View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
City of Muskegon
City Commission Worksession
September 10, 2007
5:30 p.m.
City Commission Chambers
AGENDA
1. Ward IV Vacancy.
2. 2008 Budget.
3. National League of Cities. (Shepherd)
4. Commendations.
5. County Wastewater Force Main.
6. Appointment to the Leisure Services Board.
7. Any other business.
8. Adjournment.
Remember: Please Bring your Budget Book
City of Muskegon
City Commission Worksession
September I 0, 2007
City Commission Chambers
5:30 PM
MINUTES
2007-80
Present: Commissioners Warmington, Gawron, Shepherd, Spataro, Wierengo, and Carter.
Absent: None.
Ward IV Vacancy
Moved by Commissioner Spataro, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to allow potential
candidates in Ward IV to submit a letter of interest and resume to the City Clerk by
Friday, September 21 st at 3:00 p.m. The Clerk will schedule interviews on Monday,
th
September 24 th at 6:00 p.m. and a vote will be taken on September 24 th or September 25 •
MOTION CARRIED.
2008 Budget
City Manager, Bryon Mazade, presented the proposed 2008 budget.
Commissioner Carter requested to see the numbers for two additional lifeguards at six hour shifts
for the summer. The figures will be calculated and presented to the board.
A public hearing will be held at the September 11, 2007 City Commission meeting.
County Wastewater Force Main
Bob Kuhn presented the Muskegon County Wastewater Management System - 66 Inch Force
Main Failure Mitigation and MDEQ Expectations.
National League of Cities
Commissioner Shepherd requested an additional $500 from the Public Relations to represent the
City at the National League of Cities in New Orleans on November 13 -November 17, 2007.
Moved by Commissioner Spataro, seconded by Commissioner Wierengo, to authorize an
additional $500 in travel funds to Commissioner Shepherd from the Public Relations
budget if it is approved by the Public Relations Committee.
MOTION CARRIED.
Commendations
The Public Relations Committee has developed an "Honorary Ambassador" certificate to
recognize individuals when appropriate.
The Commission approved the title of "Honorary Ambassador".
Appointment to the Leisure Services Board
Moved by Commissioner Spataro, seconded by Commissioner Shepherd, to recommend
appointment of Charles Nash, Muskegon Public School Board Member, to the Leisure
Services Board.
MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner Shepherd, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to adjourn at 8:30
p.m.
MOTION PASSES
Ann Marie Becker, MMC
City Clerk
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Cl'IY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: l'UBUC RJ-:LATIONS COMMJ'TT'EE
SUBJECT: COMMENDATIONS
DATE: 9/5/2007
The Public Relations Committee received a request to create a commendation, a docutnent that
could be issued by the City Conunission to reward a citizen or organization foi- a specific act. ]base
recipients may also be nominated for the Outstanding Citizenship Award at the end of the year.
·n,e title Honorary Ambassador was selected. Attached is a copy of the award with a sketch of the
lighthouse in the background. The city seal will be added to the finished product.
Gity · of Mur5ke9011
1
. ·•
History of 66" Failures 1983-200 1
Muskegon County Wastewater
Management System
66 Inch Force Main Failure Mitigation
and MDEQ Expectations
September 2007
Mitigation of 1983-2001 Force
List of 66" Failures Through 2001 Main Failures
Al the first failure site near Yuba Street and Seaway
Failure Dale Location Cause Drive, four pipe sections upstream and downstream
# were supported by pilings.
1 November Yuba Street Unsuitable pipe support • Al the second site in 4-Mile Creek, the whole 200 feel of
1983 through poor soils
the creek crossing was encased in concrete with piling
2 March Four Mile Creek Area Unsuitable pipe support support.
1988 through poor soils
The next two failures resulted in the construction of 2.5
3 Apnl 1999 Eastern Avenue and BR Cracked mortar and brittle miles of new ductile iron force main.
US-31 pre-stressing w ires A study in 2004 concluded that the remaining 66-inch
4 January Sumner Cracked mortar and brittle force main had a low probability of failure and that the
2001 Avenue and Wood Streel pre-stressing wires pipe should again be examined in about 5 years with
whatever technology that would be available.
