Guidelines for engineering reports for wastewater projects

              GUIDELINES FOR
ENGINEERING REPORTS
FOR
WASTEWATER PROJECTS
ENDORSED BY:
OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCES BOARD
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
OKLAHOMA CITY AREA INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE
USDA - RURAL DEVELOPMENT - OKLAHOMA
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Revised: May 12, 2011
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 2
CONTENTS
ENGINEERING REPORT
Wastewater Projects
I. Project Planning Area
A.
Location, maps, photographs, & sketches ........................................................... 3
B.
Provide project, design period ………………………………………………………3
C.
Growth areas and population trends ..................................................................... 3
D.
Current and projected wastewater flows ............................................................... 3
E.
Environmental concerns in service area ............................................................... 3
II. Existing Facilities and Need for Project
A. Location and layout ............................................................................................. 3
B. Condition of existing facilities ............................................................................... 3
C. Health and safety ................................................................................................ 4
D. System O&M ....................................................................................................... 4
E. Design hydraulic and organic capacity ................................................................. 4
F. Water system availability ..................................................................................... 4
III. Alternatives Considered
A. Description ........................................................................................................... 4
B. Design criteria ...................................................................................................... 4
C. Environmental impacts ......................................................................................... 4
D. Land requirements ............................................................................................... 4
E. Construction problems ......................................................................................... 5
F. Cost estimates ..................................................................................................... 5
G. Advantages/Disadvantages ................................................................................. 5
IV. Proposed Project Design and Cost Estimate (Recommended Alternative)
A.
Treatment ............................................................................................................ 5
B.
Pumping stations ................................................................................................ 5
C.
Collection system layout ...................................................................................... 5
D.
Waste disposal .................................................................................................... 5
E.
Green project reserve components ...................................................................... 6
F.
Recommended Alternative Cost Estimate ........................................................... 6
V. Financial status .......................................................................................................... 6
VI. Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................... 7
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 3
CONTENTS (continued)
ENGINEERING REPORT
Wastewater Projects
Appendices
Appendix A Population Projections .............................................................................. 8
Appendix B Alternative Design Parameters ................................................................. 9
Appendix C Cost Effective Present-Worth Analysis Format .................................. 10-11
Appendix D Proposed Design Parameters ................................................................ 12
Appendix E Green Project Reserve Component ........................................................ 13
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 4
ENGINEERING REPORT
Wastewater Projects
I. PROJECT PLANNING AREA. Describe the area under consideration. The project planning area may be larger than the service area determined to be economically feasible. The description should include information on the following:
A. Location, maps, photographs, and sketches. These materials should indicate legal and natural boundaries, major obstacles, elevations, etc.
B. Provide Project design period. State the design life of the project.
C. Growth areas and population trends. Specific areas of concentrated growth should be identified. Population projections for the project planning area and concentrated growth areas should be provided for the project design period. These projections should be based on historical records with justification from Oklahoma Department of Commerce (ODOC), U.S. Census Bureau, and document additional sources, if any. (See example table in Appendix A.) Include a description of population trends as indicated by available records, and the estimated population that will be served by the proposed wastewater collection system or expanded system.
D. Current and projected wastewater flows. Current and projected volume and strength of sewage flows both domestic and industrial (hydraulic and organic) should be provided. If a deviation is deemed necessary, a justification must be provided. Present wastewater flow rates during average and peak flow periods must be used as the basis for design. (See example table in Appendix B.)
E. Environmental concerns in the service area. Discuss all the environmental concerns or effects within the service area that must be considered in project planning.
II. EXISTING FACILITIES AND NEED FOR PROJECT. Describe the existing facilities including at least the following information:
A. Location and layout. Provide a site plan and schematic layout for treatment facilities.
B. Condition of existing facilities. Describe present condition; suitability for continued use; and, if any existing central facilities, for treatment; discuss the hydraulic and organic capacity, storage, and collection capabilities. Also, describe compliance with all state and federal requirements for wastewater systems including: Water Pollution Control Standards, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits.
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 5
C. Health and safety. Describe concerns and include relevant regulations and correspondence from/to Federal and State regulatory agencies such as ODEQ inspection reports, Notices of Violation, and Consent or Administrative Orders. Also, describe compliance with all state and federal requirements for handicap accessibility standards for public use areas, and security standards for the protection of all wastewater facilities. This section should also discuss any improvements necessary to provide enhanced security at source or treatment facilities and improved handicap accessibility in public areas as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
D. System O&M. Describe the concerns and indicate those with the greatest impact such as bypasses. Investigate inflow, infiltration and leakage, management adequacy, inefficient designs, and/or outdated facilities and problem elimination prior to adding additional capacity.
E. Design hydraulic and organic capacity. Describe the reasonable growth capacity that is necessary to meet needs during the planning period. Facilities proposed to be constructed to meet future growth needs should generally be supported by additional revenues. Consideration should be given to designing for phased capacity increases. Provide number of new customers committed to this project.
F.
Water System Availability. Describe the existing or proposed water supply to the wastewater treatment system.
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED. This section should contain a description of the reasonable alternatives that were considered in planning a solution to meet the identified need(s). The description should include the following information on each alternative:
A. Description. Describe the facilities associated with the alternative, including treatment in locations of, wet weather flow equalization basin, pumping, collection system, discharge point and sludge handling facilities.
B. Design criteria. State the design parameters used for evaluation purposes.
C. Environmental impacts. Provide a short description of environmental impacts that may preclude any alternatives. Only projects that will utilize funds that have a federal identity require the completion of an Environmental Impact Document (EID). Those current funding sources would be as follows:
1. Rural Development Loan and Grant Programs for Water and Wastewater
2. Department of Commerce Community Development Block Grants
3. OWRB-ODEQ State Revolving Loan Funds
4. Oklahoma City Area Indian Health Service
D. Land requirements. Identify sites, rights of way, and easements required. Further specify whether these properties are currently owned, to be acquired, or Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 6
leased.
E. Construction problems. Discuss concerns such as subsurface rock or unsuitable soil material, high water table, limited access, floodplain areas, or other conditions which may affect cost of construction or operation of facility.
F. Cost estimates.
1. Construction.
2. Non-construction and other projects costs, such as, land, professional fees, testing surveying, etc.
3. Annual operation and maintenance.
4. Cost effective present worth analysis. See a sample format in Appendix C.
G. Advantages/Disadvantages. Describe the specific alternative’s ability to meet the owner's needs within its financial and operational resources, comply with regulatory requirements, compatibility with existing comprehensive area-wide development plans, and satisfy public and environmental concerns.
IV. PROPOSED PROJECT DESIGN AND COST ESTIMATE (RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE). This section should contain a fully developed description of the proposed project based on the preliminary description under the evaluation of alternatives. At least the following information should be included:
A.
Treatment. Describe process in detail and identify location of plant and site of any discharges. Provide documentation of compliance with the 208 Plan. Provide a description of how sludge is or will be managed. Sludge Management Plan (SMP) must be provided with submittal of the Plans and Specifications. Also describe foundation conditions and floodplain elevations prevailing at sites of proposed structures based on geotechnical information, and the appropriate elevation of ground water in relation to subsurface structures. Show the design capacity for each existing unit, proposed unit, ODEQ required capacity (OAC 252:656), and indicate if plant design meets ODEQ requirement. Include a hydraulic profile. Provide alternate power source. This information should provide sufficient detail in a tabular format to determine compliance with ODEQ design requirements. See Appendix D.
B.
Pumping stations. Identify size, type, site location and any special power requirements and emergency operations. Also describe foundation conditions and floodplain elevations prevailing at sites of proposed structures, and the appropriate elevation of ground water in relation to subsurface structures.
C.
Collection system layout and hydraulic calculation. Identify general location of line improvements: Lengths, sizes, slopes, and key components, and the character of the soil through which sewer lines are to be installed including NRCS soil maps and descriptions.
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 7
D.
Waste Disposal. Discuss the various wastes from the wastewater treatment plant, their volume, proposed treatment, points of discharge, and/or method of disposal. Project sites shall include the following:
1.
Discussion of the various sites considered and advantages of the recommended ones.
2.
The proximity of residences, industries, and other establishments.
E.
Green project reserve components (for SRF Projects Only). Identify and discuss any components of the proposed project that may qualify as “green” based on the guideline in Appendix E. Complete and attach the GPR check sheet as an appendix to the Engineering Report.
F.
Recommended Alternative Cost Estimate. Provide an itemized cost estimate for the proposed project based upon anticipated period of construction (For projects containing both water and waste disposal systems, provide a separate cost estimate for each system.)
1.
Development costs.
2.
