WEF Discussions — Now on LinkedIn!

WEF is pleased to announce the creation of free LinkedIn groups associated with its technical discussion forum topics. Through these LinkedIn groups, members will be able to view and participate in discussions, as well as communicate with one another via direct messages. Share your experiences and knowledge, ask questions and respond to other discussions as frequently as you like!

You must have a LinkedIn profile to join a LinkedIn group; you can create your profile here. If you already have a LinkedIn profile, all you need to do is submit a request to join one or all of the following groups:

Water Environment Federation (Main) | Biosolids | Collection Systems | Nutrients | Stormwater 
Utility Management | Water Reuse | Water for Jobs | Watershed Management | Laboratory Practices 

RSS Feed Print
Inter-Governmental Agreements / Cost Sharing
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2009 10:29 AM
Joined: 12/21/2009
Posts: 1

I am looking for others experience addressing the sharing of wastewater costs between two municipalities. Traditionally, costs are allocated based on the amount of sewage flow sent to the WWTP. If your flow is 30% of the total plant flow, then you pay 30% of the costs to operate the plant. I am interested in finding other locations who share the operating costs based on allocated flow at the plant. That is to say, if you own 25% of the plant capacity, then you will pay for 25% of the cost to operate the plant (even if you send only 10% of the total flow). The rationale behind this is that most of the operational costs (labor, taxes, insurance, benefits, heat, tools, equipment, etc) are not influenced by the amount of flow entering the plant. Does anyone have a similar inter-governmental agreement??

Michael DeMarco
Posted: Wednesday, February 3, 2010 12:43 PM
Joined: 12/9/2009
Posts: 1

Hello, and sorry to be a couple of months late in reading your post.  Hopefully the following is  not confusing.


We are a non-government cooperative that deals in wastewater and have no agreements currently with outside agencies. Having said that we assess based on maximum capacity anticipated and bill for amounts over the purchased capacity. That is, we are not strictly flow-based, but rather EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) based (one EDU is set at 270 gallons per day).


In the past, we did have an agreement with the township. They contributed to the system at a set rate, we charged them only for treatment costs annually adjusted (we were basically, always a year behind in collecting true O & M). The township had their own collection system and debt service - separate from the cooperative. That has since changed, as the township sold their collection system to us.



M DeMarco

Jesse Moffett
Posted: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 3:42 PM
Joined: 3/15/2011
Posts: 1

The authority which I work for has an intermunicpal agreement in which the operational costs are allocated to flow and BOD delivered. The debt service is handled separately based on ownership of the Flow and BOD capacity of the facility. We are only in the treatment business and have two customers a county and a city. We have metering and sampling stations located at the point of entry to our truck main going to the plant. From the stations we get flow contributions and BOD contributions and distribute operational costs based on those results on a monthly basis.

We would like to expand this to include TN and TP now that we are doing nutrient removal but we are have a real problem with allocation of costs between the components of flow, BOD, TSS, TN, and TP hence I can understand why one would want to allocate on ownership to simplify everything but we see some real inequities (I/I, high strength waste, industrial vs. residential and others). Also we do separate out insurance, permit fees and other items based on capacity ownership.