Recent Pipe Failure and Current
MDEQ Response
Mitigation Efforts
The most recent failure occurred in March of this year • Current efforts are insufficient
near MacArthur and Sheridan Roads. The cause was
thought to be a combination of joint seepage, • Pipe replacement and testing is not
construction damage, and surges from the main lift
station. enough
In May 2007, a leak test of the remaining 8.5 miles of old
pipe showed no leaks. • County must consider construction of
PURE Technologies are currently installing fiber optic "defensive mechanisms"
cable inside the 66-inch pipe to monitor w ire breakage in
the future and the completion date for this effort is - Dual pipelines
October 2007.
A proposed $18M project would replace the next three - Isolation valves
miles of existing pipe from US-3 1 to Brooks Road. This - Retention basins
work has recently been deemed eligible for a low interest
SRF loan.
1
County Response "Route 66"
Hired Prein Newhof as consultant to investigate required • The MDEQ is
options requiring MCWMS to
- Dual pipelines not feasible
• Velocity Is too low, solids will sellle out look at Retention
• Odor problems wilt occur, pipe lhat is out of service will corrode Basins as "defensive"
badty from the inside
- Isolation valves not feasible options.
• Reduces amounl of flow coming from pipe break • "Route 66" committee
• Does not deal wilh continual flow
• Requires extremely expensive live taps - must keep flow going was formed to study
Prein Newhof, County, Wastewater Committee and these "defensive"
MDEQ have met to discuss other options options.
- MDEQ has requested retention basins
Route "66" Committee One Central Basin
The committee originally was given the task to size and
The next meeting is scheduled for September locate one emergency Retention Basin.
181h with MDEQ, Prein & Newhof, County Staff, The area around Pump Station C was studied to locate
and the Committee. an area large enough to accommodate one central
basin.
• County staff is requesting input from City of
It was assumed 3 days of flow (not including Sappi) and
Muskegon regarding locating some of these
1/3 of the volume of the 66" forcemain would be
basins within the city. required to be stored.
County staff does not support the concept of This amounts to 45.4 MG
retention basins, but would rather install new The required area is 725' x 1,000' ( 16.64 acres).
pipe as needed to protect neighborhoods as well Wastewater would be stored 16' deep in this basin.
as the surface waters.
One Central Basin One Central Basin
Proposed Construction Improvements
were estimated at S7.2M + Land and
Easements.
2
One Central Basin Satellite Basins
After the committee received information on one central
basin, it was decided to study the use of satellite basins.
Satellite basins have the advantage that they protect
against not only the 66-inch failure but failure of other
forcemains.
The committee decided to study satellite basins in the
areas of the main collection system pump stations (A, Q,
D, and C.)
·-· . . '. ."·· _r _,c,_;;;:::,:;.. -- ~ ··:-r:..:···
Station A Satellite Basin Station A Satellite Basin
3 days of flow at Station A is estimated at 5.2MG. A site was located across Whitehall Road from Station
A 500' x 500' (5. 73 acre) property is required. A, adjacent to the Bowling Alley.
The depth of the wastewater would be 6' deep with 8'
dikes.
Estimated construction cost is $1.3M + Land and
Easements.
Station Q Satellite Basin Station Q Satellite Basin
A site was located across Getty Street from Station Q ,
3 days of flow at Station Q is estimated at 10.6MG. adjacent to the Norton Avenue.
A 300' x 1,250' (8.61 acre) property is required.
The depth of the wastewater would be 10' deep with 12'
dikes.
Estimated construction cost is $2.0M + Land and
Easements.
