HomeMy WebLinkAbout021317_cabs02JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S BRIEFING AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners r --
r
FROM: Philip Morley, County Administrat
DATE: February 13, 2017
G=
RE: Briefing re: Port Hadlock Wastewater System
STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Public Works Director/County Engineer Monte Reinders will lead a
briefing to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the financing and status of the Port
Hadlock Wastewater System project. Community Development Director Patty Charnas will also
attend.
ANALYSIS: The Irondale & Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area (UGA) is an unincorporated UGA
designated in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Under Washington State's Growth
Management Act (GMA), urban growth areas are required to have "fundamental urban
services," including public sewers. The area is currently served by private septic systems.
Without a public sewer system, development in the area is limited by its current "transitional
rural zoning." Future urban zoning has been approved for the UGA, but cannot be put into
effect until a wastewater collection and treatment system is constructed.
The County has completed final plans and specifications for the wastewater treatment plant,
influent pipeline, and effluent reuse/infiltration area, and acquired the land for those facilities.
Design of the gravity collection system that will be under the roads in the UGA has been
completed to the 10% level.
Construction of the Port Hadlock Wastewater System cannot begin until funding that is both
affordable and sustainable is acquired. Jefferson County continues to seek funding for the
sewer system. A current 2 -page flyer about the project, and a 2015 financial plan by Katy
Isaksen & Associates are attached to this memo as background for the February 13 briefing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None from the briefing.
RECOMMENDATION: Hear the briefing and engage in dialogue with staff about funding for the
project.
REVIE D BY:
i
Philip Morle , ounty Adminis for Date
x . =future Wastewater Future Sewer Treatment Plant - — a �K
`% , :. E
Reuse Site
¢�
AD-R
per 5'acres Without;Sewer
Vacant Und'i DweNmg
n � j
_ =`• r 7z v? Co my iibr y & _ hlmaeum 4
410 6) —i _f Pgmar�r Sch pi (!4rnptJ§ Zr
�
{. -f §-:St--
fi '� / AF Large Grocery St�o�e +
Cannot Expand
r1 I1-ICrYEI 5t� Sl �..1�. `-
.r''A` Jr•G?f may, . !�i £`i i,i dU'.0 �'�` � '- '� • .�
Popular R taurant "Ajax Cafe"
K gsy'Rd -0W0r 4ya
r/0cf Close definitely — Septic Failure
Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area (UGA) & Sewer
• Only UGA in Unincorporated Jefferson County
• Characterized by Urban Densities Along 2 State Highways
• Currently Served by 100's of Old Septic Systems
• Sewer Mandated by State Growth Management Act (GMA)
• Without Sewer - Commercial, Retail, Multi -family, Senior &
Low Income Housing, Light Industrial Cannot Expand
• County's Economic Growth and Jobs Tied to Development
Opportunity in UGA
• 1,290 acres
• 3,580 (2010 Population) Grows to 5,398 in 20 Years
• Sewer Addresses Water Quality Iss&ogle
Earth
Imagery date: 7/20/2016 40 V18.23" N 122145'54.95' W elegy 131 ft eye alt 7720 ft 0
Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area (UGA) — Wastewater Treatment Project
Jefferson County
Completed!
Next Steps...
Port Hadlock Wastewater System, $45,200,000
Existing Grants,
C1 inn nnn
Sewer User
$10,200,OC
Program Grants,
$9,000,000
xisting County,
$3,900,000
ISsv':rmli
• Without a sewer, economic growth, development, and jobs cannot be created in the UGA
• High density and multi -family low income and senior housing are not possible without sewer
• Sewer infrastructure is challenging and expensive to develop "from scratch"
• Sewer costs to users must be affordable
• Port Hadlock has a relatively low Median Household Income level (60% of State MHI)
• Without significant investment from the State and Federal Government, the sewer is just not
affordable
4ppropriations, • Without State/Federal assistance, sewer will cost over $20,000/residence to connect +
$21,000,000 $87.00/month for O&M
• Jefferson County is seeking a minimum of $30 Million in assistance from State and Federal
sources to bring user costs into an affordable range and see this required prosect succeed.
