02-13-1985 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Twin Cities and state have made ambitious, expensive and salutory efforts to maintain the quality of Minnesota's waters. Combined sewer overflows are an anachronism in the face of this tradition. Without state financial assistance to accelerate the solution, the Twin Cities Area could be subject to enforcement action by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The enforcement agencies could levy fines and mandate solutions that would remove choices and options the Metropolitan Area might wish to pursue to solve the problem. One such option could be constructing new filtering equip- ment at the plant that could cost in the neighborhood of $150 million. In addition, storage chambers to hold the overflow would need to be built. The benefits from convey- ing all stormwater in the combined pipes to the Metro Plant for treatment would be very minimal. The raw sewage, on the other hand, is not only unsightly, but contains large amounts of disease - carrying bacteria and viruses. Separating the pipes that carry both sewage and stormwater will remove these pollutants from the Mississippi River. The agencies could impose a ban on hookups to the central sewer system until the problem is rectified. The effect of such an action could be to halt construction of buildings of all types —new homes, new industry or new commercial developments affecting 66 cities and townships and about 80 percent of the Twin Cities Area's population. The action :would hit the Twin Cities suburbs particularly hard. It would bring downtown and neighborhood commercial and residential development to a halt. A court could impose a solution. This situation could occur .after the permit is issued and if the three cities, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission or the Metropolitan Council do not meet the permit schedules for ending the raw sewage discharge into the Mississippi River. Recently, the Milwaukee, Wisconsin area was taken to court over the quality of the area's discharges into Lake Michigan. Under a Figure 2 PROPOSED FUNDING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM 50% from Minneapolis, St. Paul, South St. Paul Combined Sewer Overflow 50% from Federal, State and Regional Grants or Loans r court-imposed plan, Milwaukee must spend a huge amount of money, $1.6 billion, to expand its wastewater storage and treatment facilities. The state of Wisconsin went to court recently asking for court review of the permits issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency which govern resolution of the Twin Cities combined sewer overflow problem. Benefits Separating the combined sewer pipes to end the practice of dumping raw sewage in the Mississippi River will help ameliorate a public health threat posed by the bacteria and viruses that now enter the river via overflow outlets. What groups of people will benefit? Everyone along and down- stream of the current outfalls: river users of all types, the three directly affected cities, the public and states down- stream from the Twin Cities. Minnesota as a whole will .benefit. Its greatest river will be cleaner and more esthetic. Solving the combined sewer overflow problem removes a threat of state or federal sanctions or court - dictated answers that might be doubly expensive or impact the natural suburban growth and development of the Twin Cities Area. Figure 3 SEWER SEPARATION: COSTS THROUGH 1982 ANO PROJECTED COSTS, BY CITY Percent Separated 100% 20 Minneapolis St. Paul 0 Nneed to complete uagam What Needs to Be Done South St. Paul Combined sewer overflow in the Metropolitan Area and inadequate wastewater treatment are two important water quality problems remaining in the state. There has not been enough federal and state funding to solve those problems on an accelerated timetable. 1, ' The 1985 legislature needs to fund adequately the independent state construction grants program that was established by the 1984 legislature and authorize financing for completing the separation program on an accelerated schedule.