Detroit Water &  Sewerage  Department

PC-792 Biosolids Dryer Facility Water Board Workshop

March 27, 2013

Customer Representatives to PC-792 Evaluation Committee Views of Customer Representatives •

Mark Steenbergh – Community Wastewater Services Manager, Macomb County Public Works

•

Thomas Maxwell – Construction Unit Project Engineer, Oakland County Water Resources Commissioner’s Office

•

Firooz Fath-Azam – Superintendent – Wastewater and Stormwater Operations, Facilities Management Division, Wayne County DPS

Slide 2

Biosolids Management Challenges • New air emissions regulations require modification of existing incinerators for continued use after March 2016 • Complex I incinerators are at the end of their useful life • DWSD experiences high costs to dewater and incinerate biosolids – Solids processing & disposal is $68M /year – 51% of WWTP O&M costs

Slide 3

Biosolids Management Challenges • Limitations on available landfill space and offloading capacity require that the majority of biosolids be incinerated or otherwise processed on site • Solids management (dewatering and incineration) has presented significant challenges resulting in previous permit violations • ACO requires DWSD to have a peak biosolids capacity of 850 dtpd • Average production is 450 dtpd Slide 4

Existing Solids Processing Overview Primary Clarifiers

Primary Sludge

Gravity Sludge Thickeners

Secondary Clarifiers

Secondary Sludge Thickened Sludge (2%-7% solids)

Sludge Dewatering

Central Off-load Facility Adds Lime and Loads Trucks For Landfill or Land Application

Incineration

Dewatered Biosolids (20-25% solids)

Slide 5

Existing Disposal Peak Day 850 dtpd

Landfill & Land Appl. 300 35%

C-I Incineration 210 25%

C-II Incineration 340 40%

Average Day 450 dtpd

Landfill 98 22% Land Application 49 11%

C-II Incineration 194 43%

C-I Incineration 109 24%

Slide 6

Existing Biosolids Management • Dewatering – 960 dtpd firm capacity (1,450 dtpd total capacity)

• Incineration – Complex I – 6 multiple hearth incinerators • In service in 1940 (No. 2, 3, 4 & 5) and in 1960’s (No. 1 & 6) • 210 dtpd firm capacity (317 dtpd total capacity)

– Complex II – 8 multiple hearth incinerators • Constructed in 1970. • 360 dtpd firm capacity (480 dtpd total capacity).

• COF capacity of up to 300 dtpd for land application or landfilling

Slide 7

Daily Biosolids Production Daily Biosolids Quantity 1000 943 Dry Tons/Day Peak 444 Dry Tons/Day Average 162,000 Dry Tons / Year 722,000 Wet Tons/Year

900 800 700

500 400 300 200 100

Jan-11

Oct-10

Jul-10

Apr-10

Jan-10

Oct-09

Jul-09

Apr-09

Jan-09

Oct-08

Jul-08

Apr-08

Jan-08

Oct-07

Jul-07

Apr-07

Jan-07

Oct-06

Jul-06

Apr-06

0 Jan-06

Dry Tons

600

Date

Daily quantities are highly variable No biosolids storage at the plant Slide 8

Existing WWTP Solids O&M Costs FY 2012-13 (Millions of $)