3
Station D Satellite Basin Stations C & D Satellite Basin
3 days of flow at Station Dis estimated at 10.5MG, not It was decided that because a suitable location could
including Sappi. not be found in the area of Station D, a basin could be
An extensive search of the area did not lead to any located by Station C to accommodate both stations.
properties that would be viable options for a basin. All • 3 days of flow at both stations+ 1/3 of the volume of the
of the possible properties were either encumbered with 66' forcemain is estimated at 21 .3MG, not including
wetlands or groundwater treatment systems that made a Sappi.
basin near Station D not viable. An extensive search of the area turned up a few
properties but none were of large enough size to
accommodate a basin required to handle 21 .3MG.
It was even studied to locate one basin at the Balcom
property and one at the Farmer's Market to handle the
required volume. Due to restrictions on these sites,
even combining the two basins would not provide the
required storage.
Stations C & D Satellite Basin
A basin of this size (635' x 635' (9.26 acres)) could be
located on the Verplank property.
Estimated construclion cost is $5.15M + Land and
Easemenls
Discussion and Initial
Reaction by City
Council
4
June 12, 2007
Mr. David Timm, P.E., Grand Rapids Water Bureau District Supervisor
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
State Office Building
350 Ottawa N.W. Unit 10
Grand Rapids, MI 49503-2341
Dear Mr. Timm,
Please consider this letter as our response to your May 8, 2007, Notice Letter
NL-00261 7 regarding our March 2, 2007, unpermitted discharge of raw
sewage into Muskegon County surface waters. I apologize for missing the
June 1, 2007, deadline. We have been hustling through meetings with your
office, my staff, our engineers, our Wastewater Committee, and County Board
to evaluate options and knew how we were going to respond. Unfortunately I
had your letter filed and not in front ofme. Thanks to Tom Berdinski for
reminding me late last week. This delay did allow us to include more up-to-
date information for you, however.
A summary of corrective actions taken over the years in dealing with the 66-
inch force main failures are listed below:
1. When the first pipe break occurred late in 1983, the County fixed the
break immediately and recognized that the pipe had been laid in poor
soils and sawdust in the Yuba Street area. Metcalf and Eddy was hired
to design a support system for the pipe in that area. Four augered
angled battered pilings driven to a design bearing were located at each
of four pipe joints upstream and downstream of the 90-degree elbow.
Concrete cradles were then poured around the pipe joints and pilings to
secure the support. The 90-degree elbow was supported by 32 straight
pilings with concrete poured solid from the elbow back through out the
piling field. This work was expensive and took most of the winter of
1984-85 to complete.
2. When seepage was found on a 66-inch pipe joint under 4-mile Creek in
1988, structural engineers NTH were retained to assist in the repair and
permanent fix. After having the replacement pipe on site, warning and
shutting down all the county industries, our excavation contractor broke
and repaired the pipe quickly. NTH designed and the County built a
200-foot piling, I-beam, and reinforced concrete encasement that surrounded and
supported the pipe in the vicinity of 4-mile creek. This work effectively made the
reinforced and supported pipe walls about 2-feet thick, again a big undertaking by
the County.
3. Variable speed motor drives were added to the 1,250 horsepower pump motors at
Lift Station C in the mid-1990s to ease station surges.
4. After the 1999 break, the County commissioned a study with Prein & Newhof and
SGH (internationally recognized leader in PCCP pipe design and repair) which
was completed in 2000 that recommended replacing the 66-inch PCCP from Lift
Station C to US-31. This study concluded that initial surges or shocks from
running the main station without dampening valves had caused cracks in the
outside pipe mortar over the first two miles. The brittle pre-stress wires in the pipe
then corroded and broke, allowing this failure. Another similar failure occurred in
2001 before the pipeline replacement could be completed.
5. In another response to the 1999 failure, staff changed how pumps were rotated at
Lift Station C. When switching pumps, the next pump is brought on line against a
throttled discharge valve and gradually the valve is opened. When sufficient flow
is passing through the second pump, the first one is shut off. The same procedure
is used when two pumps must operate to keep up with flows. Also, during low
flows, instead of turning the station off, we circulate water through the surge tank.
6. The County and local municipalities bonded and built 13,500 feet of60-inch
ductile iron force main in 2001 per the above-referenced study. As part of the
construction, surge valves were added to the pipeline at C Station.
