and
(2) The Manager determines that sufficient capacity to serve such area
is available; and
(3) The Manager determines that other necessary infrastructure to provide
urban services is reasonably available;
(4) The Manager has evaluated the probability of including the area proposed
to be served pursuant to Rule 4.11 and has found that such inclusion
is reasonably likely to occur in the reasonable future. The Manager
shall seasonably initiate the process to cause such area to be included
within the 201 service area.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(e))
(a) Rule 4.11.
Any person desiring that the boundary of
the 201 service area be modified, including a political subdivision,
shall begin by making application to the Manager. The application
shall include such information as the Manager shall require in order
to evaluate the effect of such modification on the plant capacity,
the ability of the City to serve such included area, and the ability
of the City to control the infrastructure standards which shall apply,
and to ensure continued compliance with applicable federal and State
law.
The Manager may initiate such a modification.
Upon the determination by the Manager that the information supplied
is sufficient to make an informed decision on the request for modification,
the Manager shall schedule a public hearing thereon with prior notice
of such hearing to be published at least twice, 10 days prior to such
hearing.
The decision on the question of modification shall be made by
the City Council, and if required by applicable law, shall be forwarded
to other agencies whose decision is required.
The Manager may require that such person pay for the costs incurred,
including personnel costs, in evaluating and deciding such a request.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(f))
(a) Background and Policy.
The importance of the use of
the availability of sewer service to obtain annexation of properties
to the City cannot be understated. The City annexes: to control the
location, quality and density of development; to ensure that the development
standards of the City are complied with; to control the impacts on
City streets and other City infrastructure; to prevent a decaying
core City by adding to the City newly developing areas, and already
developed areas which are urban or urbanizing; and to provide planning
and fiscal responsibility.
For decades, the City has required powers of attorney to be
delivered to the City at the time that permission to physically connect
to the system has been granted. At times, this has occurred when the
plant investment fee has been paid and a planning clearance issued.
Where the only approval is a building permit, this method has an inherent
weakness: because the annexation process requires significant lead
time and procedural steps, development can occur faster than annexations
can be completed. Thus, a developer can obtain permission to install
infrastructure for subdivisions/developments without City inspection
and without City specifications being met. Additionally, because at
times in the past some County-adopted standards have been waived,
the City finds that it must to protect its taxpayers from bearing
the burden of upgrading deficient infrastructure upon annexation,
implement a supplementary method of obtaining control over the infrastructure
which is installed.
A second inherent weakness in the method used in the past is
that the discretionary planning and land use decisions are made by
entities other than the City for lands which the City annexes shortly
thereafter. The City finds that its citizens are best served, and
the public welfare is best served, if the land use review process
occurs under the City’s jurisdiction. Earlier acquisition of
powers of attorney facilitates that important public policy decision.
The following rule will assist in promoting the City’s
annexation policies and is therefore adopted.
(b) Rule 4.12.
The Manager requires, prior to its review
or approval of construction drawings for sanitary sewer and prior
to approval of sewer service related to any plat or other development
approval, whichever occurs first, that the Manager receive an approved
executed power of attorney (POA) for annexation. POAs shall be provided
using the forms furnished by the City, and shall include a full legal
description of the entire parcel(s) and property intended to be developed,
or which are subject to review.
To implement Rule 4.12, the City has requested the assistance
of the County Planning Department to:
(1) At the time of the County preapplication conference, make developers
aware of the City POA requirement and inform them that the Manager
requires an executed POA before it will review or approve any sewer
construction plans, preliminary or final plat and in any event prior
to connection to the system;
(2) Provide the Manager with a full legal description of the entire parcel(s)
(not just the portion being final platted) at the time the County
refers development proposals in the 201 service area to the Manager
for review, comment and/or approval;
(3) The Manager will not begin the review of, nor approve preliminary
or final sewer constructing plans, or preliminary or final plat approval
or other development approval, without first having obtained a proper
and completed POA. Should preliminary plans be submitted without the
signed POA, the Manager may inform the property owner/developer that
no further review will occur, nor approval be given, nor connection
allowed, until the Manager’s requirements for a signed POA are
satisfied.
(Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(g))
The plant investment fee, as adopted by resolution, is not intended
to pay for the expansion of the sewer plant; rather it is intended
only to pay part of the payments due on the 1992 bonds on the existing
plant and infrastructure. Based on the number of current and projected
users, it is insufficient to pay for completing the infrastructure
that is needed to utilize the existing plant capacity and other system
expansion. Source: City audits, the bond documents, et al. The Manager
has analyzed the financial requirements of plant and system expansion(s).
The Manager’s philosophy, which is adopted herein, is
that current users should pay only for current capacity and current
operations. When the capacity is used up, the system should borrow
to expand the system and future users should pay for such bonds and
the then current operational costs.
The City finds that it would be improper to require the present
users of the system to subsidize future system expansion(s) such expansion
should be paid for by those future users which necessitate such expansion.
Hence, the Manager’s policy, hereby adopted, is that there should
not be a charge, paid by present users of the system, to be used to
pay for system or plant expansion.
(Amended during 2009 recodification; Res. 83-03, 9-3-03; Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95; Res. 62-94, 7-20-94; Res. 41-94, 6-1-94. Code 1994 App.
D § 4(h))
(Res. 80-95 § 2, 9-20-95. Code 1994 App.
D § 5)
This section of the sewer rules and regulations describes rules
and regulations for entities, organizations, special sanitation districts
or homeowners associations which discharge sewage to the 201 joint
sewer system. In this section, “person” includes individuals,
contracting entities and permittees, unless the context requires otherwise.
(a) Application.
These rules and regulations apply to and
govern each person or entity who obtains treatment at the Persigo
plant and/or receives any sewage services from the City, including
the owners and/or operators of a collection system.
(b) Authorization.
No person shall cause any sewage to be
transmitted to or treated by the system unless during all times pertinent
thereto:
(1) A written agreement is in effect signed by the Manager and the person
(“contracting entity”); or
(2) Such person has obtained a current permit from the Manager (“permittee”)
which permit is issued by the Manager in compliance with these regulations.
(c) Written Approval – Descriptions of Connections.
(1) No person shall connect to the system at any point or location unless
previously approved in writing by the Manager. Connections which have
been previously authorized by the Manager and which exist as of the
date of adoption of this section are approved.
(2) Each contracting entity and each permittee shall within 60 days of
connection to the system or notice from the Manager notify the Manager
of the location(s), size and type of each such connection to the system,
along with a description sufficient to distinguish each connection
from another and the location, size and type of all lines and facilities
which constitute the collection system of such person.
(d) Confirmation of Connections – Annexation Agreement.
(1) No connection, line or facility other than described and approved as provided in subsection
(c) of this section, to the system shall occur until the Manager has approved the location and specifications. Each contracting entity and permittee shall pay such costs and expenses which are required to comply with the requirements of subsection
(c) of this section. Each contracting entity and permittee shall pay to the Manager the expenses, costs and charges established by the Manager to confirm connections to, or disconnections from, the system. For the purposes of this provision, “expenses, costs and charges” means the time of the Manager’s employees, the fees and charges of any or other experts required, value of the use of equipment and materials, and the costs of mapping, copying and the like. All expenses of connection, or disconnection, shall be borne by the contracting entity or permittee.
(2) No connection to the system nor to any facilities connected to the
system shall be made or authorized until each property served by the
collector system of such person is annexed to the City or until the
City has received an annexation agreement (e.g., power of attorney
for annexation).
(e) Specifications – Expenses.
No person shall
install, or authorize to be installed, any collection sewage lines
which are designed to connect to the system unless the prior written
approval of the Manager is obtained; the Manager shall not grant such
approval unless the improvements conform with the several requirements
of the Manager, including size and technical standards for sewer construction.
During the period of construction, and with regard to each enlargement,
extension, or replacement, such person shall pay the expenses of the
Manager’s construction inspector, or other professional as is
deemed necessary by the Manager, which inspector shall have complete
access to the construction and the work.
(f) Maps – As-Builts.