Incineration

COF & Residuals

Dewatering

Total Solids Handling

Labor

$ 10.48

$ 13.55

$ 1.36

$ 25.40

Natural Gas

$ 10.60

$ 0

$0

$ 10.60

$ 2.08

$0.49

$0

$ 2.57

Polymer

$0

$ 5.64

$0

$ 5.64

Lime

$0

$0

$ 1.65

$ 1.65

Hauling/Disposal

$ 0.87

$0

$ 9.21

$ 10.09

Parts, Services & Other

$ 3.73

$ 8.36

$ 0.33

$ 12.41

$ 27.77

$ 28.04

$ 12.55

$ 68.35

Electricity

Total

Slide 9

Existing WWTP Solids O&M Cost Per Dry Ton FY 2012-13

Incineration

Dewatering

COF & Residuals

Total Solids Handling

Dry Tons Processed/Year

111,000

163,000

52,000

163,000

Labor

$ 94.45

$ 83.15

$ 26.23

$ 155.84

Natural Gas

$ 95.45

$0

$0

$ 65.00

Electricity

$ 18.77

$ 3.01

$0

$ 15.79

Polymer

$0

$ 34.60

$0

$ 34.60

Lime

$0

$0

$ 31.64

$ 10.10

$ 7.86

$0

$177.17

$ 61.88

Parts, Services & Other

$ 33.59

$ 51.26

$ 6.28

$ 76.14

Total

$250.14

$172.02

$241.32

$ 419.35

Hauling/Disposal

Slide 10

Planned Biosolids Management • Bring C-II Incinerators into Air Quality Compliance with 2016 regulations (PC-791) • Retire C-I Incinerators (Noncompliant after 2016 and 50-70 years old)

Slide 11

Planned Biosolids Management • Construct Biosolids Dryer Facility (PC-792) – Replaces Complex I Incineration – 316 dtpd firm capacity to handle base load – Dewatering included to reduce cost and reliance on C-I and C-II dewatering which have faced challenges – 20 Years operation and maintenance contract – Significant cost savings

• Biosolids peaks managed with land application, land-filling and C-II Incinerators. Slide 12

Drying Effectively Manages Biosolids Drying identified by industry experts as a viable option for DWSD during the March 2012 Biosolids Symposium

Slide 13

Benefits of Drying • Proven and reliable • Economical – O&M savings of $16.9 million/year from current process • Environmentally beneficial – Beneficial reuse of biosolids as fertilizer or fuel with less trucking – Produces Class A biosolids – lower odors and stable – Uses less energy than existing incinerators – Future feedstock for biosolids gasification if desired

Slide 14

Well established technology used in: • • • • • • • • •

Boston, MA Milwaukee, WI Philadelphia, PA South Bronx, NY Chicago, IL Windsor, ON Sacramento, CA St. Petersburg, FL Stamford, CT

• • • • • • • •

Winston-Salem, NC Honolulu, HI Irvine, CA Green Bay, WI Blue Lake (Shakpoee, MN) GLSD (N. Andover, MA) West Palm Beach, FL Cumberland, MD

Slide 15

Typical Use of Heat Drying By Others (Typical Day) Chicago (MWRD) – • • •

150 dtpd (29%) heat dried 215 dtpd (41%) land application 155 dtpd (30%) landfill cover

Boston (MWRA) •

240 dtpd (100%) heat dried

Milwaukee (MMSD) •

114 dtpd (~100%) heat dried

Philadelphia •

180 dtpd (~100%) heat dried

Baltimore (Patapsco) •

110 dtpd (100%) heat dried

West Palm Beach •

150 dtpd (~100%)

Typical Dryer Facility

Slide 17

Improved Air Emissions PC-792 Dryer Facility • • •

Best Available Emission Controls (BACT) Will emit an order of magnitude less than the existing multiple hearth incinerators Will not emit yellow plumes associated with incinerators

PC-791 Incinerator Upgrades EMISSIONS COMPONENT Polychlorinated Dibenzo‐P‐Dioxins &  Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans (PCDD/PCDF toxic equivalency – ng/dscm) Polychlorinated Dibenzo‐P‐Dioxins &  Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans (PCDD/PCDF total mass – ng/dscm) Hydrogen Chloride (ppmvd) Nitrogen Oxides (NOx – ppmvd)

AFTER  EXISTING PC‐791  0.76 0.32

21

5.0

3.6

1.2

277

220

Typical Dryer Facility

Slide 19

Dried Biosolids – Fertilizer or Fuel

Slide 20

Dryer Challenges and Solutions • Fire and Explosion • Undigested Primary Biosolids Contain Fiber • Public Impact • Marketing of Biosolids