7. The County further commissioned a study in 2003 of the deactivated pipeline just
west of Getty Street to learn more about the integrity of the pipe and project future
problems. The study examined the wires in the decommissioned pipe, dug up the
force main in several places, and concluded in 2004 that the remaining 8.5 miles
of pipe had a low probability of failure. The study recommended more
examination work on the pipeline in 5 years as it was assumed that technological
improvements might give us more tools by then.
8. A 2004 Project Plan was approved by MDEQ that included replacement of Lift
Station C with a more modular station that will provide even smoother transitions
in pumping. The new construction will be done in 2008 and will include a back-
up generator. The County and communities moved ahead with bonding in 2006
and construction began on the new Lift Station C. This construction is still on
schedule as of June 2007.
9. On March 2, 2007, when the C Station operator was aware of the most recent
break, he immediately diverted the paper mill, and other Wastewater staff
scrambled to turn off all flow to Lift Station C, spilling water into Bear, Mona, and
Muskegon Lakes. This minimized the overflow into houses at the break site.
10. Jackson-Merkey scrambled to install by-pass pumps at C Station (so we could shut
off all flow to the break site), started moving equipment to the break site to replace
the damaged sections, and called Price Brothers to have new pipe shipped.
11. Wastewater staff began calling industries immediately to shut down and
notification was given to our Health Department, Central Dispatch, Prein-Newhof
Engineers, and to MDEQ.
12. Wastewater staff called waste haulers to pump and haul the wastewater from Lift
Station J to the treatment site. Two firms employed seven tanker trucks and
several pumps in order to spill as little into Ryerson Creek as possible. Lift
Station E was switched over to pump through the Sun Chemical line directly to the
treatment plant, so no spill or hauling had to be done there.
13. Wastewater and City staff installed pumps at the break site to pump sewage
directly from the 66-inch main into the Muskegon Township gravity sewer. This
effort quickly diverted the rest of the flow from the big force main so that no more
wastewater was spilled into the neighborhood.
14. Muskegon Township police, fire, and emergency services handled site security,
evacuation, and information coordination. Residents were assisted by emergency
services to get pets, medication, and any other emergency items from their homes. ·
15. The Red Cross was called in to provide many different services to all of the
displaced residents, and many meetings were conducted at Muskegon Township
Hall to assist them.
16. The displaced residents were placed in motels for their immediate lodging needs.
17. County Health Department staff was on site to evaluate the extent of the spill and
make recommendations on actions. As soon as the water started to recede, a
restricted perimeter was established, and officials identified each house where
wells could no longer be used. Samples were taken from wells outside the area of
influence where requested by other residents and immediately tested by
Wastewater staff. The results all showed no contamination and were reported
back to the property owners the next day.
18. The County Health Department took samples of all the wells south of MacArthur
in the general area of the break and found no contamination. Wells in the area are
still being tested by the County Health Department upon request.
19. As soon as the by-pass pumps were installed at C Station, Lift Station A was
turned back on to stop the spill to Bear Lake.
20. Wastewater was gravity fed back through the surge tank to quickly empty the 66-
inch force main back down to the location of the break site.
21.As soon as the by-pass pumps could handle the extra flow at C Station, the lift
stations that overflow into Mona Lake were turned on, ending the spill to that lake.
22. Sampling of upstream and downstream locations for fecal coliform on Bear Lake
and Mona Lake began March 3rd •
23. It was arranged with the trucking company that delivered the new 66-inch pipe for
the trucks to have two drivers for each truck so they could drive all night to
Muskegon. They arrived March 3rd .
24. The local news asked County residents to conserve water and reminded the public
that the Health Department had posted Bear, Mona, and Muskegon Lakes for no
body contact.