Within 30 days of any replacement, enlargement, extension or connection to the system (other than permitted pursuant to subsection
(c) of this section), each contracting entity or permittee shall provide the Manager with maps, as-built drawings and other documentary information from which the Manager may determine the type, date, and specification(s) of each such replacement, enlargement, extension and individual sewer connection to the collection system of such person.
(g) Fees, Charges – Hook-Up Permit.
Each applicant
for connection to the collection system of any person shall pay directly
to the Manager a tap fee (if applicable), the applicable plant investment
fee, and shall execute a hook-up permit (including a power of attorney
for annexation) at the Grand Junction City Hall. No person or entity
shall issue any approval or clearance for connection to the collection
system of such person or entity until, and after, the Manager has
evidenced its approval by the issuance of a hook-up permit. The present
form of the hook-up permit is at the end of this chapter as Exhibit
6A.
(h) Tap Permits.
Prior to connection an applicant shall
either (1) agree to pay the Manager for the time and materials incurred
in making the connection, or (2) obtain a permit issued by the Manager
to an approved contractor who shall make the connection, or (3) have
agreed to pay a district which controls a collection system.
The Manager may also require all excavations in public rights-of-way
or utility easements to be done by system personnel and equipment
with excavation piping and valves in these areas to be provided by
the Manager and paid for by the contracting entity or permittee.
(i) Building Permit.
No building permit (but excluding foundation
only permits and building permits for a structure not requiring sewer
service) shall be issued by the Mesa County Building Department until
the applicant has obtained a hook-up permit from the Manager at City
Hall.
(j) Operation/Maintenance Services.
The Manager will not
provide operation and maintenance services, e.g., flushing or jetting
of the system of a collecting entity or permittee, unless provided
for by a written agreement with the Manager.
(k) Connector’s Duties.
Any failure of a part of the
collection system of a contracting entity or permittee, such as repair
or replacement of a lift station, or blockage due to slippage or cave-in,
whether by reason of faulty installation, age or otherwise, which
requires excavation and/or replacement of pipe materials, shall be
at the sole expense of the contracting entity or permittee. If the
contracting entity or permittee fails to make such repairs or replacement
in a timely manner, the Manager may elect to make the repair and replacement,
and in such event the contracting entity or permittee shall reimburse
the Manager for labor (direct and indirect), equipment costs, materials,
plus 10 percent of such labor, equipment and material costs for the
costs of administration.
(l) Inspection.
During the period of construction, and with
regard to each extension of the contracting entity or permittee’s
collection system, the contracting entity or permittee shall pay the
expenses of a construction inspector, or other professional as is
deemed necessary by the Manager, which inspector shall have complete
access to the construction and the work.
(m) Billing.
No contracting entity or permittee shall collect
from, or bill, any charge or fee, including any monthly fee or charge
from a permittee or other user of the system or other person connected
to the system, except as may be specifically provided otherwise in
an agreement with the Manager. The Manager is authorized to enter
into agreements with a contracting entity or permittee to bill and
collect such additional amounts as may be agreed upon, such as a district
surcharge for connecting district operations and maintenance. If the
Manager bills and collects the contracting entity’s portion
of monthly or other charges or fees, the Manager may, pursuant to
such agreement, account to a contracting entity for the revenues collected
upon a regular monthly basis.
(n) Written Agreements.
The Manager is authorized to enter
into written agreements with a contracting entity whereby the Manager
collects from individual users who are connected to the contracting
entity’s collection system such additional tap or other fee
the contracting entity shall determine. The contracting entity shall
notify the Manager in writing of the amount of said additional tap
or other fee(s) and shall indemnify and hold harmless the system,
and the Manager and its employees and officers from any claims from
any person that such fees or charges are improper or uncollectible.
(o) Property Served.
Except as provided in these rules and
regulations, service or connection to the system will be furnished
only to persons whose property is subject to these rules and regulations.
(p) Infiltration and Inflow.
(1) No contracting entity nor permittee shall permit infiltration or
inflow into the system except as provided herein. Each such contracting
entity and permittee shall, at its own expense and at no expense to
the City or the system, rebuild such of its lines and other facilities,
and remove any illegal or improper connections according to the plans,
as to specifications and the time for performance, as approved by
the Manager in order to reduce excess infiltration and inflow as required.