Slide 21

Management of Dryer Challenges Reduction of Fire and Explosion Risks • Dryer inert atmosphere via exhaust circulation. • Water quench is provided. • Dry product storage and recycle bins are blanketed with nitrogen. • Deflagration relief vents are provided in silos and the dryer cyclone. • Sprinklers and fire suppression are provided. • The fuel train meets the most stringent requirements of IRI, FM or the Michigan state code. • Silo and recycle bin temperature monitoring • Non-combustible construction materials • Employee safety training • Contractor required to provide insurance Slide 22

Management of Dryer Challenges Undigested Primary Biosolids Contain Fiber • Design modifications have been made to ensure that fiber can be handled. • Grinders are installed before the centrifuge feed pumps. • The system is immune to fiber before drying. • Drag conveyors are used because they are less subject to fouling. • Three scalper decks are used to remove trash from the dried product. • Pellet coolers are provided with larger gaps.

Slide 23

Management of Dryer Challenges Public Impact • Contract requires no noticeable odors on site or in surrounding community – Alkaline Hypochlorite Scrubbers – remove odors – Regenerative thermal oxidizers –remove odor-causing compounds and organic vapors – Only dried biosolids will be trucked – low odor – Sealed building – Best available emissions control (BACT)

• Contract requires no noticeable increase in ambient sound at 500 feet from facility – 90 Decibels or less aggregate at 3 feet from equipment specified

• Truck Traffic – Trucking of dried biosolids will reduce the number of truckloads by 75% as compared with sludge cake Slide 24

Management of Dryer Challenges Marketing of Biosolids • Selected contractor is highly experienced in marketing biosolids • Marketing plan includes agricultural distribution in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Florida • Market diversification – Bulk distribution to agricultural users – Bulk distribution to fertilizer blenders/manufacturers – Bulk distribution as an alternative fuel/energy source

Slide 25

PC-792 Replaces Other Projects • Allows retirement of C-I incineration • Allows Department to cancel, defer or avoid: – Dewatered biosolids storage facility ($12.2M in CIP) – Centrifuge replacement project ($25M in CIP deferred) – Rehabilitation of remaining 4 C-I incinerators ($6.5M avoided) – Modify C-I Incinerators to meet air emissions rule after 2016 ($26M avoided)

Slide 26

PC-792 Replaces Other Projects • New dryer facility also – Slows exhaustion of available landfill capacity – Reduces use of aging and expensive C-II incineration equipment (but C-II still provides capacity for peak days)

Slide 27

Planned Disposal Peak Day 850 dtpd

Average Day 450 dtpd Land Application 45 10%

C-II Incineration 234 28%

Landfill & Land Appl. 300 35%

Drying 316 37%

Landfill 22 5% C-II Incineration 78 17%

Drying 305 68%

Slide 28

PC-792 Requested Proposals Scope •

Design & construct dryer facility (owned & financed by DWSD) – 220 dtpd capacity – 150 dtpd (55,000 dtpy) guaranteed to Contractor – Produce 65% - 95% solids Class A biosolids (pathogens and vector attraction eliminated) – Reliable, flexible, maintainable and cost effective – Storage for wet cake and dried product – Conveying (to dryer and dewatering C-I to incineration C-II) and truck loading – Odor control – Choice of sites: Lagoon 2, Lagoon 1A/1B, DMT, parking, others – Dewatering not requested in RFP but offered by all proposers as an Alternate

•

Operate and maintain for 20 years on unit price basis – – – –

•

Operate and maintain new facility in “as-new” condition except normal wear and tear Dry, haul and beneficially reuse all dried biosolids Lawfully dispose of residuals Utilities are a pass-through cost to DWSD up to guaranteed usage cap

Closeout services – Training, manuals, records – Turn-over in “as-new” condition (except reasonable & normal wear and tear)

Slide 29

Contract PC-792 Schedule Milestone RFP available to proposers

Date August 2, 2012

Proposals received

January 23, 2013

Complete proposal evaluation

February 1, 2013

Complete contract negotiation

March 7, 2013

Targeted notice to proceed

May 30, 2013

Substantial completion of first 3 dryer trains

March 14, 2016

Substantial completion of 4th dryer train

March 29, 2016

Construction completion Completion of twenty‐year O&M period Final completion (entire work)

October 13, 2016 March 14, 2036 October 13, 2037

Slide 30

Potential Dryer Facility Locations Lagoon 1A/1B  Site

Lagoon 2 Site

Existing Incineration &  Dewatering

Intended Dryer  Facility Site (Voss  Street Property)

Detroit Marine  Terminal Site

Slide 31

PC-792 Request For Proposals • RFP provisions – Publicly advertised procurement – Exceptions and assumptions allowed – Alternate proposals allowed

Slide 32

Key Terms and Conditions PC-792 Request For Proposals

• Contractor performance guarantee • Guaranteed utility utilization cap • DWSD protected by performance & payment bonds ($143M construction, $20M O&M) • Contractor insurance: builders risk ($143M), environmental pollution ($5M), PLI ($5M), CGL ($2M), excess liability ($15M), workers comp ($1M), automobile ($1M), all risks building & personal property (replacement value during O&M period)

Slide 33

Key Terms and Conditions (continued) PC-792 Request For Proposals

• Damages for late completion or failure to provide required capacity • Right to engage others if contractor fails to perform • Termination for cause or convenience • Escalation provision based on federal CPI • Uncontrollable circumstances – relief of obligations – Force majeure, material change in law, material change in quality of biosolids, long term reduction in biosolids quantity received at WWTP – Equitable adjustment only in case of change in law

Slide 34

PC-792 Evaluation Criteria • Total present value cost (40%) – Construction cost – fixed cost – 20 years O&M cost – unit price basis (escalated) – Closeout cost – fixed cost (escalated) – Utility costs passed through to DWSD based on proposer’s guaranteed utilization – Other costs or savings DWSD would incur – Price equalization credit if prime is DBB or CBB

Slide 35

PC-792 Evaluation Criteria • Technical proposal (20%) • Work plan (20%) – O&M will be reliable, effective, efficient and meet DWSD needs – Time of completion – Benefits, adverse impacts and risks

• Ability to perform work (10%) • Staff experience (10%)

Slide 36

Proposals Received • Three Proposers – Synagro – New England Fertilizer Company (NEFCO) – WeCare-Walker Detroit, LLC (WWD)

Slide 37

Proposals Received • Nine Proposals (base and 2 alternates from each proposer) – All good proposals – All base proposals included spare train – All proposers offered dewatering as an alternate – All proposers agreed use of blast furnace gas not feasible – Lowest lifecycle cost from each proposer was for its alternate that included dewatering (due to significant cost savings at WWTP).

Slide 38

Synagro Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering & 2 trains at Lagoon 2 – 220 dtpd peak

Slide 39

WWD Alternate 1 Proposal Dewatering & 6 trains at DMT – 272 dtpd peak

Slide 40

NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering & 3 trains @ DMT – 330 dtpd peak

Slide 41

NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering & 3 trains @ DMT – 330 dtpd peak

Slide 42

NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering & 3 trains @ DMT – 330 dtpd peak

Slide 43

Proposal Evaluation Scoring Proposer Maximum Points New England Fertilizer Co.  (Alternate 2) New England Fertilizer Co.  (Alternate 1) New England Fertilizer Co.  (Base Proposal) Synagro  (Alternate 2) WeCare‐Walker Detroit, LLC  (Alternate 1) Synagro  (Alternate 1) WeCare‐Walker Detroit, LLC  (Base Proposal) Synagro  (Base Proposal) WeCare‐Walker Detroit, LLC  (Alternate 2)

Ability  to Staff Technical  Perform Experience Proposal

Work Plan

Cost

Total Score

600

600

1,200

1,200

2,400

6,000

576

543

1,117.5

1,136.5

2,364.0

5,737.0

576

543

981.5

1,093.5

2,400.0

5,594.0

576

543

997.5

1,117.5

1,828.8

5,062.8

586

547

869

1,063.5

1,836

4,901.5

560

550

983

988

1,478.4

4,559.4

586

547

718

1,055.5

1,430.4

4,336.9

560

550

1,005

1,000

1,188.0

4,303.0

586

547

724

1,100.5

1,305.6

4,263.1

560

550

1,020.5

986

1,072.8

4,189.3 Slide 44

Summary of Original Proposals Firm Capacity (dtpd) NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering  and 3 trains drying (1 spare) at DMT  (95% solids) NEFCO Alternate 1 Proposal Dewatering and 3 trains drying (1 spare) at Lagoon 2 (95% solids) NEFCO Base Proposal   3 trains drying (1 spare) at Lagoon 2  (95% solids) Synagro Alternate 2 Proposal Dewatering & 2 trains drying & strain presses at Lagoon 2 (92%  solids) WWD Alternate 1 Proposal ‐ Dewatering and 6 trains drying (1 spare) at DMT  (55% solids) Synagro Alternate 1 Proposal ‐ 2 trains drying with strain presses at Lagoon 2 (92% solids) WWD Base Proposal ‐ 6 trains drying (1 spare) at DMT  (55% solids) Synagro Base Proposal ‐ 3 trains drying (1 spare) with strain presses at Lagoon 2  (92% solids) WWD Alternate 2 Proposal ‐ 6 primary trains (1 spare) & 3 trains secondary dryers at DMT

Construction  Evaluated  Peak  Contract Price  Present  Capacity (Capital Cost) Value Cost* (dtpd) ($ Millions) ($ Millions)

211 

330

$ 101.245 

$244.34 

211

330

$97.641 

$240.74 

200

330

$92.485 

$316.01 

110

220

$ 139.714 

$314.49 

227

272

$ 163.540 

$390.94 

110

220

$ 132.223 

$404.22 

227

272

$ 155.640 

$486.34 

220

330

$ 152.663 

$442.76 

227

272

$ 182.898 

$445.09 

* Calculated in accordance with PC-792 RFP criteria, drying 64,000 dry tons of biosolids per year over 20 years and crediting savings for WWTP plant dewatering to the extent PC-792 will provide dewatering.

Slide 45

NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Judged Superior • Low life cycle cost • Spare dryer train for greater reliability and increased peak capacity • Provides dewatering at a low cost – Relieves the wastewater plant of a significant portion of operational and maintenance challenges and saves money

• Does not significantly constrain the flexibility of other plant operations or reduce the capacity of the Central Offload Facility.

Slide 46

NEFCO Alternate 2 Proposal Judged Superior • Locates the new drying facility off-site, – Avoids WWTP site congestion & conflicts – Prevents construction damage to nearby WWTP facilities (Primary Effluent Tunnel) – Room for future expansion.

• NEFCO will dry biosolids to 95% flexible product for fertilizer or fuel. • No significant exceptions to the specified requirements • NEFCO work plan judged superior – Most likely to complete on-time – Less risk and more benefits than other proposals

• NEFCO had excellent ability to perform and its proposed staff was judged capable. Slide 47

Negotiated Changes Requested by DWSD • Objective: – Large operational cost savings of drying as compared to existing – Improved reliability and maintainability

• Changes: – Add a fourth dryer train to increase capacity to 316 dtpd firm and 440 dtpd peak – Provide a unit price to use spare capacity when available – Relocate to Voss Street property • • • •

Reduce potential conflicts with outfall project Increase room for future expansion Shorter pipelines from WWTP Provide security fencing, paving, water management, and other features for new site

Slide 48

Negotiated Changes Requested by DWSD • Increase the dry product storage from 1,650 to 3,200 dry tons • Provide additional space to facilitate maintenance • Add redundancy: sludge line, electrical feed, water/fire line

Slide 49

NEFCO Modified Proposal Dewatering and 4 trains with 316 dtpd firm capacity

Slide 50

NEFCO Modified Proposal Dewatering and 4 trains with 316 dtpd firm capacity

Slide 51

NEFCO Modified Proposal – Redundant Utilities Dewatering and 4 trains with 316 dtpd firm capacity Potable Water Electrical Natural Gas Sludge Screened Final Effluent Sanitary Sewer

Slide 52

NEFCO On-site O&M Staffing Plan Position

Staff

Plant manager

1

Assistant plant manager

1

Safety & process engineer

1

Laboratory technician

1

Chief operator (4 shifts)

4

Staff operators  (4 shifts)

6 – 8 

Load/shipping operator

1

Maintenance mechanics

3‐5

Electricians

1‐2

Office assistant Total

1 20‐25 Slide 53

Modified and Negotiated Pricing Original NEFCO  Alternate 2  Proposal (3 Trains)

NEFCO  Modified   Proposal (4 Trains)

Agreed  Contract Price (4 Trains)

Construction costs

$101,245,000

$147,973,000 

$143,000,000

Annual fixed O&M costs incl. processing 150.7 dtpd (55,000 dtpy) of biosolids Annual fixed O&M costs incl. processing 200 dtpd (73,000 dtpy) of biosolids Process biosolids above 150.7 dtpd (55,000 dtpy) and up to 220 dtpd (80,300 dtpy) annually. Process biosolids above 200 dtpd (73,000 dtpy) and up to 316 dtpd (115,340 dtpy) annually. Process biosolids above 316 dtpd (115,340 dtpy) and up to 383.6 dtpd (140,000 dtpy) annually.

$10,068,000 ($183/dt)

N/A

N/A

N/A

$12,948,000 ($177/dt) 

$12,948,000 ($177/dt)  

$76.60

N/A

N/A

N/A

$76.60 

$76.60 

N/A

$88.93 

$88.93 

$25,000

$25,000 

$25,000 

Proposed Item

Closeout costs.

Slide 54

Modified Proposal Reduces Costs • Agreement to reduce capital cost from $148M to $143M • Average O&M costs per dry ton in the modified proposal lower than original proposal so acceptable • Increased capacity will divert more solids to the dryer facility from expensive WWTP dewatering and incineration – Reduces dryer O&M cost from $149.51/dt at 220 dtpd to $140.38/dt at 316 dtpd. (In either case DWSD will also pay $68.61/dt for electricity and gas to fuel the dryers) – Further reduces operating costs by $6.2 million per year or $125 million over the 20 year operating period – Payback period of ~6.7 years for the $41.7 million increase in capital cost of the modified proposal as compared with the original alternate 2 proposal

Slide 55

PC-792 Dryer Scope of Work • Design & construct dryer facility – Dewatering – 4 trains of dryers

• Operate and maintain for 20 Years – O&M of new facility – Dewater, dry, haul and beneficially reuse all dried biosolids. – Lawfully dispose of residuals

• Closeout services – Training, manuals, records – Turn-over in “as-new” condition (except reasonable & normal wear and tear)

Slide 56

Local Contracting • •

None of the PC-792 prime proposers were Detroit Based Businesses or Customer Based Businesses Construction management will be by NEFCO’s corporate affiliate Daniel O’Connell’s Sons (DOC) who will work to engage local construction subcontractors – Utilizing Detroit-headquartered engineers (Wade-Trim, NTH, Somat) – Will endeavor to utilize local, qualified contractors, consultants, and labor to perform the services included in contract PC-792 – Will supervise qualified subcontractors, including firms that are DetroitBased Businesses (DBB) and Customer-Based Businesses (CBB) – While NEFCO is not obligated to use any one particular company, it will strive to maximize local company participation – NEFCO team has been meeting with many local companies and will continue to identify well-qualified and experienced firms to assist with project delivery – Local labor will be accessed for operations and maintenance staff – Committed to solicit local contractors for biosolids hauling over the 20 year O&M period

Slide 57

PC-792 Contract Pricing Structure Contract Unit  Price A)  Lump sum price for design and construction B)  Allowances (hazardous materials and changes) C)  Construction contract price (A+B) D)  Fixed monthly unit price for dryer O&M (includes beneficial reuse of  minimum guaranteed 200 dtpd of biosolids)

$132,000,000 $11,000,000 $143,000,000 $1,079,000

E) Unit price per dry ton to dry and beneficially reuse additional biosolids  up to firm capacity (200 dtpd to 316 dtpd)

$76.60

F)  Unit price per dry ton to dry and beneficially reuse additional biosolids  to the extent capacity is available and needed above firm capacity (316  dtpd to 383.6 dtpd)

$88.93

G)  Fixed price for close‐out services

$25,000

Note: Prices for Items D‐G are subject to cost escalation per the CPI for the  Detroit area Slide 58

Use of Dryer Facility Saves $16.9 Million of Solids O&M Cost Per Year Existing WWTP Solids O&M Costs $68.35 Million Parts, Services & Other $12.4 WWTP Labor $25.4 Hauling/ Disposal $10.1

Lime $1.6

Polymer $5.6

Hauling/ Disposal $4.3 Lime $0.7 Polymer $1.8 WWTP Electricity $0.7 WWTP. Gas $2.7

Natural Gas $10.6

Solids O&M Costs With Dryer Facility $51.5 Million Parts, Services & Other $7.0

Dryer O&M (305 dtpd) $15.9

Dryers Gas & Elect. $7.6

WWTP Labor $10.7

Savings $16.9

Electricity $2.6

Slide 59

Existing WWTP Solids O&M Costs FY 2012-13 (Millions of $)

Incineration

Dewatering

COF & Residuals

Labor

$ 10.48

$ 13.55

$ 1.36

$ 25.40

Natural Gas

$ 10.60

$0

$0

$ 10.60

$ 2.08

$ 0.49

$0

$ 2.57

Polymer

$0

$ 5.64

$0

$ 5.64

Lime

$0

$0

$ 1.65

$ 1.65

Hauling/Disposal

$ 0.87

$0

$ 9.21

$ 10.09

Parts, Services & Other

$ 3.73

$ 8.36

$ 0.33

$ 12.41

$ 27.77

$ 28.04

$ 12.55

$ 68.35

Electricity

Total

Total Solids Handling

Slide 60

Projected Solids O&M Costs Using Dryers (Millions of $) Incineration

Dewatering

COF &  Residuals

Labor

$ 3.32 

$ 6.40 

$ 0.99 

$  10.72 

Natural Gas

$ 2.71 

$ ‐

$ ‐

$ 2.71 

Electricity

$ 0.53 

$ 0.16 

$ ‐

$ 0.69 

Polymer

$ ‐

$ 1.79 

$ ‐

$ 1.79 

Lime

$ ‐

$ ‐

$ 0.73 

$ 0.73 

Hauling/Disposal

$ 0.22 

$ ‐

$ 4.11 

$ 4.34 

Parts, Services & Other

$ 1.41 

$ 5.25 

$ 0.33 

$ 6.99 

$ 8.21 

$  13.60 

$ 6.16 

$  27.96 

Subtotal WWTP O&M

Total Solids  Handling

Dryer Facility O&M Cost

$  15.89 

Natural Gas For Dryers

$ 5.47 

Electricity For Dryers

$ 2.16 

Subtotal Dryers O&M

$ 23.52

Total

$  51.49  Slide 61

Solids O&M Savings Using Dryers (Millions of $) Incineration $(7.16)

Dewatering $(7.15)

COF &  Residuals $(0.38)

Natural Gas

$(7.88)

$-

$-

$ (7.88)

Electricity

$(1.55)

$(0.33)

$-

$ (1.88)

Polymer

$-

$(3.85)

$-

$ (3.85)

Lime

$-

$-

$(0.91)

$ (0.91)

Hauling/Disposal

$(0.65)

$-

$(5.10)

$ (5.75)

Parts, Services & Other

$(2.32)