25. March 4th, as soon as the new 66-inch pipe was properly bedded, a C Station pump
was started up slowly at Lift Station C against a mostly closed discharge valve to
gradually begin filling the pipe. Constant communication with the paper mill
allowed them to slowly increase their flow to us as we filled the line. This
allowed staff to slowly fill the pipeline without interruption. Three crews of
wastewater employees worked 14 hours to relieve the air in the line at manhole
locations as the pipe was gradually filled.
26.As soon as Lift Station C was started, the by-pass pumps were shut down, and the
spill ceased to Muskegon Lake.
th
27. Sampling of Muskegon Lake for fecal coliform began March 5 ·
28.A preliminary report from our engineers on the cause of the pipe break was
received and discussed a few days after the event. Based upon pipe evidence, the
experience of several pipe experts, and Lift Station C operation, our engineers
could describe conditions that led to the type of failure witnessed. Several unusual
things had to go wrong. The pipe had to leak slowly at a joint, installation or
construction traffic had to damage the top interior concrete support, and surges
had to weaken the steel cylinder until it imploded. Discussions got underway to
determine what testing might be done to the remaining 8.5 miles of 66-inch PCCP
pipeline.
29. The residents that would be displaced for a long period of time were placed in
apartments within a few weeks of the spill. These residents were issued a cash
advance to help meet their immediate food, clothing, and other needs.
30. Cleaning work outside began immediately on the properties, with a contractor
removing sludge and topsoil. Small trees were removed to allow the contractor to
cleanup even the wooded areas of the contaminated site. Cleanup work inside the
homes also began immediately with another contractor removing wastewater and
sludge from basements and crawl spaces.
31. Many efforts were made on a staff and Board level to assure the displaced
residents that the County would take care of them. Staff met with them several
times and continues to have a representative on site (Steve Barnard). The Board
granted authority to the County Administrator and Public Works Director to make
all decisions on behalf of the County to take care of these people. Part of these
efforts is to provide sewer and water connections at no charge to the displaced
residents and abandon their old systems.
32. Early-on the Township inspectors and Count Health Department did a detailed
inspection of the properties and determined what had to be done to move people
back on site.
33. Wastewater staff began writing a monthly newsletter for the residents to keep
them informed on the progress of the clean-up.
34. It was determined in April that a leak test would be valuable as that was thought to
be part of the pipe failure mechanism. This work was completed in May and
determined that there were no leaks on the remaining 8.5 miles of PCCP.
35. Many out-buildings were removed from the affected properties and taken to the
landfill.
36. After the contaminated soil was removed, 272 soil samples were taken according
to MDEQ recommendations and tested for 45 parameters.
37. Further lake sampling was performed at the request of County Health and MDEQ.
A final round of tests was done when the weather warmed up and showed no
remaining evidence of the spill in any of the affected lakes.
38. The affected acreage had lime tilled in to limit the growth of bacteria and reduce
odors.
39. Driveways damaged by the break were repaired and replaced by County staff.
40. A contractor abandoned all of the existing wells and septic systems in the area
where the residents were displaced. Water and sewer services are being hooked
up as residents are returned to their homes. As of this writing, one resident is back
in his home and a second is expected to be back in June.
41. The contracts have been let to raise two homes and replace the basements and this
work is scheduled to begin June 19th , We anticipate that this will be done by this
fall so that the landscaping on these properties can be done then.
42. Initial soil sample results from the 272 locations showed one mercury hit, several
iron and manganese, several cyanide, and some ammonia. Further soil removal
th
and retesting have cleared all of the soil sample sites as of June 11 • We will be
sending the last results that came in during the last two weeks to MDEQ this week.
43. The County Health Department took another round of drinking water well
samples in the surrounding area in late May and those results showed (this
morning) that no contamination has been found. We anticipate that the Health
Department will now lift the drinking water restrictions for these residents.
44. Of the three homes that are total losses, State Farm is handling one and the
County's insurance the other two. We are offering those two property owners a
type of replacement-value settlement if they will rebuild on the property. We hope
to have agreements with them in June. Since these two property owners will be
paid off, no schedule can be determined on when they will have new houses.
45. Once the reconstruction is done on the site, top soil replacement and landscaping
will be done. Most of this work could be done by this fall.