Construction costs.
3.
Land and rights.
4.
Legal fees.
5.
Engineering fees.
6.
Interest fees.
7.
Interest.
8.
Contingency.
9.
Refinancing.
10.
Other costs associated with the proposed project.
V. Financial status. Provide information regarding:
A.
The current and proposed or projected rate schedules.
B.
Annual operating and maintenance (O&M) cost (existing and proposed).
C.
Tabulation of users by monthly usage categories.
D.
Revenue received for the last three fiscal years.
E.
Give status of existing debts and required reserve accounts.
F.
Prepare a schedule of short-lived assets and a recommended annual reserve deposit to fund replacement of short-lived assets such as pumps, paint, and small equipment. Short-lived assets include those items not covered under O&M, however, this does not include long-lived assets such as water tank or treatment facility replacement that should be funded with long-term financing. Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 8
VII.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Provide any additional findings and recommendations that should be considered in development of the project. This may include recommendations for special studies; highlight the need for special coordination, a recommended plan of action to expedite project development, etc. Provide a schedule for the project planning and construction.
END OF GUIDELINES
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 9
APPENDIX A
Population Projections
Data Found At:
http://www.okcommerce.gov/Libraries/Documents/Projections_of_Cities_Towns_in_Oklahoma_2000_121004413.pdf
http://www.census.gov/ or http://dataferrett.census.gov/
The download contains population/growth projections from 2000-2030 for Oklahoma.
Information provided is by County, Towns and Cities, Remainder of the County.
Example for the Sasakwa Rural Water District, Seminole County.
Population
Projections
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Remainder of County
11,716
11,720
11,860
12,050
12,240
12,380
12,570
Using the compound amount formula F = P(1+r)n
Where F: future amount, P: present amount, r: growth rate, n: term in years
(F/P)1/n-1 = r (12570/11716)1/30-1 = r .002348 = r
From the sdwis.deq.state.ok.us web site the water system site the user population of the RWD is 210 people in 2010.
This project will add an additional 8 homes to the system with an increased population of 27 people.
In twenty years F = 237(1+0.002348)20years = 248 people
Population Growth at Design Life
(Persons)
Present Pop
Year 2010
Pop. added by this project
Total Pop Of this project
Future Pop at design life year 2040
210
27
237
248
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 10
APPENDIX B
Wastewater Use Projections
Projected Wastewater Flow: Average Daily Flow calculated from 12 months of readings taken from the influent flow meter. Using current data, the average flow per person is:
19320 gpd/210 persons = 92 gpcd
Adding the new homes served by this project
92 gpcd x 27 persons = 2484 gpd
Using the same formula as population growth at 20 year design life (Appendix A), calculate daily estimate flow at 20 years.
F = (19320 + 2484)gpd x (1+0.002348)20years = 22,851 gpd
Using the same formula as population growth at 20 year design life, calculate increase in homes.
F = (70 + 8) homes x (1+0.002348)20years = 82 homes
Wastewater Flow at Design Life
(gallons per day)
Average Daily Flow*
Present
Added users
Total
20 Years
19,320
2,484
21,804
22,851 gpd
Wastewater Flow at Design Life
(gallons per day)
Maximum Daily Flow = 2.5 X Average Daily Flow*
Present
Added users
Total
20 Years
38,640
4,968
43,608
45,702 gpd
Wastewater Flow at Design Life
(gallons per hour)
Peak Hourly Demand = 1 gpm per hour x 60 min.
Homes
Added homes
Total homes
Homes at 20 years
20 years
70
8
78
82
4,920 gph
*Flow rates for existing facilities must be documented, i.e., flow study.
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 11
APPENDIX C
Cost Effective Present-Worth Analysis Format
Cost Effective Present-Worth Analysis is a tool that compares feasible alternatives:
•
To ensure modesty in cost and design.
•
To compare options and ensure the best choice for both taxpayers and the borrower.
Present Worth (PW) = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value
1.
Determine Discount Rate Factor (i).
•
Use the “real” Federal Discount Rate
􀂾
Appendix C of OMB Circular A-94
•
What is a real rate versus a nominal rate?
􀂾
Nominal includes market inflation
􀂾
Real removes expected inflation
•
The rate is based on a calendar year: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a094_a94_appx-c/
Example: The 20 yr real rate is 2.7% for 2010.
2.
Determine Capital Cost. Capital Cost is the estimated construction cost plus any non- construction costs (i.e. land, fees, testing, etc.) for the alternative shown in the Engineering Report.
Example: Total construction costs for a water treatment plant (WTP) rehabilitation are $1,000,000.00. Total non- construction costs are $156,900 (engineering report = $8500; all other engineering fees = $80,400; legal fees = $26,000; environmental information document = $10,000; land = $20,000; geotechnical testing = $12,000). Total capital costs = $1,156,900.
3.
Determine Uniform Series Present Worth O&M. Uniform Series Present Worth O&M is the present worth of the operation and maintenance costs for the alternative. These costs are assumed to be constant for the life of the project.
PW O&M = A [(1 + i) N -1]
PW O&M = present worth of O&M series
i(1 + i) N A = annual O&M value (assumed constant)
i = discount rate
N = number of years in evaluation period
Example: N = 20 years (in most cases), i = 0.027, A = $50,000
PW O&M = A * 15.30 = $50,000 * 15.30 = $765,000
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 12
4.
Determine Salvage Value. Salvage Value is only needed if the useful life is longer than the planning period, otherwise if useful life is equal to the planning period, salvage value is zero.
•
Start with useful life of facility or infrastructure.
•
Assume straight line depreciation and 20 year analysis.
􀂾
salvage value at 20th year = capital cost * (years of service remaining at end of planning horizon / total useful life).
PW salvage value = F (1 + i) –N PW salvage value = present worth of salvage value
F = future salvage value
i = discount rate
N = number of years in evaluation period
Example: N = 20 years (in most cases), i = 0.027
If the WTP has a useful life of 30 years (at 20 years, there is 10 years remaining) and a capital cost of $1,156,900, then F = 1/3 * ($1,156,900) = $385,633.
PW salvage value = $385,633 (1 + 0.027) –20 = $226,342
5.
Present Worth (PW) for each alternative = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value
Example: Therefore, Present Worth (PW) for the alternative = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value = $1,156,900 + $765,000 – $226,342 = $1,695,558
Cost Effective Present-Worth Analysis Format
Cost Effective Present-Worth Analysis is a tool that compares feasible alternatives:
•
To ensure modesty in cost and design.
•
To compare options and ensure the best choice for both taxpayers and the borrower.
Present Worth (PW) = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value
6.
Determine Discount Rate Factor (i).
•
Use the “real” Federal Discount Rate
􀂾
Appendix C of OMB Circular A-94
•
What is a real rate versus a nominal rate?
􀂾
Nominal includes market inflation Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 13
􀂾
Real removes expected inflation
•
The rate is based on a calendar year: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a094_a94_appx-c/
Example: The 20 yr real rate is 2.7% for 2010.
7.
Determine Capital Cost. Capital Cost is the estimated construction cost for the alternative shown in the Engineering Report.
Example: Total construction costs for a water treatment plant (WTP) rehabilitation are $1,000,000.00.
8.
Determine Uniform Series Present Worth O&M. Uniform Series Present Worth O&M is the present worth of the operation and maintenance costs for the alternative. These costs are assumed to be constant for the life of the project.
PW O&M = A [(1 + i) N -1]
i(1 + i) N
PW O&M = present worth of O&M series
A = annual O&M value (assumed constant)
i = discount rate
N = number of years in evaluation period
Example: N = 20 years (in most cases), i = 0.027, A = $50,000
PW O&M = A * 15.30 = $50,000 * 15.30 = $765,000
9.
Determine Salvage Value. Salvage Value is only needed if the useful life is longer than the planning period, otherwise if useful life is equal to the planning period, salvage value is zero .
•
Start with useful life of facility or infrastructure.
•
Assume straight line depreciation and 20 year analysis.
􀂾
salvage value at 20th year = capital cost * (years of service remaining at end of planning horizon / total useful life).
PW salvage value = F (1 + i) –N PW salvage value = present worth of salvage value
F = future salvage value
i = discount rate
N = number of years in evaluation period
Example: N = 20 years (in most cases), i = 0.027
If the WTP has a useful life of 30 years (at 20 years, there is 10 years remaining) and a capital cost of $1,000,000, then F = 1/3 * ($1,000,000) = $333,333.
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 14
PW salvage value = $195,700 (1 + 0.027) –20 = $195,700
10.
Present Worth (PW) for each alternative = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value
Example: Therefore, Present Worth (PW) for the alternative = [Capital Cost] + [Uniform Series Present Worth]O&M – [Single Payment Present Worth]Salvage Value = $1,000,000 + $765,000 – $195,700 = $1,569,300
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 15
APPENDIX D
Proposed Design Parameters
Unit
Existing Design
Proposed Design
DEQ Requirement
(OAC 252:656)
Meets
Wastewater Plant
500,000 GPD Plant
1 MGD Plant
n/a
n/a
Aeration
1,300 ft3/lb peak BOD5
1,500 ft3/lb peak BOD5
1,500 ft3/lb peak BOD5
Yes
Reactor Volume
10 hr hydraulic detention
20 hr hydraulic detention
18 hr hydraulic detention
Yes
Clarifier
700 gal/ft2/day hydraulic overflow rate
1,000 gal/ft2/day hydraulic overflow rate
1,000 gal/ft2/day hydraulic overflow rate
Yes
Lagoon-primary cell
none
60 days retention
60 days retention
Yes
Lagoon-secondary cell
none
60 days retention and 120 days retention in system
60 days retention and 120 days retention in system
Yes
Wet Weather Flow Equalization Basin (FEB)
Minimum storage to contain largest 7 days wet weather period in ten years;
Two compartments
Yes
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 16
APPENDIX E
Green Project Reserve Components
ORF-000
Rev-05/10
Oklahoma Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Green Project Reserve (GPR)
Checklist
Purpose
The Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB) Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) loan program’s GPR checklist is a tool to aid loan applicants and consultants in determining the green components of any given project, identifying both green performance targets and submittal materials that will be used for the implementation of the green components. It is also a tool to aid OWRB staff in tracking the implementation of the GPR throughout Oklahoma.
How to Use the Checklist
The following checklist is provided as a resource for CWSRF loan program applicants and consultants. The CWSRF loan program may accept components and technologies other than those listed in the attachment EPA CWSRF GPR Specific Guidance upon OWRB staff review and approval. Applicants are encouraged to introduce additional innovative green technologies in the proposed projects. The Checklist should be provided to the consultants by Loan applicants’ staff at the earliest possible stage of the project planning process, ideally during pre-application consultation.
How to Submit the Checklist
It is the applicant’s responsibility to obtain the necessary approvals and permits, and to properly design, build and effectively operate and maintain the proposed facilities covered in the Engineering Report (ER) or planning document. Loan applicants should return a completed copy of the checklist with their ER. The completion of the Checklist is equally valuable for projects that do not meet the GPR, since it will help OWRB staff to track the implementation of the various features within the GPR.
Contact for more Information: Jennifer Wasinger, Assistant Chief, FAD or Your OWRB project engineer @405-530-8800
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 17
I.
CWSRF Loan Applicant Information
Loan Number (if assigned):_______________________________________________________
Applicant Name: _______________________________________________________________
Project Name/Location: __________________________________________________________
Latest date this list was last updated by the Applicant: __________________________________
II.
Categories
Please mark, from the categories below, all the GPR components that are proposed for the project.
1.
Energy Efficiency Components:
Definition: Energy efficiency is the use of improved technologies and practices to reduce the energy consumption of water quality projects, use energy in a more efficient way, and/or produce/utilize renewable energy.
Projects that achieve a 20% reduction in energy consumption are categorically eligible for GPR, energy savings < 20% requires a business case. (Sample business cases are in attachment)
N/A Yes
( ) ( ) a. Site plan for facilities includes sustainable building components.
( ) ( ) b. The design includes an energy reduction plan with at least a 20% reduction
goal
( ) ( ) c. The Treatment Facility participates in EPA energy star program1
( ) ( ) d. Project utilizes high efficiency fixtures, energy star components in heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, Power Smart technology
( ) ( ) e. Project utilizes a SCADA system to reduce overall energy consumption by 20% and enhance process control. (Please show in business case the energy and cost saved in $$$numbers)
( ) ( ) f. Use of renewable energy alternatives (e.g., geothermal, solar, off grid, Hydro Wind) (Categorical)
( ) ( ) g. Project proposes to use high efficiency pumps (achieve 20% reduction in energy consumption) (categorical-documentation required)
( ) ( ) h. Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) correction projects that save energy from pumping and reduced treatment costs and are cost effective. Projects that count toward GPR cannot build new structural capacity. These projects may, however, recover existing capacity by reducing flow from I/I (business case required)
( ) ( ) i. Collection system Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) detection equipment (Categorical)
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 18
2.
Water Efficiency Components:
Definition: EPA’s WaterSense program defines water efficiency as the use of improved technologies and practices to deliver equal or better services with less water. Water efficiency encompasses conservation and reuse efforts, as well as water loss reduction and prevention, to protect water resources for the future.
N/A Yes
( ) ( ) a. The project utilizes on site stormwater management/rain harvesting (e.g., green roof, permeable paving, on-site drainage, rain garden) (Categorical)
( ) ( ) b. Recycling and water reuse projects that replace potable sources with non-potable sources, Extra treatment costs and distribution pipes associated with water (Categorical)
( ) ( ) c. The project incorporates water use reduction measures (e.g., low consumption fixtures, grey water systems, and stormwater irrigation measures) (Categorical)
( ) ( ) d. The Treatment Facility participates in EPA’s Water sense Program.
( ) ( ) e. Gray water, condensate and wastewater effluent reuse systems (where local codes allow the practice) (Categorical)
( ) ( ) f. Installing any type of water meter in previously unmetered areas
(i) If rate structures are based on metered use
(ii)Can include backflow prevention devices if installed in conjunction with water meter (Categorical)
( ) ( ) g. Replacing existing broken/malfunctioning water meters, or upgrading existing meters, (Categorical) with:
(i) Automatic meter reading systems (AMR), for example Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), Smart meters
(ii) Meters with built in leak detection
(iii)Can include backflow prevention devices if installed in conjunction with water meter replacement
( ) ( ) h. Water efficient landscaping (e.g., drought resistant and/or native plantings, use of non-potable water for irrigation, high efficiency irrigation
3.
Green Infrastructure Components:
Definition: Green stormwater infrastructure includes a wide array of practices at multiple scales that manage wet weather and that maintains and restores natural hydrology by infiltrating, evapotranspiring and harvesting and using stormwater. On a regional scale, green infrastructure is the preservation and restoration of natural landscape features, such as forests, floodplains and wetlands, coupled with policies such as infill and redevelopment that reduce overall imperviousness in a watershed. On the local scale green infrastructure consists of site- and neighborhood-specific practices, such as bioretention, trees, green roofs, permeable pavements and cisterns.
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 19
N/A Yes
( ) ( ) a. Implementation of green streets (combinations of green infrastructure practices in transportation right-of-ways), for either new development, redevelopment or retrofits including: permeable pavement2, bioretention, trees, green roofs, and other practices such as constructed wetlands that can be designed to mimic natural hydrology and reduce effective imperviousness at one or more scales. Vactor trucks and other capital equipment necessary to maintain green infrastructure projects. (Categorical)
( ) ( ) b. Wet weather management systems for parking areas including: permeable pavement2, bioretention, trees, green roofs, and other practices such as constructed wetlands that can be designed to mimic natural hydrology and reduce effective imperviousness at one or more scales. (Categorical)
( ) ( ) c. Offsite reuse of either treated wastewater or a bio solids treatment process
Significantly reduces residuals disposal.
( ) ( ) d. The project provides enhanced waste diversion facilities
(e.g., on-site recycling, on-site composting) (Categorical)
( ) ( ) e. Establishment or restoration of permanent riparian buffers, floodplains, wetlands and other natural features, including vegetated buffers or soft bioengineered stream banks(categorical)
( ) ( ) f. The project beneficially utilizes recycled materials. (Categorical)
( ) ( ) g. Low-impact development (LID).
( ) ( ) h. Downspout disconnection to remove stormwater from combined sewers and storm sewers (Categorical)
4.
Environmentally Innovative Project (EIP) Component
Definition: Environmentally innovative projects include those that demonstrate new and/or innovative approaches to delivering services or managing water resources in a more sustainable way.
( ) ( ) a. Utility Sustainability Plan consistent with EPA’s SRF sustainability policy.
( ) ( ) b. Greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory or mitigation plan and submission of a GHG inventory to a registry (such as Climate Leaders or Climate Registry)
(i). EPA Climate Leaders: http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders/basic/index.html
(ii). Registry: http://www.theclimateregistry.org/
( ) ( ) c. Construction of US Building Council LEED certified buildings or renovation of an existing building on POTW facilities.
( ) ( ) d Decentralized wastewater treatment solutions to existing deficient or failing onsite wastewater systems
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 20
Total Present worth Cost Analysis Component:
To properly evaluate a project’s long-term costs, a Total Present Worth (TPW) cost analysis of feasible alternatives is strongly recommended. TPW cost for each alternative includes Construction Cost, Non construction Cost (e.g., Engineering, Inspection, Legal, Land, Easements, Soils/Foundation Testing, Permits, O& M Manual and Other cost), estimated annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs during the service life (for example 20 years) discounted to its present value and added to the Construction & Non construction Cost together known as TPW*. The resulting TPW allows participants to assess the true cost of construction projects. Prepare a comparison of the selected alternative for the project with and without the proposed GPR components.
*SRF Loan Programs will provide the participant/applicant an estimated interest rate to be used in
the life- cycle analysis.
5.
Cost Estimate for Green Project Components:
Provide a cost estimate for the green infrastructure project or components. (Add pages if necessary)
(Description) (GPR Component) (Cost $$)
i.____________________________ ________________ _____________
ii.____________________________ ________________ _____________
iii.____________________________ ________________ _____________
Total: ______________
6.
Please describe the problems with the existing system and explain the technical and financial benefits of using green components included in the project. (Please add pages if necessary)
1. For more information on energy star see http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=government.wastewater_drinking_water
2.For more information on LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification see http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/LEED_main.asp
3. For more information on green building see http://www.epa.gov/greenbuilding/
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 21
(Attachment-2)
Sample calculation for energy and cost savings for SCADA control:
Project #
LS #
kWh Consumption for Current Run Times/yr
Energy Cost/yr
Excessive kWh Consumption/yr
kWh Consumption/yr after SCADA
Energy Cost/yr
Cost Savings
Energy Savings
Eligible Costs
E1
20
111,521
$104,829.74
7,806
103,715
$97,491.66
$ 7,338.08
7%
$4,500.00
E4
48
50,093
$ 47,087.42
1,503
48,590
$45,674.80
$ 1,412.62
3%
$ 4,500.00
Sub 1
82
3,335
$ 3,134.90
200
3,135
$2,946.81
$ 188.09
6%
$4,500.00
109
35,292
$33,174.48
706
34,586
$32,510.99
$ 663.49
2%
$4,500.00
Sub 4
17
4,792
$ 4,504.48
144
4,648
$ 4,369.35
$135.13
3%
$4,500.00
Sub 5
27
15,570
$14,635.80
1,246
14,324
$3,464.94
$1,170.86
8%
$4,500.00
Sub 6
64
170,718
$160,474.92
8,536
162,182
$152,451.17
$8,023.75
5%
$4,500.00
Sub 8
8
113,280
$106,483.20
3,398
109,882
$103,288.70
$3,194.50
3%
$4,500.00
Sub 9
49
24,749
$ 23,264.06
990
23,759
$22,333.50
$ 930.56
4%
$4,500.00
61
27,594
$ 25,938.36
1,656
25,938
$24,382.06
$1,556.30
6%
$4,500.00
74
6,693
$ 6,291.42
67
6,626
$6,228.51
$ 62.91
1%
$4,500.00
76
27,213
$ 25,580.22
816
26,397
$ 24,812.81
$ 767.41
3%
$4,500.00
Sub 9b
68
39,127
$ 36,779.38
2,739
36,388
$ 34,204.82
$2,574.56
7%
$4,500.00
Sub 11
34
18,015
$ 16,934.10
1,081
16,934
$ 15,918.05
$1,016.05
6%
$4,500.00
36
19,590
$ 18,414.60
1,763
17,827
$16,757.29
$1,657.31
9%
$4,500.00
42
12,440
$ 11,693.60
871
11,569
$10,875.05
$ 818.55
7%
$4,500.00
System‐Wide TOTALS
680,022
$639,220.68
47,602
632,420
$607,710.50
$31,510.18
7%
$ 72,000.00
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 22
Efficiency Calc:
(Total Run Hours ‐ Excess Run Hours)/Total Run Hours
LS #
Total Run Hours
Excess Run Hours
% Excess
20
7708
572.1
7%
48
4645
154
3%
82
1967.8
119
6%
109
4961.5
78
2%
17
584.3
15.9
3%
27
2574.8
207.5
8%
64
4984.2
234.2
5%
8
3022.4
87.1
3%
49
4419.6
173.1
4%
61
3986.9
229.4
6%
74
790.6
6.4
1%
76
5407.5
169.6
3%
68
2923.1
211.9
7%
34
6837.3
411.8
6%
36
4058.2
356.2
9%
42
4069.2
283.5
7%
NOTES:
Project specs call for SCADA units to consist of:
Siemens Intralink LC150 (or similar)
MDS iNET900 Data Transmission Unit
Estimate cost per SCADA unit = $4,500 per correspondence from local Distributor
(Municipal Pump & Control)
Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 23
(Attachment-2)
Guidance on Energy Efficiency Business Case for Wastewater Pumping Systems
for Green Project Reserve
Modifications, retrofits or replacement of existing wastewater pumping systems that achieve a 20% increase in energy efficiency will categorically qualify for the Green Project Reserve (GPR) Projects that do not achieve a 20% increase in energy efficiency can also count towards the GPR if they have a business case showing how the project significantly improves energy efficiency. Information to be included in a business case for wastewater pumping stations is provided below.
Business cases for wastewater pumping systems must include information that demonstrates that energy efficiency is the primary goal of the project. They should clearly show that: 1) the most energy efficient equipment is being used in the project, 2) that energy efficient design and operational considerations and practices are followed, 3) the percent increase in energy efficiency and KWH saved, and 4) why further energy efficiency improvements cannot be achieved.
1) Energy Efficient Equipment : The business case shall demonstrate that selected equipment is of the highest efficiency suitable for the project. The following are examples of standards or guidelines to be met:
•
Selection of new or replacement electrical equipment should meet or exceed energy efficiency standards set forth by professional engineering and manufacturers associations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA).
•
If it is not possible to select new electrical equipment that can meet or exceed energy efficiency standards then applicants must provide acceptable evidence of why this could not be achieved, with rationale for selecting alternate equipment if the goal of energy efficiency is to be achieved.
2) Energy Efficient Design Practices and Considerations: The business case shall demonstrate that all energy efficient design practices and considerations suitable for the project were used. The following are general examples of design considerations where energy efficiency could be demonstrated:
•
Pumping systems should be designed to operate in their most efficient zone. Pumps should be selected to operate close to the Best Efficiency Point (BEP) on a pump curve defined as the point with maximum efficiency of the pump. Choose pumps that result in the lowest friction head loss and ensure that pumps are properly sized for the pumping system.
•
Pumping systems should be designed to reduce flows to be pumped where possible.
•
Reduce pipe friction and lower head losses to reduce the energy needed for pumping. Note that repair and replacement of the collection system piping does not qualify as “green” except in the most dramatic infiltration/inflow cases. Revised: 05/12/2011 Engineering Report Guidelines/Wastewater Page 24
•
Where appropriate for energy efficiency purposes, use distributed control systems to operate the most efficient combination of pumps, and at the proper pump speeds, for needed flow rates and pressures.
•
3) Energy Savings: Comparing the energy requirements of the existing system with the energy requirements of the proposed upgrades yields the increase in energy efficiency. Business cases for energy efficient wastewater pumping projects should calculate the increase in energy efficiency as follows:
kWh/year used prior to the upgrade – kWh/year used after the upgrade
kWh/year used prior to the upgrade
The answer is expressed as a percentage improvement. The business case should clearly report the kWh/year saved by the project.
4) Energy Saving Justification: Business cases that demonstrate significant energy efficiency improvements will utilize all practical opportunities to improve energy efficiency. Consequently, each business case should discuss why the project cannot achieve a higher level of energy efficiency. One possible answer is that prior energy efficiency improvements have elevated the operation to a point where the remaining gains represent a smaller improvement.
Sample Calculation for energy and cost savings for Pumps:
Demonstrating Energy and Cost Savings for Pumps
Pump Parameter
Comparison Pump
New Pump
( Proposed Pump, Spec)
Manufacturer
EPA Region 6 Criteria
Voltage/ Phase
240/3
Motor Efficiency, %
89
Pump Efficiency
72.5
Power usage, Kw‐Hr/Yr
283,021
Power Cost, $/Yr
0.09
Operational Cost, $/Yr
25472
Savings, $/Yr
N/A
Base Standard Efficiency, %
77
0
New Standard Grade Efficiency: Pumps ‐72.5%; Motors‐89% : 0.725*0.89=0.65
Adding 20% efficiency to the standard grade Efficiency:
Base Std. Efficiency, %
77