Contact Information
Jefferson County Department of Public Works - 623 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Monte Reinders, P.E., Jefferson County Public Works Director, (360) 385-9160
Jefferson County District 2 Commissioner: David Sullivan, (360) 385-9100
P 206.706.8893
PO Box 30008
Seattle, WA 98113-2008
Katy@kisaksenassoc1ates.com
Katy Isaksen & Associates
Utility Financial Planning for Local Government QW)
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 23, 2015
To: Monte Reinders, Jefferson County Public Works Director
From: Katy Isaksen, KI&A
Cc: Kevin Dour, Tetra Tech
Subject: Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
This technical memorandum presents the updated financial plan deliverable for Task 300.5—Financial
Plan Refinement for the Phase I Collection System LID Formation Support Services Contract
(4055351693). The original financial plan was developed for Chapter 9 of the Jefferson County Port
Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan dated September 2008. It was updated following the 30% design cost
estimates for the Port Hadlock Wastewater Facility, Reclamation Plant and Influent Pipeline on May 25,
2012. Since that time, final plans and specifications have been completed for the wastewater treatment
plant, influent pipeline, and wastewater reuse (infiltration) area. In addition, all land needed for
construction of these facilities has been acquired by the County. Tetra Tech has subsequently updated the
following design documents with updated costs:
• 100% Design Cost Estimate, Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline, 12/31/13 (Costs include
construction, 10% contingency and 9.5% sales tax)
• 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, Core and Rhody Drive Collection System, 5/6/14;
Final Revisions (Costs include 20% contingency)
• Estimated Annual Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs, 1/17/14
• Estimated Short Lived Asset Replacement, 1/17/14
• No change to the population projections by Jefferson County.
This financial plan update indicates that a substantial infusion of grant assistance will be required to
bring the user -financed portion of the project into an affordable range using commonly accepted
measures of affordability (as explained later). The financial plan in the approved 2008 Facility Plan relies
on the establishment of a local improvement district (LID) to finance the full cost of the collection
system. Given the current collection system cost estimates and depressed property values (a measure
of "demand"), the special benefit provided at this time as a result of the project would be substantially
short of the amount needed to finance the entire cost of the collection system (see Draft Formation
Special Benefit/Proportionate Assessment Study by McCauley and Associates LTD, November 2013). An
additional challenge continues to be that Jefferson County is not eligible to apply for funding from grant
or low-interest loan programs until the LID is established, but an LID is extremely difficult to establish
without secured grant and loan funding to present to the affected property owners.
Considerations that may make the project more feasible from a financing perspective are as follows:
• Reduce the amount to be financed and paid back by users through the acquisition of new grants.
• Attempt to finance the construction without formation of an LID.
• Wait for further economic recovery, which may result in greater commercial development
interest in the Port Hadlock/Irondale area. This would result in property value increases and
more interest by property owners to invest in sewer.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 1
Wait for a revision to the Washington State Growth Management Act that may allow use of
urban zoning together with the installation of sewer service and not require the sewer system to
be in place prior to any use of urban zoning.
Convene a meeting of the financial Tech Team, made up of representatives of state and federal
funding assistance programs to discuss this updated financial plan and the options for moving
forward.
The use of urban zoning as an economic development tool for Jefferson County is not able to be
financed at this level with traditional infrastructure funding sources without substantial grant assistance.
PORT HADLOCK WASTEWATER FACILITY PROJECT
The Port Hadlock Wastewater Facility Project consists of a new wastewater treatment facility (WWTF),
collection system and financing for side sewers to serve the Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area
(UGA). As approved in the 2008 Facility Plan, the project is phased to begin in Port Hadlock and expand
to the Irondale area over a 20 -year period, ultimately serving approximately 1,290 acres. The area is
currently served by septic tanks that will be decommissioned when existing properties are connected to
the sewer system.
• The initial phase is planned to construct the wastewater treatment plant, the effluent re -use
(infiltration) ponds, the main influent pipeline and pump station, and a portion of the gravity
collection system. The initial collection system has been refined from the Facility Plan to include
the Core and Rhody areas, for approximately 500 acres. These are primarily the commercial
zones along SR -116 (Core) and SR -19 Rhody Drive.