46. The Municipal Wastewater Committee recommended that we proceed with the
acoustic testing at their meeting in May. We are putting agreements together to do
this work and have it authorized at a special Public Works Board meeting the last
week of June. We are also discussing this at our SRF Public Hearing in June.
th
47. The Wastewater Committee is meeting June 12 to get a Public Hearing preview
of the 66-inch options ahead of the Public Hearing. If they are comfortable with
the partial pipe replacement recommendation, I will ask for their recommendation
at that time. lfnot, we can hold a special Committee meeting later in the month.
48. A Public Hearing on the 66-inch options written in a Supplement to our Project
Plan is being held June 20 th at 6:30 PM at the McMurray Center. The
recommended options in this document are the acoustic monitoring, partial pipe
replacement, and the continued investigation into "defensive" mechanisms
requested by MDEQ. Our intent is to qualify this work for a SRF loan in 2008.
49. Defensive mechanisms considered in the Supplement include a 75 million gallon
retention basin and parallel 66-inch pipelines. Both were determined to have ·
operational problems and were too expensive, but staff and our engineer continue
to discuss other possibilities. We are looking into ways to make the basin less
expensive and have less impact on the lake shore. We are looking at ways to use
the three miles of PCCP line if that option is constructed. We are looking at
valving the large main line.
50. We anticipate starting the acoustic monitoring as soon as the agreements and
Board approval are completed. This monitoring could be installed as early as
November 2007. This technology will tell us where and when any pre-stress wires
break in the future so that suspect pipe sections can be fixed before a failure
occurs. The longer this monitoring is in place, the better the decisions will be on
replacing the remaining PCCP force main.
51. The partial pipe replacement is a really big project for us, at an estimated cost of
$ l 8.5M, but there is a real possibility that we will be replacing pipe that is still in
good condition. At least it does not leak. The design and SRF paperwork should
be completed in time for the three miles to be constructed in 2008.
52. Staff and our engineers have met with MDEQ in March, April, and May and will
continue to update the State in regards to our progress at the MacArthur site and
with plans for future improvements.
53. Staff plans to have the three miles of PCCP that are to be replaced physically
tested after it is out of service to know if it can be used as a defensive mechanism.
Below is a summary of milestone dates referenced above:
Milestone Estimated Completion Date
Public Hearing on 66-inch options for Supplement to June 20, 2007
Project Plan
Agreements done with total-loss property owners June 2007
Complete Application for SRF loan for acoustic July 1, 2007
monitoring and partial pipe replacement on 66-inch
force main
Basement replacement in two houses October 2007
Topsoil replaced in neighborhood and landscaping November 2007
done for affected properties
Install 5.5 miles of acoustic monitoring November 2007
Replace three miles of PCCP November 2008
August 16, 2007
Ms. Ronda Wuycheck, Enforcement Specialist
Water Bureau Enforcement Unit
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
525 West Allegan Street
Lansing, MI 48909-7773
Dear Ms. Wuycheck,
I am in receipt of your letter of August 9, 2007, pertaining to increased
enforcement action and request for further information from the County.
Attached is a June 12, 2007, letter to our MDEQ Water Bureau in Grand
Rapids detailing the work done by the County over the last 24 years in
response to the 66-inch pipe failures. The County has made (and continues
to make) every effort imaginable to investigate these events, immediately
implement any engineering recommendations, and mitigate any
environmental damages.
Since June li\ the County's efforts include:
• hiring PURE Technologies to install permanent acoustic monitoring
on the 66-inch PCCP at a cost of over$ lM,
• hiring Prein & NewhofEngineers to review all MDEQ defensive
option suggestions,
• successfully cleaning the recent spill site to background soil and
water criteria,
• installing new basements in two of the affected homes,
• completing much of the landscaping in the spill site area,
• meeting with MDEQ regularly regarding their defensive option
suggestions,
• forming a Municipal Wastewater Committee to work with staff,
MDEQ, and our engineers on defensive options,
• receiving and storing on site 100 feet of replacement 66-inch PCCP
pipe and all the repair fittings, and
• submitting a supplement to our Project Plan to MDEQ in an effort
to qualify for an SRF loan for replacing three miles of the 66-inch
force main.
