Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer outlines revised Porter Road wastewater plant plan, estimates cost under $15 million
Summary
At the Sept. 8 Lower Pottsgrove Township Authority meeting, Engineer Fred Ebert presented a smaller Porter Road wastewater treatment plant design estimated at under $15 million and compared Sequencing Batch Reactor and extended aeration options, noting tradeoffs in energy use, sludge production and excavation costs.
Fred Ebert, the Authority’s engineer, told the Lower Pottsgrove Township Authority on Sept. 8 that a revised design for the proposed Porter Road wastewater treatment plant reduces the facility’s size and some components to bring the construction estimate to under $15 million. Ebert said he has asked the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for the treatment-process standards he must meet and will evaluate an extended aeration alternative if the DEP standards permit it.
"The size of the treatment plant and some of the treatment components have been reduced to bring the cost down to under $15 million," Ebert said. He explained that a Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) design denitrifies more effectively but "uses more electricity" and produces greater quantities of sludge, including chemical sludge; by contrast, an extended aeration system would have different excavation and energy profiles and may reduce some costs.
Ebert described one cost-saving construction detail: placing the treatment tank half above grade with a stairway to reduce excavation rather than burying the tank completely. He warned that locating the tank partly above ground would make removal of major equipment more complex because a crane would be needed. He also said many laboratory testing tasks have been removed from the plan because samples will be sent to an outside lab.
On timing, Ebert said DEP review of his calculations should take "three to four weeks," meaning the board might have updated data by the October meeting but possibly not until November. He described the likely sequence if the board moves forward: amend the Act 537 plan (a process that can take roughly one year and would include a DEP meeting), complete Act 527 planning in 2026, undertake design, permitting and bidding in 2027, and begin construction in 2028.
Authority Manager Edward C. Wagner asked whether DEP approval looked likely; Ebert said he had no indication it would be a problem and noted that recent regulatory attention has focused on additional monitoring for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFOA and PFOS). Ebert said he will follow up with DEP on whether the alternative treatment approach could further reduce costs.
Next steps the board discussed include awaiting Ebert’s final calculations and, if acceptable, pursuing the Act 537 amendment and related DEP meetings. Ebert emphasized that choosing a different treatment process would materially change both capital and long-term operating costs, particularly energy and sludge-handling needs.