• Subsequent phases—The treatment facilities are planned for modest improvements to add
3 days' storage and Ultraviolet Disinfection #3 approximately 5 years after the initial phase. A
major expansion is planned for approximately 11 years after completion of the initial phase to
provide capacity for a portion of Residential Area #2 and all of Residential Areas #3 and #4. The
collection system is planned to expand to the old Alcohol Plant area in approximately the third
year after completion of the initial phase, Residential Area #1 in year 6, Residential Area #2 in
year 9, and Residential Areas #3 and #4 beginning in year 14.
Given the complexity of beginning a new sewer system and the slow economic growth in the area, a
conservative financial test was developed to demonstrate what might happen if the system began with
the Core and Rhody Drive areas and then paused for a period of years instead of the steady progression
of expansion laid out above. In other words, test to see if the system could be sustainable without
further expansion and limited solely to in -fill in the initial phase area.
System Components
The financial plan has been developed around the concept that system components fall into one of three
categories:
a) Common and shared
b) Local
c) On-site.
The common and shared facilities include the water reclamation facility, reuse facilities and influent
pipeline. These facilities are a shared responsibility of all system users. The local facilities are the sewer
collection lines and local pump stations that serve each neighborhood to bring the sewage to the main
influent pipeline and the treatment plant. The on-site costs are those necessary to connect each home
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 2
or business to the sewer stub at the edge of the property line and right-of-way. The on-site costs are the
responsibility of the individual property owner connecting to the sewer. Typically these costs are not
included in the system costs; however, they are included here to allow the County to pursue funding if
available, to encourage customers to connect early and be able to finance the costs over time.
The 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (completed by Tetra Tech in late 2013/early 2014) for
the collection system in the initial phase (Core and Rhody) includes three categories:
• Mainline sewers and pump stations
• Service laterals in the right-of-way
• Service connections on private property.
This financial plan assumes that local costs include mainline sewers and service laterals in the right-of-
way. On- site costs include the service connections on private property.
Estimated Project Cost for Initial Phase
The estimated project costs for the initial phase have been updated with the 100% design estimate of
the WWTF and the 10% design estimate of the collection system, as shown in Table 1. The costs were
estimated at the end of 2013, assuming hypothetical mid -point of construction one year later.
These costs do not include planning work performed prior to 2011.
Jefferson County has completed the land acquisition for the common/shared facilities. A utility
operations startup item has been added at the estimated cost of operations for the first year. This
addition anticipates that the staff would be hired and trained prior to sewer customers being connected.
The costs will need to be updated for construction inflation at the time the project moves forward. An
allowance for project restart is included to refresh the technical, environmental and permitting to meet
requirements that are current at such time.
The current estimated cost for the Phase I (Core and Rhody) collection system (including design, land
acquisition and construction management) is roughly double what can be financed through an LID as
explained later. Together with the current depressed property values, the preliminary special benefit
can support approximately $6,000,000 to $8,000,000 (50%-60% of special benefit) and the remaining
collection system would need to be financed with grants or outside of the LID.
If the collection system were to be constructed without establishing an LID, the savings would be
$1,600,000, but the new connections would have to pay for the collection system through higher
connection fees or monthly rates.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 3
Table 1: Estimated Project Cost for Initial Phase
ESTIMATE AT 100% DESIGN WWTF,10% COLLECTION SYSTEM I UPDATED COSTS ($2014)
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS (excludes Facility Plan and previous planning/UGA efforts)
Preliminary/Other
Land Acquisition
$1,400,000 Completed
Environmental/Cultural Review
$276,000 Completed
Permitting
$60,000 Completed
Other Preliminary (fund, public involvement, etc.) 30%
$316,000 Completed
Public involvement/information
$73,000 Ongoing
Other (Value Engineering/LID/Legal)
$500,000 Ongoing
County Project Administration
$525,000 Ongoing
Utility Operations Startup
$220,000
Subtotal Preliminary
$3,370,000
Water Reclamation & Pipeline - Common
Construction 1
$15,496,000
Design: 30%
$500,000 Completed
Design: final & bid documents
$1,785,000 Completed
Project Restart @ 1%
$155,000
Construction Management @ 10%
$1,550,000
Subtotal Common
$19,486,000
Future Storage and UV3 to complete initial capacity
$782,000 Year 6
Total Common Facilities (Treatment, Reuse & Pipeline)
$23,638,000
Initial Collection System: Core & Rhody
Construction z
$13,818,000
Land Acquisition for Pump Stations
$25,000
Design @ 15%
$2,073,000
Construction Management @ 10%
$1,382,000
Establish LID (20% of assumed $8,000,000 LID)'
$1,600,000
Subtotal Initial Collection System
$18,898,000
Total System w/Initial Collection System
$42,536,000
Option: Include Initial Side Sewer Cost 3
$2,675,000
Total Project Cost
$45,211,000
1 Tetra Tech Water Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline 100% Cost
Estimate 12-30-2013 ENR Adjusted
2. Tetra Tech 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Core and Rhody
Drive Collection System includes
• Mainline sewers in right-of-way and pump stations
• Service laterals in right-of-way.