Please feel free to contact me if you need more information or wish to discuss further
options.
Sincerely,
Dave Kendrick, Public Works Director
Cc: Muskegon County Public Works Board members
Municipal Wastewater Committee members
Jack Niemiec, County Administrator
Ted Williams, County Counsel
Ken Kraus, County Health Department Director
Mike Fuller, Prein & Newhof
August 16, 2007
Ms. Ronda Wuycheck, Enforcement Specialist
Water Bureau Enforcement Unit
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
525 West Allegan Street
Lansing, MI 48909-7773
Dear Ms. Wuycheck,
I am in receipt of your letter of August 9, 2007, pertaining to increased
enforcement action and request for further information from the County.
Attached is a June 12, 2007, letter to our MDEQ Water Bureau in Grand
Rapids detailing the work done by the County over the last 24 years in
response to the 66-inch pipe failures. The County has made (and continues
to make) every effort imaginable to investigate these events, immediately
implement any engineering recommendations, and mitigate any
environmental damages.
Since June Ii\ the County's efforts include:
• hiring PURE Technologies to install permanent acoustic monitoring
on the 66-inch PCCP at a cost of over $IM,
• hiring Prein & NewhofEngineers to review all MDEQ defensive
option suggestions,
• successfully cleaning the recent spill site to background soil and
water criteria,
• installing new basements in two of the affected homes,
• completing much of the landscaping in the spill site area,
• meeting with MDEQ regularly regarding their defensive option
suggestions,
• forming a Municipal Wastewater Committee to work with staff,
MDEQ, and our engineers on defensive options,
• receiving and storing on site 100 feet of replacement 66-inch PCCP
pipe and all the repair fittings, and
• submitting a supplement to our Project Plan to MDEQ in an effort
to qualify for an SRF loan for replacing three miles of the 66-inch
force main.
The County requests that the EU take into consideration our recent and historical
environmental efforts, our current Phase I and Phase II $32M investment in our sewer
infrastructure, and the fact that the plant has discharged some of the cleanest effluent
in the state over the last 34 years when drafting the Consent Order.
Sincerely,
Dave Kendrick, Director
Muskegon County Public Works
Cc: Mr. Louis McMurray, County Public Works Board Chairman
Mr. Roland Crummel, Chairman Municipal Wastewater Committee
Mr. Jack Niemiec, County Administrator
Mr. Ted Williams, County Corporate Counsel
MUSKEGON COUNTY
In Cooperation with
MUSKEGON COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PS A RETENTION BASIN
Item Description Quantity Unit Estimat,e,_d Cost
1. Site Grading (11,500 cyd @$10/cyd trucked in) 1 lsum $115,000.00 $115,000.00
2. Soil Crete Including Fine Grading 1 !sum $450,000.00 $450,000.00
3. 8" Sanitary Sewer 400 l.f. $75.00 $30,000.00
4. 5' Diameter Sanitary Manhole 3 each $3,500.00 $10,500.00
5. Structure with Slide-Gate 1 each $10,000.00 $10,000.00
6. 12" DI CL 52 FM 1,400 l.f. $65.00 $91,000.00
7. 12" DI CL 52 Fittings and Valve and Box 1 [sum $40,000.00 $40,000.00
8. Discharge Structure l each $10,000.00 $10,000.00
9. Bore & Jack 24" x 0.5'' Steel Casing 100 l.f. $300.00 $30,000.00
10. 8" Watermain and Appurtenances 1,700 l.f. $75.00 $127,500.00
11. Site Work, Fencing, and Restoration l lsum $100,000.00 $100,000.QQ
Sub-Total $1,014,000.00
Allowance for Construction Contingencies,
Legal, Administration, and Engineering $286,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST $1,300,000.00 +
LAND&
EASEMENTS
MUSKEGON COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
PS A RETENTION BASIN
BASIS OF DESIGN
CAPACITY
Requirements for storage capacity: Store 3 days of wastewater flow
• 3 days of flow@ l.7 mgd = 5.1 mg
o 5.lmg=681,77l.8ft3
DIMENSIONS
Requirements for dimensions:
