|
| | | Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/29/2008 11:39:52 AM
Posts: 1, Visits: 28 |
| Good Afternoon, My organization is considering a modification to our current "flat" method for charging industrial user sanitary sewer fees to a "tiered" approach (specifically for BOD). We would like to know your facility uses / or if you know of a facility that uses a tiered approach - and we would like to gain a bit of knowledge as to how such programs were setup. To get into the situation a bit - we have an SIU which discharges high BOD loadings to one of our STPs, and has complained about paying the large user charge fees which are associated with their discharge. Long story short, the IU has voiced an option that it could relocate (already has some operations elsewhere) because of the high sanitary fee. Being that our STP is under loaded, we do not want to lose that good food-source for our bugs. So the thought is some type of tiered approach - increase the BOD rates on the lower end, and decrease the rates above a yet undetermined poundage value - so that we would be bringing in the same amount of dollars, its just would be spread out amongst more uses. This would reduce the fees for the SIU in question, and perhaps make it more enticing for other BOD dischargers to move into our area. Just wondering if anyone else may have any thoughts on this - Thank you Stats: ~17 MGD
Thanks, JR |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 5:30:36 AM
Posts: 236, Visits: 720 |
| | In effect what you are suggesting is that the domestic load subsidises the industrial load? If that is the case why should Mr and Mrs Average Citizen be taxed so Mr Industrialist makes more money? At the same Mr Industrialist should not be unfairly burdened just because he wants to do business. The solution will be driven by your utility's approach to those fundamental questions. Charging needs to be fair (ideal world which does not exist) but should be based on volumetric and biological load paramters. It is very difficult to do and to get right but should not stop you trying. Companies will only leave if they want to leave. Wherever they relocate to will probably ultimately face the same issues regarding charges. If they are not willing to pay a fair charge for their contribution may be you don't need them anyway. Regards TerryF |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 9/29/2008 9:11:07 PM
Posts: 372, Visits: 758 |
| I used to have a plant with a couple of industrial users. We determined the BOD (or COD) without the industrial component, then charged the industries based on the strength of their discharge. That is. if the normal BOD was 150 mg/L and the industrial flow was 600 mg/L, we charged them 4 times the flow amount. Seemed to work out pretty well -- there was no way they could complain that they weren't getting a fair shake.
David |
| |
| | | 
Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/6/2008 10:58:48 AM
Posts: 41, Visits: 58 |
| You may want to look at estimating the marginal cost to treat their waste first. Separate your fixed costs from your variable costs. Then estimate what you would save if they pulled out of the system (the marginal cost of treatment being the avoided cost). Think about what's fixed and variable first then check it by seeing what truly "goes away" should they move away. Next see what that gives you for a user rate and how it compares to current rate. Ask yourselves if you can afford to use that rate for all users? Essentially owners of the system would pick up fixed costs and any ndustrial users would only pay their variable (added) costs. Any system has to be equally fair to all users including public (considering perhaps added value of industies in other respects). Also consider whether the industry has been a good corporate citizen vis a vis the treatment plant. Do they pose risks to effluent quality? Problems for sludge handling or other areas? Are they responsible users of the system and cooperative with wastewater personnel? This process should lead you to a good decision about what to do.
Wiff Peterson |
| |
|
|