Loading...
2008-838-Minutes for Meeting August 13,2008 Recorded 9/11/2008COUNTY NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKDS CJ 2008.838 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 0911112008 09;46;09 AM IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III 2008-838 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244: Re-recorded to correct [give reason] previously recorded in Book or as Fee Number and Page , Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ore MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2008 Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke and Tammy Melton; Commissioner Michael A. Daly was out of the office. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Tom Anderson, Barbara Rich, Todd Cleveland, Peter Gutowsky and Dennis Perkins, Community Development; David Givans, Auditor; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Scott Johnson, Mental Health Department; Anna Johnson, Communications; David Inbody, Assistant to the Administrator; Susan Ross, Property and Facilities; Ruth Jenkin, Jail; and five other citizens. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Request from La Pine Parks & Recreation District for Financial Assistance. Tony DeBone from La Pine Parks and Recreation District, and two other people representing La Pine Frontier Days and the Christmas Basket Association came before the Board. The building they are using, which historically was the La Pine School, requires at least $9,000 worth of work so that it can be used for their purposes. $5,000 of this is for electrical work. Tom Anderson said that a letter was issued to the District indicating the work that needed to be done before they could use the facilities for events. Most of the work has been completed but a few issues need to be addressed. There are other changes that need to be done in the near future. Commissioner Luke said he could provide $5,000 from lottery grant funds, to include permit fees. Mr. Kanner thought the need was for $9,000, and perhaps that can come from the business loan fund, which can be repaid out of the tax base if it passes this fall. Mr. DeBone said that if it does not pass, they would likely have to shut down the building. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 1 of 8 Pages LUKE: Move $5,000 come from Commissioner Luke's lottery funds. MELTON: Second. VOTE: MELTON: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. LUKE: Move that the Administrator to move forward with a business loan for the balance of the $9,000, with some flexibility on the amount. MELTON: Second. VOTE: MELTON: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 2. Public Affairs Counsel - Legislative Update. Mark Nelson and Erica Hagedorn updated the Board on legislative actions and asked what the County's additional priorities are. They feel there will be at least two more democrats in office after the election. Federal tax deduction would be worth about $1.2 billion to the general fund. The Sizemore measure relating to home improvements under $35,000 would not require permits. The building trades and Realtors will campaign against this as a safety issue. The Mannix measure, mandatory prison sentences and an alternative legislative measure will both cost a lot of money, but the Mannix measure would be far more costly in the long term. The open primary is on the ballot as well. The litigious lawsuit measure did not make it. The double majority issue will be on the ballot, also. Limited document recording fees for affordable housing has been approved by the Governor. A lot of ideas have come up to try to address the federal timber funding loss. A real estate transfer tax was proposed, but probably the votes are not there now. A coalition of industry experts has been formed to develop a long-term view of the affordable housing issue. At this point local governments cannot impose a real estate transfer tax. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 2 of 8 Pages Mr. Kanner said that the State has a nonpoint source pollution control facilities tax credit that does not include septic systems. A change in the law to apply this to alternative technology systems would be helpful. Gene Whisnant has been opposed to the local rule, so this would give him something constructive to do. Commissioners Melton and Luke do not think he would take this on. They thought that this would be better coming from the Governor. Mr. Kanner gave an overview of the groundwater study and history of the issue for the benefit of the attendees. There are about 11,000 lots in the area and about 6,500 of them are developed in some fashion. There are federal dollars available for low-income residents and the County has some funds dedicated in this regard. He said that being able to get the tax credit would pay for most of the cost of the upgrades required. The DEQ declared that there was an imminent danger to the groundwater, which makes it easier for neighborhoods to look into putting in sewer systems. The tax credit typically goes to farmers and people raising livestock, for parking lots and similar structures, and for equipment that affects air quality. Mr. Kanner asked if there is a way to get a totally new tax credit just for southern Deschutes County. Barbara Rich said that other counties are using the ATT systems now as well. Mr. Kanner added that it would be best if DEQ would get on board in support of this idea. Commissioner Luke said that several locations have failing intersections which is stifling job creation in those areas. ODOT has no funds to pay their share. They in effect put a moratorium on new construction but don't have the mandate to get those off, and don't have the funds to pay their share. Another option is to remove the moratorium since it only affects those intersections a few hours a day at most. Mr. Kanner said that the fix for the Redmond location is $230 million, for instance. The County can pay part, but definitely not all. Commissioner Melton stated that in regard to the ten-year plan to address homelessness, Project Connect said that a big component is medical needs. However, there seems to be a big concern regarding liability. Erik Kropp replied that there is a waiver form for doctors to complete that go to the State Medical Board. Commissioner Melton said that the medical team still seems to be concerned about potential liability. Mr. Nelson stated that there is a program to provide liability insurance for doctors working in rural areas; perhaps these teams can tie into that. Mr. Kropp said that Volunteers in Medicine has been able to get an umbrella type of coverage. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 3 of 8 Pages A bill may be presented requiring pharmacists to take back and destroy drugs. There are complications especially when these involve controlled substances. And most drugs that end up in the water table get there after they have been taken by people, not because they are dumped down the drain. Mr. Kanner feels that advisory boards that have no fiduciary obligations should not be subject to the ethics law revisions that are contemplated. Commissioner Luke asked if there would be changes in the laws regulating destination resorts. Mr. Nelson said the pendulum swings back and forth and the opinion seems to be if it isn't in someone's back yard, they don't care. It will be up to the counties that are affected to find some balance. Mr. Kanner said that in his opinion, tort liability limits and the tax credit are big issues. The County also has to be at the table for the Skyline Forest issue but can't take an active role. 3. Discussion of Intent to Award Contract Letter for a Construction Manager/General Contractor for the Adult Jail Expansion Project. Susan Ross said J. E. Dunn and Kirby Nagelhout are the contenders for the project. She presented a summary sheet indicating the fees and work to be done. Both are very qualified. J. E. Dunn has more jail experience but Kirby Nagelhout's quote is less. Scott Steele said Kirby was his first choice. Scott Lund said he chose Dunn because of the experience factor. Dunn indicated they would be willing to waive certain fees to bring the cost down. Ruth Jenkin likes the experience of Dunn. Mr. Lund stated that at the interviews, both companies did well. But it is a tough choice because of the money factor. Ms. Ross said that Kirby has a lot of local experience and this should be considered as well. Erik Kropp recommended going with the low bid. David Inbody recommended the most experienced firm. David Givans said the amount of the difference is not small so he recommended the low bid. Commissioner Luke said that having one with more experience helps to limit the time the County has to work on it. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 4 of 8 Pages Commissioner Melton said that either is a risk, as the funding is not assured. However, she is leaning towards using Kirby; they are local, and she is not hearing that they are not capable of doing the work. Also, there would be a cost savings, and there is no guarantee there won't be overruns with Dunn. Commissioner Luke said that spending over $400,000 additional cannot be justified at this point, but there has to be good communications between all parties during the process. MELTON: Move signature of a notice of intent to award contract letter to Kirby Nagelhout. LUKE: Second. VOTE: MELTON: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Commissioner Melton said that if other field trips are needed, or if others need to be contacted for ideas or help, she wants that to happen. 4. Update on Jail Planning Project. This will be addressed at the Monday, August 18 5. Sunriver Sewer District - Feasibility Study Proposal. Tom Keith, Dick Nichols, Terry Penhollow, June Rainey, Eric Nigg of the Department of Environmental Quality, Steve Runner, Todd Cleveland and Peter Gutowsky came before the Board. Tom Anderson said that this item has been discussed with the Financial Assistance Committee and others. Dick Nichols of Newton Consultants for Sunriver said that there is interest at DEQ and from others regarding extending the sewer system in areas around Sunriver. At this time there is a window of opportunity at Sunriver as the have received a mandate from DEQ to update their sewer system. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 5 of 8 Pages Concurrently the legislature has authorized the Water Resources Department to grant funds for water storage and reuse; this requires a 50% match. They could apply for the grant, add the reuse option and extend the sewer to the south. Treatment would increase to level four; there are now five levels. Class A effluent can be used for drinking water purposes. The grant application must be submitted by September 2. It requires a 50% match and the source of that match has to be secure. They asked the County for the match portion in the amount of $75,000. It would be more cost effective to redo the plant where it is and not move it, but in the interest of the area it could be moved. (They referred to an oversized map at this time) He asked that the County staff help with some of the grant preparation work and feasibility study if they get the grant. Mr. Anderson said they haven't talked about the level of participation yet. Mr. Nichols said they need to look at areas that seem to be reasonable and practical. The application will need to show the different steps and the costs involved, and the source(s) of funding. Mr. Nigg of DEQ supports opportunities for sewering parts of south County, including extending the timeframe if it looks like there is some feasibility. This would allow planning for this to move forward. Commissioner Melton said the department is struggling staff-wise already and it would be hard to commit staff to another big project. Mr. Anderson stated that he doesn't know what level of help might be needed and the timeframe involved. Commissioner Luke said they want a letter of support from the County, and also a commitment for $75,000. Mr. Anderson stated that the committee recommends there should be some level of commitment from the people who may be served by the sewer extension, including monetary. There is not enough time to get any kind of financial commitment but the Commissioners need to know whether the community affected feels it is a viable alternative. Commissioner Luke stated that Sunriver has to make a decision on which way they should go. But this is different from setting up a district. Commissioner Melton said that they are seeking in-kind help, but also need funds. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 6 of 8 Pages Commissioner Luke wants to support their efforts but the money could end up being considerable, as could staff time. He wants more information on what the cost share might be if they get the grant. Commissioner Luke advised the group that the Commissioners would write a letter. He is not sure about how much staff time would be available. The Commissioners are not ready to provide $75,000 at this point. He wants them to get others involved and negotiations to take place on the cost share portion, perhaps with Sunriver or the adjacent communities. He wants to make sure the others are committed to cooperating. Commissioner Melton said she does not want to make it too difficult on them, since they may not want to include others in the plan and may just want to make the necessary changes only for Sunriver. Mr. Penhollow pointed out that if the application fails, it would have been wasted money for Sunriver since it primarily would be for the benefit of outlying communities. Mr. Anderson asked Eric Nigg of DEQ if they have any discretionary funds for this purpose; he said that he didn't think anything was available. Mr. Anderson asked exactly what assistance they are looking for. Mr. Nichols said help with planning would help. He will talk with Sunriver representatives about a strategy. 6. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules. None were discussed. 7. Other Items. None were discussed. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 7 of 8 Pages DATED this 13th Day of August 2008 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Dennis. R. Luke, Chair Tammy'( aney) Won, Vice Chair ATTEST: S F~~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Page 8 of 8 Pages Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2008 1. Request from La Pine Parks & Rec District for Financial Assistance - Tony DeBone, Tom Anderson 2. Public Affairs Counsel - Legislative Update 3. Discussion of Intent to Award Contract Letter for a Construction Manager/General Contractor for the Adult Jail Expansion Project - Susan Ross 4. Update on Jail Planning Project - Susan Ross 5. Sunriver Sewer District - Feasibility Study Proposal - Tom Anderson, Dick Nichols 6. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules 7. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), pending or threatened litigation; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. QD O L S v ~ c co J ILI ~'1 X co LL ~n N• V, o r- Q) Q) N V% cY -a n' 1t> ~ ( M Vl - ~O+ Eb ~ l LA ~ J S V N 1 c0 0. \5 ~lj F- Q,) co tao z TES I. Community Development Department Planning Division • Building Safety Division • Environmental Health Division August 6, 2008 Tony DeBone, Chairman Board of Directors La Pine Parks & Recreation District P.O. Box 664 La Pine, Oregon 97739 Re: La Pine Recreation Center Dear Tony: 117 NW Lafayette Avenue • Bend, Oregon • 97701-1925 (541) 388-6575 • FAX [541) 385-1764 http-//www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ As a follow-up to my site visits to the La Pine Recreation building on August 4th and 5th, I submit the following: As I understand the issues, your Board of Directors would like to address the permitting and occupancy for the subject building and the stage facility. I also understand you would like to have the minimum requirements of the Building Code explained so that a portion of the facility can be brought into compliance in approximately two weeks for a scheduled event.. First, I will address the requirements that will need to be completed in order to temporarily occupy a portion of the recreation building. 1) Install a barricade at the mid section of the structure to restrict anyone from accessing the south half of the building, the offices and classroom area. 2) Install door hardware on the exit doors that meets the code. Currently, flush mounted locks are installed. They will need to be replaced with panic door hardware. 