• Property to be acquired has a 500'x 500' footprint (5.73 acres)
• Depth of wastewater to be 6' and 2' offreeboard
• Bottom of Basin will be at existing ground surface
• Slopes of basin dikes will be I on 4
• IO' flat area at the toe of slope to be provided
Inside Width= 500' - ((2* 10') + (2*(8'*4)) + (2*8') + (2*(8'*4))) = 336'
Inside Length = 500' - ((2* IO') + (2 *(8' *4 )) + (2 *8') + (2 *(8'*4))) = 336'
CAPACITY PROVIDED
Inside dimensions volume= 6' deep * 336' wide * 336' long= 677,376 ft 3 (5.07 mg)
Side slope volume= 0.5 * 6' deep* 24' wide* (336' * 4) = 96,768 ft3 (0.72 mg)
Total capacity provided is 5.79 mg> 5.1 mg so sufficient capacity is provided
S :ITMB\MCWMS\204 ! 064\retention\basisP SA doi;
History of Muskegon County Wastewater
66-inch Force Main Failures
• The first failure occurred in 1983 near Yuba Street and
Seaway Drive. The failure occurred because the pipe was
laid unsupported in poor soils and sawdust. Four pipe
sections upstream and downstream were supported by
pilings.
• Seepage was found in 4-Mile Creek in 1988 and the pipe was
purposely broken to replace the leaking section. The reason
again was that the pipe was laid unsupported in poor soils.
The whole 200 feet of the creek crossing was later encased in
concrete with piling support.
• Another pipe failure across from the main pump station near
Seaway Drive happened in 1999 and the investigation found
brittle reinforcing wires to be the cause. Replacement of the
first 2.5 miles of the 66-inch reinforced concrete cylinder
pipe was recommended.
• A second pipe failure due to brittle wires happened in 2001
just north of Sumner and Wood streets before the new ductile
iron force main was completed.
• A study in 2004 concluded that the remaining 66-inch force
main had a low probability of failure and that the pipe should
again be examined in about 5 years with whatever technology
that would be available.
• The most recent failure occurred in March of this year near
MacArthur and Sheridan Roads. The cause was thought to
be joint seepage, construction damage, and surges from the
main lift station.
• In May, a leak test of the remaining 8.5 miles of old pipe
showed no leaks.
• The County is in the process of installing fiber optic cable
inside the 66-inch pipe to monitor wire breakage in the
future. This should be done in October.
Why Are We Considering Retention Basins?
• In meetings and correspondence, MDEQ has stated that pipe
replacement and testing is not enough of a response to the
recent break as this was the fifth such event. MDEQ insisted
that the County Wastewater System consider construction of
"defensive mechanisms" such as dual pipelines, isolation
valves, and retention basins.
• Our engineers have studied these defensive mechanisms and
determined that dual pipelines and isolation valves are not
feasible.
• Prein & Newhof, the Wastewater Committee, and MDEQ
have held meetings and discussed retention basins. Our
engineers were charged to perform preliminary design work
on two options: a single large basin at Lift Station C or
remote basins at Lift Stations A, Q, D, and C.
1
• The next meeting of the above group is September 18 \ and
the County and our engineers wish to brief the City of
Muskegon on this development and get any initial feedback
for our meeting.
• County staff does not support the concept of retention basins,
but would install new pipe as needed to protect both the
communities where the pipe is located and protect our
surface waters.
Date: September 5, 2007
To: Community Relations Committee
From: City Clerk's Office
RE: Appointment to the Leisure Services Board
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Muskegon Public School Board has requested that
Charles Nash be named to the Leisure Services Board. The term will expire January 31,
2009.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval.
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails