Regional Service Through Unity… Meeting our Region’s Needs Today and Tomorrow WASTEWATER COMMITTEE MEETING May 30, 2019
CLICK TO EDIT MASTER TITLE STYLE AGENDA Opening Remarks A. Executive Director/Committee Champion Status Report concerning legislation and regulatory matters, budgets, current projects and ongoing Wastewater System programs of the District 2
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COMMITTEE CHAMPION STATUS REPORT Impacts of Recent Rain Events Facility Flow Water Total Quality Bear Creek WWTP 0 0 0 Recent Rainfall Exceeds Norms Buffalo Creek WWTP 0 0 0 8 7.28 Farmersville WWTP 9 0 9 6.75 7 Floyd Branch WWTP 3 0 3 6 Muddy Creek WWTP 2 2 4 4.9 Panther Creek WWTP 0 0 0 5 Rowlett Creek WWTP 5 4 9 4 Sabine Creek WWTP 0 0 0 3.03 3 Seis Lagos WWTP 5 0 5 South Mesquite WWTP 3 1 4 2 Squabble Creek WWTP 1 0 1 1 Stewart Creek WWTP 1 0 1 0 Wilson Creek WWTP 0 3 3 April May MTD 29 10 39 Normal Rainfall 2019 Actual Violations shown in table below are for April and May (thru 5/28) 3
Agenda AGENDA Action Items A. Consider Approval of Wastewater Committee Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2019 B. Consider Approval of Wastewater Committee Meeting Minutes – April 11, 2019 Recommend Approval of Wastewater Committee Meeting Minutes 4
Agenda AGENDA Action Items C. Consider recommendation on authorizing award of construction contract with Flow-Line Construction, Inc., in the amount of $408,350 on Project No. 501-0478-17, McKinney and Upper Cottonwood Creek Lift Stations Metering Improvements (Please refer to Administrative Memorandum No. 5412) 5
MCKINNEY AND UPPER COTTONWOOD CREEK LIFT STATIONS METERING IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION AWARD Base Bid: Upper Cottonwood Creek Lift Station • The parshall flume meter vault has significant concrete corrosion creating safety concerns. • Project No. 295 constructed a new meter station with electromagnetic flow meters. • It is now recommended to decommission the parshall flume meter vault and reroute the gravity pipeline into the lift station wet well. Additive Alternative: McKinney Lift Station • The existing flow meters at McKinney Lift Station no longer function as designed. • Bid was for new meters to be installed to provide billing meters for the existing McKinney Lift Station.
MCKINNEY AND UPPER COTTONWOOD CREEK LIFT STATIONS METERING IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION AWARD Bid Tabulation and Construction Award Bid Bidder Base Bid Total Bid Recommendation Alternate Flow-Line Lowest responsible bidder $408,350 $337,160 $745,510 Construction, Inc. Recommended for Award Archer Western $568,445 $163,620 $732,065 Construction, LLC ENGINEER’S OPINION OF PROBABLE $444,300 $267,700 $712,000 CONSTRUCTION COST • Project originally bid in October 2018. Rejected bids (Ad memo 5286) due to disparity between engineer’s estimate and low bid. • New meters will be installed with new McKinney Lift Station Improvements (Project No. 502). • Staff recommends award of base bid.
Agenda RECOMMENDATION 8
Agenda AGENDA Action Items D. Consider recommendation on authorizing award of construction contract with Eagle Contracting, LP, in the amount of $14,193,000 for Project No. 301-0432-16, Floyd Branch Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Process Optimization Improvements (Please refer to Administrative Memorandum No. 5410) 9
FLOYD BRANCH RWWTP PROCESS OPTIMIZATION IMPROVEMENTS Background • Wastewater flow from a portion of the City of Richardson is treated at the Floyd Branch RWWTP. • The existing trickling filter technology from the 1950’s – 1960’s is outdated and needs to be replaced. • New ballasted activated sludge technology optimizes treatment process to meet permitted capacity of 4.75 MGD annual average and 10 MGD peak. • Project includes providing plant SCADA and substantial electrical improvements.