Each such contracting entity or permittee shall perform such work
immediately following the giving of notice by the Manager.
(2) The total of infiltration and inflow shall not exceed a rate of more
than 200 gallons per inch diameter per day per mile of line and any
amounts over such rate are “excess.” Inflow from existing
combined sanitary and storm sewers, which the Manager has approved,
shall not be considered as “excess.”
(3) During any period in which any contracting entity or permittee permits
excess infiltration and/or inflow, the Manager may require such entity
or permittee to pay a surcharge equal to the additional costs incurred
by the Manager in conveying and treating the excess infiltration.
The Manager’s calculation of such surcharge shall include the
costs of the consumption of capacity of the system.
(4) The Manager shall calculate any infiltration/inflow rate by comparing
peak flow during wet weather to peak flow during dry weather (especially
summer months with irrigation activity versus winter months with no
irrigation activity). Dry weather flow is measured during dry weather
during the nonirrigation season (December through March). Each contracting
entity and permittee shall provide the Manager with such information
and data as the Manager may require to perform such calculation such
as all pipe length and the size of each such pipe, age, material and
conditions of all such pipe, and location of all connections and results
of any infiltration and/or inflow studies and data.
(5) Infiltration and/or inflow shall be measured using calibrated equipment
specifically designed to measure flow in sanitary sewers. Flow should
be measured over an extended period of time (more than three months)
and should be correlated to rainfall data for the drainage basin where
the sanitary sewer flow is being measured. Flow from each contracting
entity and permittee shall be measured at the points of connection
with the City of Grand Junction sewer system. Each contracting entity
or permittee shall perform such flow measurement as the Manager deems
necessary to accurately establish the infiltration and/or inflow.
(q) Charges.
Each contracting entity and permittee shall
timely pay all Manager adopted charges and fees within 30 days of
billing by the Manager. Any such charges and fees not timely paid
shall accrue interest thereon at a rate of 15 percent per annum.
(r) Pretreatment.
Each contracting entity and permittee shall comply with the requirements of the Manager concerning industrial pretreatment, including but not limited to obtaining a permit therefor prior to discharge into or connection with the system. See Chapters
13.04 through
13.12 GJMC, which are incorporated herein by this reference.
(s) Maintenance Program.
Each contracting entity and permittee
shall adopt and implement a comprehensive collection system maintenance
program. Such a program shall be developed to comply with the standards
and methods provided in “Existing Sewer Evaluation and Rehabilitation
(ESER),” published by Water Environment Federation Manual of
Practice FD-6 and American Society of Civil Engineers Manuals and
Reports on Engineering Practice No. 62 Second Edition, 1994, which
is incorporated herein by this reference. Include: routine cleaning and television inspection and
replacement and repair of all portions of the collection system as
required. The Manager may require additions or changes to such a program.
(t) Sewer Back-Up Policy.
(1) The City will reimburse the costs of immediate, professional cleanup
service up to $750.00 (normally not to exceed $750.00, unless approved
by the Wastewater Superintendent).
Claims for damages beyond the emergency cleanup shall be forwarded
to the City’s Risk Manager. Once any adjustments for depreciation,
prior conditions and cause are made, and if the owner of the property
signs the waiver form, the City will pay one-half of the actual cash
value of the damage, up to a maximum City cost of $2,500. Actual cash
value is defined as replacement cost less depreciation.
(2) Public Awareness.
This amended policy shall be implemented
with extensive public information to sewer customers that even in
the best maintained sewage collection systems, blockages occur for
many reasons; tree roots, grease, disposed items thrown into manholes
which can cause blockages.
Because blockages may occur without anyone being “at fault,”
the City recommends:
(i) That every owner who is concerned about back-ups make sure their
insurance policy covers sewer back-up damages; and
(ii)
That the owner pay to install an approved backflow device.
The information shall be posted on the City’s web site
and provided through utility bill stuffers.
|
(Res. 22-03, 3-5-03; Res. 80-95 § 1, 9-20-95. Code 1994 App.
D § 6)