$(3.11)

$-

$ (5.43)

$ (19.56)

$ (14.44)

$(6.39)

Dryer Facility O&M Cost

$(40.39) $  15.89 

Natural Gas For Dryers

$ 5.47 

Electricity For Dryers

$ 2.16 

Labor

Subtotal WWTP O&M

Total Solids  Handling $(14.69)

Subtotal Dryers O&M

$ 23.52

Total

$(16.87)

Annual O&M savings: $16.9 million 20 year O&M savings: $337.3 million (in 2013 dollars) Payback period on $143 million capital cost: 8.5 years Slide 62

PC-792 Dryer Facility 20 Year Cost Contract Unit  Price A)  Design and construction

Estimated Contract  Cost for 20 Years (383.6 dtpd )

$132,000,000

$132,000,000

B)  Allowances (haz. mat. & changes)

$11,000,000

$11,000,000

C)  Construction contract price (A+B)

$143,000,000

$143,000,000

$1,079,000

$258,960,000

E)  Dry & beneficially reuse additional biosolids  (200 dtpd to 316 dtpd)

$76.60

$64,864,880

F)  Dry & beneficially reuse additional biosolids  (316 dtpd to 383.6 dtpd)

$88.93

$43,860,276

$25,000

$25,000

D)  Monthly O&M (including 200 dtpd of           biosolids beneficial reuse)

G)  Close‐out services H)  CPI escalation on Items D‐G (estimated @  3% per annum)

$172,289,844

I) Total estimated O&M cost (D‐H)

$540,000,000

J)  20 year total contract cost (estimated)

$683,000,000 Slide 63

PC-792 Cash Flow and Construction Funding ($ x 1,000) PC‐792* FY 2013‐14

$24,110

FY 2014‐15

$88,928

FY 2015‐16

$29,962 Total

Annual debt service $10.3 million  (30 years at 5.5% interest) 

•

Bonds have been sold to fund the  CIP including PC‐792 through FY  2013‐14 – 5 year plan includes  bond sale for balance in 2015

•

PC‐792 included in 5 year plan so  rate impact will be negligible during  construction with reduction during  the later part of the 5 year period  as O&M savings begin

$143,000

Funding Available in CIP PC‐792 Dryer Facility

$135,000

Biosolids Storage Facility

$12,200

Centrifuge Replacement Project

$25,000

Total

•

$172,000

Slide 64

Positive Cumulative Cash Flow Savings After Four Years Dryers Operation (3% annual escalation and debt service at 5.5% over 30 years – $ x 1,000,000)

Fiscal Year (A) Current Cost

Biosolids O&M O&M + Using Debt Debt Existing Dryers Service Service Net WWTP (After For Using Annual Cumulative Biosolids FY16) Dryers Dryers Savings Net O&M (B) (C) (D) (E=C+D) (F=E-B) Savings

Notes

$ 68.35

$51.49

FY 13-14

$ 70.40

$ 70.40

$10.32 $ 80.72 $ (10.32)

$(10.32) Start Dryers Construction

FY 14-15

$ 72.52

$ 72.52

$10.32 $ 82.84 $ (10.32)

$(20.64)

FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19

$ 74.69 $ 76.93 $ 79.24 $ 81.62

$ $ $ $

74.69 57.95 59.69 61.48

$10.32 $10.32 $10.32 $10.32

$ $ $ $

85.01 68.27 70.01 71.80

$ (10.32) $ 8.66 $ 9.23 $ 9.82

$(30.96) $(22.30) Start Dryers Operations $(13.07) $ (3.25)

FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23

$ 84.07 $ 86.59 $ 89.19 $ 91.86

$ $ $ $

63.32 65.22 67.18 69.20

$10.32 $10.32 $10.32 $10.32

$ $ $ $

73.64 75.54 77.50 79.52

$ $ $ $

$7.17 $ 18.21 $ 29.90 $ 42.24

10.42 11.04 11.68 12.34

Positive Cash Flow

Questions?

Slide 66