01/26/1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

distribution plus interest, until either the original project is repaired and the I/1 eliminated, or continue to repay the loan distribution amount plus interest annually until the end of the 5 year period after the original project completion date. Exact terms of loan repayment schedules and amounts will be included in each individual agreement between the MCES and loan recipient The goal of this loan offer is to assist communities to implement I/I control improvements which provide a metropolitan benefit in addition to a local benefit. Because the funds are limited for this loan offer, the MCES places a greater priority on physical improvements over desk -top studies. Studies to identify, quantify and locate sources of 1/I can receive monetary assistance under the grant portion of this program offer. Communities that already have an understanding of where problems exist and how they can be corrected will be in a better position to justify their proposal for the loan offered under this program. The MCES also intends that the administration of these loan agreements be streamlined to coincide in nature with the limited loan amount and the infrequent offering of loan and grant monies. Loan and Grant money will not be made available for projects or studies that have been started prior to the date of the agreement, or as pre - authorized by the MCES. Projects pertaining to the separation of sewers (Storm vs. Sanitary) will not be eligible for either the loan or grant monies. The intent of this loan/grant offer is to help communities initiate projects which are not funded by other outside sources. II. GENERAL CRITERIA FOR FUNDING PRIORITIES (LOANS) Proposed projects will be evaluated by MCES staff who will make a recommendation on the priority classification of the project. MCES staff will prepare a recommended priority list for consideration by the members of the Metropolitan Council. Projects targeted to produce a metropolitan benefit will receive higher priority than those where a metropolitan benefit is unlikely. Removal of I/I which previously resulted in sewage bypasses would be an example of a project with metropolitan benefit, in that loading to the conveyance and treatment facilities would be lessened and a potential public health hazard would be eliminated. A project to increase the capacity of the local system for the above example would not however be considered an example of a metropolitan benefit. If a project is submitted that cites an elimination of historic bypasses, the application must include a copy of a "MPCA Report Form(s)" which documents the bypass(es). Another example of metropolitan benefit is a project designed to reduce high peak flow rates, resulting from I/1. If a community received a specific I/1 goal as part of the December 1996 Systems Statement, or if the 1992 "Systemwide Infiltration/Inflow Evaluation" by the former MWCC identified your community as having high peak flow rates then that community's proposed loan project may have a metropolitan benefit. Since the aforementioned report did not include information regarding estimated Rain Derived I/1 (RDI/I) or Groundwater Infiltration (GWI) for the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul or South St. Paul, applications from these communities will need to include documentation of their RDI/I and Page 3