Budget Message / Highlights - Metropolitan Water Reclamation ...
Budget Message / Highlights - Metropolitan Water Reclamation ... Budget Message / Highlights - Metropolitan Water Reclamation ...
METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO 2009 BUDGET Budget Message / Highlights The 2009 appropriation for the Bond Redemption and Interest Fund totals $134.4 million, a decrease of $44.7 million, or 25.0 percent, compared to 2008 adjusted. Appropriations and tax levies are adjusted for new bond sales or state revolving loans. A debt service graph is found on page 59 that displays debt service from 2001 through 2013 and one on page 422 that displays debt service from 2009 through retirement. The 2009 tax levy for this Fund is $120.1 million, a decrease of $18.8 million, or 13.6 percent, from the 2008 adjusted levy. This decrease is primarily due to no levy being required for August 1992 Refunding Bonds that mature in 2009. Monitoring and Research In 2009, the Monitoring and Research (M&R) Department will continue the monitoring of dissolved oxygen (DO) levels and collection of water quality data in the District’s waterways to determine the need for supplemental aeration, to meet the DO standard in the Chicago River system and to assess water quality impacts under reduced lake diversion. The water quality monitoring program also provides data to assess water and stream quality to meet Clean Water Act reporting requirements. Continuous DO monitoring began in 1998 and was expanded in 2006 to provide data required to develop nutrient standards and will continue through 2009. M&R will work on a number of initiatives related to nutrient control. These include working with the M&O and Engineering Departments on a phosphorus removal demonstration study at the Egan WRP and working with the Illinois EPA (IEPA) to develop appropriate nutrient water quality standards for the State of Illinois, by intensely monitoring effects of nutrient removal at the Egan WRP on water quality in Salt Creek. The experimental portion of this project was completed at the end of 2008 and the final report will be completed in 2009. M&R is also characterizing WRP recycle streams to determine potential for future nutrient removal; this work will also continue through 2009. In support of the proposed rulemaking, M&R will continue to develop and support the presentation of testimony in the resulting rulemaking before the Illinois Pollution Control Board. The District is also engaging consultants to study the risks of boating, canoeing and fishing on the CAWs and to determine the reduction in risk of illness that can be expected if Water Reclamation Plants that discharge to the CAWs disinfected their effluents. Studies are also underway to determine nonpoint sources of bacterial pollution to the CAWs and to assess the extent to which further improvements to fish populations in the CAWs are limited by habitat. M&R is managing all of these studies, which are likely impact the wastewater treatment process and future operating permits. The studies will continue through 2009 and are scheduled for completion in 2010. M&R will work with M&O to evaluate new initiatives in solids processing and management. Most notably, a pilot scale drying system will be installed, which will allow for year-round production of air-dried exceptional quality biosolids and potential odor reduction at the solids management areas. Pilot work is anticipated to begin in 2010. Measures to reduce the discharge of mercury and silver, begun in 2003 in the Egan WRP service area, will be continued in 2009. The USEPA’s Pretreatment Streamlining Final Rule became effective in November 2005. M&R will continue Pretreatment Program streamlining through implementation of the provisions of the Final Rule and new software to increase staff efficiency and maintain District and industrial user records in a single database. Industrial Waste Monitoring The accompanying three tables demonstrate the success of the District’s industrial waste monitoring program by cooperatively working with industry. The first two tables show the trends in concentrations of metals associated with industrial activity in biosolids generated at the Calumet Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) and Stickney WRP. The third table on the following page shows the number of industrial users demonstrating exemplary compliance with the Sewage and Waste Control Ordinance, as well as the number of industrial users in significant noncompliance. The number of industrial users in exemplary compliance has increased 4.8 percent from 1998 to 2007. The number of industrial users in significant noncompliance has decreased 43.5 percent from 1998 to 2007. 25 25
METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO 2009 BUDGET Budget Message / Highlights Metals Concentrations in Calumet WRP Digested Biosolids Percent Annual Mean Concentration (mg/kg) Change Metal 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 1992-2007 Cadmium 42 7 6 4 4 10 3 3 3 -92.9 Chromium 289 85 82 67 73 127 77 90 66 -77.2 Copper 320 296 307 331 330 411 388 404 358 11.2 Lead 136 119 145 135 108 111 99 93 81 -40.4 Nickel 40 32 32 34 30 37 34 41 32 -20.0 Zinc 1,432 1,393 1,626 1,429 1,125 1,138 907 975 952 -33.5 Metals Concentrations in Stickney WRP Digested Biosolids Percent Annual Mean Concentration (mg/kg) Change Metal 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 1992-2007 Cadmium 41 18 8 6 4 4 4 4 3 -92.7 Chromium 1,017 439 338 258 251 307 224 164 150 -85.2 Copper 580 509 385 377 387 405 399 381 363 -37.4 Lead 302 248 184 163 139 131 130 124 120 -60.3 Nickel 109 70 61 55 54 57 53 46 41 -62.4 Zinc 1,827 1,495 1,165 840 872 829 865 877 904 -50.5 The District must provide information to the public regarding Industrial Users (IUs) that are in significant noncompliance with applicable pretreatment standards, and other pretreatment requirements. Amendments to the Ordinance, adopted by the Board on September 5, 1991, provide for the annual publication of names of significant violators in the newspaper. A summary of the compliance status of IUs is presented in the table below. Industrial User Compliance Indicators 1998-2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Exemplary Compliance 251 258 267 263 266 256 246 244 261 263 Consistent Compliance 240 209 208 200 156 * * * * * Not in Compliance 62 80 70 62 75 73 63 52 47 35 Violation Category: Effluent Limitations 30 22 11 15 19 22 11 13 13 12 Reporting Requirements 36 62 61 49 62 55 56 45 36 27 Monitoring Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dilution Prohibition 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Right of Access 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Violations Published 66 85 72 64 82 77 67 58 52 39 * This indicator is no longer tracked. 26 26