3) Ensure that the exit signs are illuminated and working properly. Once these three items have been completed, call the County Building Division and schedule an inspection. If the inspection is approved, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for that section of the building. Quality Services Performed with Pride Included with this letter you will find a list of electrical issues that will need to be re- permitted and inspected. Secondly, in order to gain full compliance with the Building Code, in reference to the recreation building, the Building Division is requiring the following: 1) Obtain a Tenant Improvement Permit for the offices and classrooms. 2) Obtain a Mechanical Permit for the heating and ducting systems. 3) Obtain an Electrical Permit for any electrical work that has been added in this area. 4) The Building Division will reactivate the Plumbing Permit and complete a final inspection at the same time as the building final. It does not appear any upgrades are needed in the bathrooms or water fountain. 5) A fire alarm system will be required for the entire facility. Please call our Building Division staff if you have any questions during this process. Sincerely, Dennis Perkins Building Safety Director 1 E 521 SW 6t' Street, Suite 100 N E V V TVN rarer CONSULTANTS INC. ~ Redmond, Oregon 97756 Earth, Water and Rock Specialists M 11 Phone: (541) 504-9960 FAX: (541) 504-9961 Memorandum To: Deschutes County Board of Date: August 8, 2008 Commissioners From: Dick Nichols Project Name: Sunriver Subject: Grant for Feasibility Study for Project No.: 1053-102 Extending Sewers from Sunriver and Reusing Treated Effluent Sunriver Environmental LLC is currently in the process of upgrading its sewerage facility to meet DEQ-mandated treatment requirements required by the existing Sunriver wastewater disposal permit. This event presents a "once in a lifetime opportunity" to economically expand the treatment plant and reuse facilities to provide service to areas south of Sunriver that are currently served by inadequate septic systems. The DEQ is very interested in exploring this possibility and has granted a time extension to the Sunriver sewerage treatment plant upgrade process to allow interested parties to explore the feasibility and possibility of taking advantage of this window of opportunity. There would seem to be local interest for sewer service, but there are also questions about the feasibility and cost of providing this service. These issues could be defined and answered through a feasibility study. Currently, the Oregon Water Resources Department has grant money's available to conduct feasibility studies on effluent reuse. Applications for the grant to conduct the feasibility study are due September 2, 2008. The grant requires a 50% match. The application must demonstrate that the match money is secured. The feasibility study would analyze the following issues: 1. Potential areas south of Sunriver that could be cost effectively served through an expansion of the Sunriver sewerage facilities. 2. Estimated costs of extending sewers to those areas south of Sunriver. 8-8-08 Deschutes County Board Memo.doc Newton Consultants Memorandum August 8, 2008 Page 2 3. Estimated costs of locating and expanding Sunriver sewage treatment and reuse facilities to accommodate expanded service area outside of Sunriver. 4. How current mandated upgrade costs and potential system expansion costs would be allocated between current users and potential, new users outside Sunriver. 5. Options for creating a public jurisdiction that would collect revenue, obtain grants, and administer to the construction, operation and maintenance of the sewage collection system and which would contract with Sunriver for treating and reusing treated effluent. 6. Changes to land use ordinances necessary to allow for extension of sewers. 7. Alternatives for financing the construction, operation and maintenance of the sewerage facilities. A very cursory, ball park figure for the feasibility study is estimated to be $150,000. The match, then, would be $75,000. This figure would be refined when the application is prepared. The purpose of bringing this matter to the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners is to request: a. Deschutes County to provide the 50% match. b. Deschutes County staff to help Sunriver prepare the application for the grant. Water Resources Department Water Conservation, Reuse and Storage Grant Program A New Feasibility Study Grant Program Background Oregon is facing increasing water demand and increasingly scarce water supplies. To adequately meet Oregon's diverse water demands now and into the future, Oregonians must use their water wisely and efficiently. That means encouraging innovative water conservation and reuse programs and environmentally sound storage projects that capture available water so it can be put to good use when needed. To meet this challenge, on March 5, 2008, Governor Kulongoski signed Senate Bill 1069 establishing the Water Conservation, Reuse and Storage Grant Program. The program is designed to fund the qualifying costs of planning studies that evaluate the feasibility of developing water conservation, reuse or storage projects. There is $1.6 million available for grants, with a maximum award of up to $500,000 for each feasibility study. Eligibility • Local, state, and federal The Grant Process governments, Indian tribes, Applications Submitted corporations, associations, firms, July 7 s - Sept 2, 2008 ~ partnerships and individuals may apply. Application Summaries • The program requires a dollar-for- Posted on Web dollar match, which can include Mid Sept 2008 cash, in-kind sources, and pending commitments. Application Review Team Recommendations Application Process and Forms Late Sept 2008 • Applications are being accepted until September 2, 2008. _ Public Comment Period • Application forms and guidance October 1 - 30, 2008 information are available at: http://www.wrd.state.or.us/OWRD/ Department Recommendation LAW/conservation-reuse-storage- to Commission grant.shtml November 21,, 2008 Contact Information Commission Considers Bob Rice Department Recommendation Nov - Dec 2008 (503) 986-0927 robert.d.rice@wrd.state.or.us For more information, please visit www.wrd.state.or.us Text updated July 2008 The grant program is designed to fund a variety of project planning studies to evaluate the feasibil # of developing water conservation, reuse or storage, including.analysesw,of: Hydrologicir6ffll capacity • Water needs Hydrology • Engineering and financial feasibility • Geology • Water exchange • Ecological flow impacts • Alternative. means of supplying water • Environmental impacts from projects • Public benefits from projects • Fiscal impacts of projects • Hydrologic impacts of projects • Water quality impacts All studies, large and small, will be given consideration. For more information, please visit www.wrd.state.or.us Text updated July 2008 r" Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Facilities Tax Credit Summary description of program: provides income tax credit to Oregon taxpayers that make a qualifying investment that exclusively functions to control, prevent or reduce nonpoint source pollution. Current restrictions: facilities for human waste, including septic tanks, are excluded from eligibility for the tax credit. Proposed amendment: change the definition of a pollution control facility to allow facilities for treating human waste like onsite wastewater treatment systems to be eligible for nonpoint source pollution control facility tax credit if the installation of the onsite systems implements a plan or strategy to reduce or control nonpoint source pollution. For example, allow nitrogen reducing onsite wastewater treatment systems installed to maintain and improve groundwater quality in south Deschutes County to be eligible for the tax credit. Another example would be installation of phosphorus reducing systems around coastal lakes. Attachment: Oregon DEQ Fact Sheet, Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Facilities Tax Credit Coordination potential: Jackson County, Southern Willamette Groundwater Management Area, Lincoln County Deschutes County Community Development Department Last updated. August 12, 2008 Definitions from Oregon Administrative Rule: 340-041-0002(42) "Nonpoint Sources" means any source of water pollution other than a point source. Generally, a nonpoint source is a diffuse or unconfined source of pollution where wastes can either enter into or be conveyed by the movement of water to waters of the state. 340-041-0002(45) "Pollution" means such contamination or other alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological properties of any waters of the state, including change in temperature, taste, color, turbidity, silt, or odor of the waters, or such discharge of any liquid, gaseous, solid, radioactive, or other substance into any water of the state that either by itself or in connection with any other substance present can reasonably be expected to create a public nuisance or render such waters harmful, detrimental, or injurious to public health, safety, or welfare; to domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, or other legitimate beneficial uses; or to livestock, wildlife, fish, other aquatic life or the habitat thereof. 340-041-0002(46) "Point Source" means a discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to a pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, vessel or other floating craft, or leachate collection system from which pollutants are or may be discharged. Point source does not include agricultural storm water discharges and return flows from irrigated agriculture. 340-041-0002(72) "Waters of the State" means lakes, bays, ponds, impounding reservoirs, springs, wells, rivers, streams, creeks, estuaries, marshes, inlets, canals, the Pacific Ocean within the territorial limits of the State of Oregon, and all other bodies of surface or underground waters, natural or artificial, inland or coastal, fresh or salt, public or private (except those private waters that do not combine or effect a junction with natural surface or underground waters) that are located wholly or partially within or bordering the state or within its jurisdiction. -...._q. Deschutes County Community Development Department Last updated: August 12, 2008 Oregon recognizes that a comprehensive approach to protecting watersheds and ecosystems from diffuse or unconfined sources of pollution is imperative to: • restore the salmon population; • protect clean drinking water supplies; • help sustain economic activities; and to • support Oregon's scenic beauty. The 1999 Legislature added nonpoint source pollution control to the list of activities eligible for the pollution control facilities tax credit' (PCTC). This action provides