3. Tetra Tech 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Core and Rhody Drive Collection System includes
• Service Connection on Private Property.
4. The LID is assumed to be able to accommodate $8,000,000 based on 60% of special benefit. The cost to
establish an LID includes a required 10% guaranty fund, 6.5% allowance for interim interest & financing, and
3.5% allowance for final bond financing costs (total 20% of LID -financed construction).
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 4
FUNDING TO DATE
Jefferson County has been working diligently on fund-raising in order to make the cost more affordable
to the residents and businesses in Port Hadlock. Table 2 summarizes the funding that has been obtained
to date. The County has been working with all possible funding agencies to attract grants that do not
have to be repaid, has sold bonds to be repaid with the .09 Rural County Sales Tax (known as the Public
Infrastructure Fund (PIF) in Jefferson County), and has begun borrowing from a $10 million Public Works
Trust Fund (PWTF) loan at 0.5% interest (approximately $1.7 million has been borrowed through 2014 to
match a federal EPA grant used for completion of the final plans and specifications and property
acquisition).
Table 2: Funding Secured to Date
Source
GRANT
WA Dept. of Ecology Reclaimed Water Grant
USDA -RD Predevelopment
SAAP Federal Appropriation (EPA Admin)
Subtotal Grant
LOCAL
2011 LTGO Bond Issue to be repaid by Rural
Co. Sales Tax (PIF Fund)
Subtotal Local
LOAN
2011 PWTF loan
Amount
$197,797 Preliminary design 30%
$25,000 National Environmental Protection Act compliance
$970,000 2010 federal appropriation toward design
$1,192,797
$2,202,190 45% local match for SAAP & portion land
acquisition, .09 Rural Co Sales Tax sunsets in 2027
$2,202,190
$10,000,000 Other preliminary, land acquisition, begin
construction
Subtotal Loan $10,000,000 Approx. $1.7 million used through 2014
TOTAL FUNDING TO DATE $13,394,987 1
LTGO = Limited -tax general obligation SAAP = Special Appropriation Act Projects (EPA grant program)
PIF = Public Infrastructure Fund USDA -RD = U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development
PWTF = Public Works Trust Fund program
Congressman Norm Dicks was instrumental in obtaining a federal appropriation for the design of the
reclamation plant, influent pipeline and reuse facilities. The PWTF loan allowed the County to meet the
local match for the grant to bring the design of the treatment facilities to 100% and was important in
allowing the County to move forward. The loan was also used to cover some of the property acquisition
costs as well as special benefit assessment work and 10% design level work and cost estimating for the
Core and Rhody (initial phase) collection system. The loan came with a five-year deferral to allow time
for construction and customers to connect to the new system. Payments will begin in June 2017.
Jefferson County has committed 50% of its .09 Rural County Sales Tax to this project. In 2011, the County
issued approximately $2.2 million in limited general obligation bonds for sewer improvements (local
match and land acquisition). This bond amount was the best estimate of what the annual PIF funds
could support.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 5
ADDITIONAL FUNDING NEEDED
Given the projects costs of approximately $45.2 million and $13.4 million of funding obtained so far,
Table 3 demonstrates that approximately $31.8 million is needed to have full funding for the initial
project phase.