Aeration Basin 1 (North) Aeration Basin 2 (South) Modifications New Magnetite Building Floyd Branch RWWTP New Electrical Buildings Abandon Trickling Filter Abandon Trickling Filter Legend Treatment Units Wastewater Plant Floyd Branch Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Process Optimization Improvements Project No. 301-0432-16 Administrative Memorandum No. 5410
FLOYD BRANCH RWWTP PROCESS OPTIMIZATION IMPROVEMENTS BID TABULATION Bid Bidder Base Bid Total Bid Recommendation Alternate Lowest responsible bidder Eagle Contracting, LP $14,193,000 $499,000 $14,692,000 Recommended for Award Archer Western $14,426,100 $493,000 $14,919,100 Construction, LLC ENGINEER’S OPINION OF PROBABLE $12,354,800 $550,000 $12,904,800 CONSTRUCTION COST • Lowest base bid recommended for award • Bid alternate for jet mixing system not recommended for award • Higher costs mainly due to contract duration and electrical costs
Agenda RECOMMENDATION 13
Agenda AGENDA Action Items E. Consider recommendation on authorizing execution of Wastewater Regionalization Agreement with East Fork Partners, LLC, for the proposed East Fork Wastewater Treatment Plant located in Weston, Texas (Please refer to Administrative Memorandum No. 5413) 14
WASTEWATER REGIONALIZATION AGREEMENT WITH EAST FORK PARTNERS Background • Sept 2017 East Fork Partners submitted permit application for 2.5 MGD WWTP to TCEQ to serve area near City of Weston • Oct 2017 NTMWD requested from TCEQ contested case hearing on the East Fork Partners Permit application • April 2018 NTMWD submitted draft agreement to East Fork Partners in attempt to settle protest of the permit application • Jan 2019 TCEQ grants hearing request, concurrently referred matter to TCEQ Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) • March – May 2019 NTMWD participates in ADR with East Fork Partners, City of Weston and TCEQ. • May 2019 Agreement reached with East Fork Partners 15
WASTEWATER REGIONALIZATION AGREEMENT COMPONENTS • East Fork Partners (EFP) requests TCEQ add special condition to final TPDES permit to include the Wastewater Regionalization Agreement • EFP shall transfer the final permit and ownership of WWTP to City of Weston • EFP provide notice to NTMWD prior to commencing initial construction and subsequent phased expansions. NTMWD will determine if connection to Regional Wastewater System is available and economically feasible • Phase I of WWTP will be a non-permanent package WWTP 0.25 MGD • Parties shall identify mutually agreeable third-party operator for WWTP • NTMWD will withdraw protest upon execution of agreement 16
Agenda RECOMMENDATION 17
Agenda AGENDA Discussion Items A. Regional Wastewater System and Upper East Fork Interceptor System Cost of Service projections B. Preliminary budget and personnel requests 18
WASTEWATER COST OF SERVICE PROJECTIONS COST OF SERVICE PROJECTIONS 19
RWWS – 5 YEAR EXPENSE TREND 8.20% $70 6.11% $63.0 17.64% $58.3 $60 $54.9 5.51% $50 $46.7 $44.2 $40 Millions $30 $20 $10 $- 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 20
UEFIS – 5 YEAR EXPENSE TREND 15.35% $35 $33.1 15.69% 14.47% $30 $28.7 12.23% $24.8 $25 $21.7 $19.3 $20 Millions $15 $10 $5 $- 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 21
MAJOR COST DRIVERS • Sister Grove WWTP construction • New cost allocation methodology shifts support services to non-water systems beginning in FY20 – Includes Administration, Engineering and Maintenance – Phased in over 5 years to minimize impact • Yearly Cost Escalations 22
COST ALLOCATION 5 YR PHASE-IN (CURRENT $’S) IMPACTS 5 th Year FY 19 1 st Year 2 nd Year 3 rd Year 4 th Year 5 th Year System Budget Total RWWS $ 5.09 M $ 0.83 M $ 0.83 M $ 0.83 M $ 0.83 M $ 0.83 M $ 9.24 M UEF $ 1.17 M $ 0.55 M $ 0.55 M $ 0.55 M $ 0.55 M $ 0.55 M $ 3.92 M SW $ 1.51 M $ 0.18 M $ 0.18 M $ 0.18 M $ 0.18 M $ 0.18 M $ 2.41 M SS $ 2.27 M $ 0.41 M $ 0.41 M $ 0.41 M $ 0.41 M $ 0.41 M $ 4.32 M NET $10.04 M $ 1.97 M $ 1.97 M $ 1.97 M $ 1.97 M $ 1.97 M $ 19.89 M *numbers may not tie due to rounding 23
CLICK TO EDIT MASTER TITLE STYLE SUPPORT SERVICES PHASE-IN Support Cost Allocation 5 YR Phase-In • Reviewed and Improved Departmental Allocations • Removed Support Departments from Water System • Created a Support Services Fund starting in FY20 Results in an Estimated $9.9 M additional funds to be allocated to the non-water systems. • Recommend a 5 YR phase-in to reduce the immediate financial impact 24
COST REDUCTION EFFORTS (KEEP INCREASES UNDER 10%) • Operating budget reductions of $1M – Operating Savings in FY20 and beyond dependent on future budget needs • Deferred future capital projects to reduce the debt issuance in the next few years – Debt Savings in FY20 and FY21 but projects are just deferred to future years. • Assumed additional reliance on Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) financing – Lowered the cost of borrowing but CWSRF may not be fully available 25
Recommend
More recommend
