Hyrum's wastewater plant capacity was reduced and the state set a report deadline, city memo says

The permitted capacity of Hyrum City's water reclamation facility was reduced, and state regulators required the city to update an engineering report for the plant, according to a May 29, 2026 memo from the city's water reclamation manager to the mayor and council. ^[1]

"A discrepancy between the 2005 and 2021 design criteria has resulted in a de-rating of the facility's permitted capacity," the memo says. It says the Division of Water Quality requires the city to submit an updated engineering report no later than the end of July 2026. ^[1]

Growth and Millville

The memo says rapid growth, "combined with the recent addition of Millville City, has accelerated wastewater flows and loading" beyond earlier projections. The city's request for proposals says the plant treats wastewater from Hyrum and Millville and is approaching capacity. ^[1][2]

The memo says "Time is of the essence" in completing a master plan for the facility, which it describes as a roadmap for capital improvements and for updating impact fees and utility rates. It does not state a fiscal impact. ^[1]

The design history

According to the request for proposals, the plant's 2005 design flow was 1.5 million gallons a day with room to expand to 2 million. It reached a 2-million-gallon design capacity in 2021 after all membranes were replaced and a membrane basin was added. ^[2]

The request says: "There are discrepancies in the original 2005 design criteria and the 2020 Engineering Report as determined by the DWQ." It asks the consultant to update that report and determine the plant's loading capacity for biochemical oxygen demand and total suspended solids. ^[2]

The request for proposals

The city issued the request on May 11, 2026, held a site tour May 18 and set May 29 as the due date. ^[1][2]

It required the updated engineering report within one month of contract signing, a master plan within seven months and an impact fee facilities plan. "Deliverable time is non-negotiable to meet UDWQ requirements," it says. ^[2]

Proposals were scored on experience and past performance (20%), team (10%), references (15%), project understanding and approach (25%), scope and deliverables (10%), schedule and availability (15%) and fee (5%). ^[2]

The June 4 council packet lists technical and fee proposals from J-U-B and from Sunrise and Hazen as attachments. The memo says a selection committee's recommendation would be presented to the council. ^[3][1]