incentives for Oregon taxpaying entities to partner in this comprehensive approach to protecting Oregon's environment. The Environmental Quality Commission amended Division 16 of Chapter 340 of the Oregon Administrative Rules to implement this legislation on January 12, 2000. "Nonpoint Source Pollution" means pollution that comes from numerous, diverse, or widely scattered sources of pollution that together have an adverse effect on the environment. The definition incorporates OAR 340-041-0006 (17); and sources of air pollution from mobile sources or area sources. Similarities to Other PCTCs The nonpoint source pollution tax credit is no different than the air, water or noise pollution tax credit. All other pollution control facilities tax credit rules apply to the nonpoint source pollution control facilities: The applicant must • be an Oregon taxpayer; • make a qualifying investment; and • be the owner and operator of the facility ' ORS 468.155(2) The investment must • be land, structure, building, installation, excavation, machinery, equipment or devices; • not include investments that do not meet the definition of a pollution control facility. This list includes items such as air conditioners; septic tanks or other facilities for human waste; asbestos abatement; or any investment used for cleanup of emergency spills or unauthorized releases; • not include distinctive portions that make an insignificant contribution to the purpose of the facility. The list includes such items as automobiles, landscaping, parking lots, and roadways; and • be reasonably used for a pollution control purpose. The purpose of the investment must • be in response to a requirement of the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, or a regional air pollution authority; or • exclusively function to control, prevent or reduce nonpoint source pollution; and • control, reduce or prevent air, water or noise pollution. Eligibility for Filing Nonpoint source pollution controls became eligible for pollution control facilities tax credit certification on January 1, 2000. The rule amendments became effective for all applications received on or after February 1, 2001. An applicant with an eligible facility has either one or two years after the construction completion date to file an application with the Department of Environmental Quality; one year if construction was completed on or after January 1, 2002 and two years if completed prior to 2002. She d oregm Department of Ern+iro nrnrtal t]ueiity Management Services Tax Credit Program 811 SW a Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Phone: (503) 229-6878 (800)452-4011 Fax: (503)229-6730 Contact: Maggie Vandehey www.deq.state.or.us Last Updated 02/27/2002 Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Facilities Tax Credit x. Scope of (Eligibility The nonpoint source tax credit is intended to cover expenditures for "on4he-ground" management practices and improvements. It is not intended to cover education, outreach or monitoring costs. Nonpoint source expenditures must be documented to be eligible for this tax credit. 'These expenditures must be incurred as part of implementation of at least one of the following elements. Any facility that implements a plan, project, or strategy to reduce or control nonpoint source pollution as documented: (a) By one or more partners listed in the Oregon Nonpoint Source Control Program Plan. This plan is the State's federally-approved nonpoint source control plan that includes: • Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plans; • forest management practices plans; • total maximum daily load (TMDL) implementation plans; • groundwater management area action plans; • estuary plans; • expenditures to supplement a Clean Water Act section 319 grant project; or • any other similar watershed restoration plazas approved by a State or Federal agency. (b) In a Federal Clean Air Act State InViementation Nan for Oregon; or 2. Any facility effective in reducing nonpoint source pollution as documented in supporting research by: (a) Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station; or (b) The United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service; or (c) The Oregon Department of Agriculture; or 3. Wood chippers used to reduce openly burned woody debris; or 4. The retrofit of diesel engines with a diesel emission control device, certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The State Implementation Plan, as required by the Clean Air Act, is a document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and the specific measures that will be taken to attain and maintain national air quality standards. The need for the strategies is identified by a technical analysis of the air shed capacity, existing and potential sources of air pollution. The strategies are recommended for adoption following review by locally affected stakeholders. For more information about Oregon's state implementation plan, contact the Air Quality Division at (503)229-5359. Retrofrt of diesel engines includes the installation of pollution control equipment on in-service diesel engines, for both highway and off-road vehicles, to improve the emissions performance. Information about retrofits can be obtained at EPA's website, http://www.epa.gov/otag/retrofit. For more information on Oregon's efforts in promoting diesel retrofit, contact Kevin Downing at (503) 229-6549. Alternative Formats Alternative formats of this document can be made available.