- Page 1 and 2: 2009 Budget Metropolitan Water Recl
- Page 3 and 4: Metropolitan Water Reclamation Dist
- Page 5 and 6: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 7 and 8: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 9 and 10: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 11 and 12: SECTION I BUDGET FOREWORD BUDGET FO
- Page 13 and 14: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 15 and 16: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 17 and 18: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 19 and 20: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 21 and 22: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 23 and 24: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 25 and 26: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 27 and 28: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 29 and 30: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 31 and 32: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 33 and 34: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 35: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 39 and 40: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 41 and 42: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 43 and 44: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 45 and 46: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 47 and 48: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 49 and 50: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 51 and 52: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 53 and 54: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 55 and 56: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 57 and 58: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 59 and 60: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 61 and 62: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 63 and 64: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 65 and 66: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 67 and 68: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 69 and 70: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 71 and 72: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 73 and 74: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 75 and 76: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 77 and 78: Mr. Richard Lanyon October 21, 2008
- Page 79 and 80: Five-Year Financial Forecast, 2009-
- Page 81 and 82: Five-Year Financial Forecast, 2009-
- Page 83 and 84: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
- Page 85 and 86: METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DIST
METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO<br />
2009 BUDGET<br />
<strong>Budget</strong> <strong>Message</strong> / <strong>Highlights</strong><br />
Metals Concentrations in Calumet WRP Digested Biosolids<br />
Percent<br />
Annual Mean Concentration (mg/kg)<br />
Change<br />
Metal 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 1992-2007<br />
Cadmium 42 7 6 4 4 10 3 3 3 -92.9<br />
Chromium 289 85 82 67 73 127 77 90 66 -77.2<br />
Copper 320 296 307 331 330 411 388 404 358 11.2<br />
Lead 136 119 145 135 108 111 99 93 81 -40.4<br />
Nickel 40 32 32 34 30 37 34 41 32 -20.0<br />
Zinc 1,432 1,393 1,626 1,429 1,125 1,138 907 975 952 -33.5<br />
Metals Concentrations in Stickney WRP Digested Biosolids<br />
Percent<br />
Annual Mean Concentration (mg/kg)<br />
Change<br />
Metal 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 1992-2007<br />
Cadmium 41 18 8 6 4 4 4 4 3 -92.7<br />
Chromium 1,017 439 338 258 251 307 224 164 150 -85.2<br />
Copper 580 509 385 377 387 405 399 381 363 -37.4<br />
Lead 302 248 184 163 139 131 130 124 120 -60.3<br />
Nickel 109 70 61 55 54 57 53 46 41 -62.4<br />
Zinc 1,827 1,495 1,165 840 872 829 865 877 904 -50.5<br />
The District must provide information to the public regarding Industrial Users (IUs) that are in significant noncompliance with<br />
applicable pretreatment standards, and other pretreatment requirements. Amendments to the Ordinance, adopted by the Board<br />
on September 5, 1991, provide for the annual publication of names of significant violators in the newspaper. A summary of the<br />
compliance status of IUs is presented in the table below.<br />
Industrial User Compliance Indicators 1998-2007<br />
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007<br />
Exemplary Compliance 251 258 267 263 266 256 246 244 261 263<br />
Consistent Compliance 240 209 208 200 156 * * * * *<br />
Not in Compliance 62 80 70 62 75 73 63 52 47 35<br />
Violation Category:<br />
Effluent Limitations 30 22 11 15 19 22 11 13 13 12<br />
Reporting Requirements 36 62 61 49 62 55 56 45 36 27<br />
Monitoring Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />
Dilution Prohibition 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0<br />
Right of Access 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />
Total Violations Published 66 85 72 64 82 77 67 58 52 39<br />
* This indicator is no longer tracked.<br />
26<br />
26
Change language