Table 3: Additional Funding Needed for Initial Phase
Total System w/Initial Collection System $42,536,000
Option: Include Initial Side Sewer Cost $2,675,000
Total Project Cost $45,211,000
LESS: FUNDING IN HAND $13,394,987
Additional Funding Needed $31,816,013
Funding Needed with Initial Side Sewer (Rounded) $31,820,000
This scenario includes the option of the County borrowing $2.7 million for the first year on-site side
sewer costs to provide incentive for early connection. The incentive would be to allow financing of the
on-site costs over time for those property owners that connect in the first year. After that point, each
customer would be responsible for obtaining funding for their own on-site side sewer costs.
The project has proceeded as far as possible with the state and federal funding programs until a local
improvement district is formed for the collection system. The advantage of using funding programs for
construction financing is to obtain a lower interest rate than the open bond market and also to have
some access to grant funding to match low interest loans offered within some programs. All programs
want to be partners in successful projects and this project has the interest of the key funding
programs—they are already funding partners.
From the funding program perspective, the formation of an LID demonstrates local commitment to the
project and increases the probability of success. If Jefferson County were to consider proceeding without
using LID financing, they should discuss this option with the funding programs to ensure that the project
remains eligible for funding. Jefferson County has been working with a Tech Team made up of key
funding program representatives and this would be an appropriate topic to discuss at a future meeting.
BORROWING FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jefferson County will be the owner/operator of the system as presented in the approved Facility Plan.
This is important because Jefferson County will need to borrow the funds for construction and will be
responsible for repayment. This responsibility can be shared with property owners through local
improvement districts for the local collection system. The County may contract for services, such as
operations, maintenance and billing, from the PUD or other provider, but the County will be responsible
for repayment of the funds borrowed.
PLAN FOR DEBT REPAYMENT
The approved Facility Plan anticipates that the County will obtain as many grants as possible, borrow
funds for construction and have customers make repayment in some combination using the following
mechanisms:
a) Connection Charges—Common facilities (water reclamation facilities, influent pipeline, and
reuse (infiltration) area) would be repaid through connection charges paid by property owners
when connecting to the system. The Facility Plan called for the connection charges to be
averaged over the 20 years as requested by the County. However, in the slower growth scenario
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 6
referred to as "Initial Area (Core & Rhody Drive areas) and Pause," the costs must be identified
and shared appropriately.
b) LID Assessments—The collection system (sewer lines in neighborhood and local pump stations
where necessary) would be funded by establishing local improvement districts as provided by
law under Revised Code of Washington 36.94.220. This would provide group financing for the
property owners and allow them to pay their assessments over 15 to 20 years. The traditional
method is for the County to sell LID bonds after construction is complete, all costs have been
finalized, the pre -payment period has closed and assessments have been finalized. If other
financing is available, such as a Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF), Department of Ecology or
USDA -Rural Development low-interest loan, the LID mechanism can also be used as the method
for repayment and could result in a lower cost to the property owners. (The LID mechanism
allows property owners to pay their assessment over a period of 15 to 20 years instead of
paying all at once.) Generally, the LID must be formed before being eligible to apply for funding.
Currently the estimated cost for the Phase I (Core and Rhody) collection system (including
design, land acquisition and construction management) is roughly double what can be financed
through an LID, as explained later.
c) Property Owner Self-Funding—On-site costs to connect a home or business through a side sewer
to the property line will vary by property, depending on the size and shape of the lot,
topography, and existing landscaping or pavement that may have to be restored. The side sewer
connection and decommissioning of existing septic tanks are assumed to be the responsibility of
the property owners. The County could seek to borrow for the initial on-site costs to provide
incentive for early connections of existing development by allowing the property owners to
finance their side sewer costs over a number of years with the LID assessment.
d) Monthly Rates—Because this is a new system without existing customers, it is assumed that the
debt payments will not be funded through monthly sewer rates. The monthly sewer rates are
assumed to include the operations, maintenance, billing, administration and replacement
reserves required to operate the wastewater system. Until the final construction financing is
known, it is assumed that the initial debt repayment will be funded by connection charges and
LID assessments and not by monthly rates.
RECOVERING CAPITAL COSTS FROM SEWER USERS
The cost categories are used to fairly allocate costs among sewer customers in a manner that strikes a
balance between ensuring fiscal sustainability for the County, the sewer utility and easing the burden on
sewer customers where possible. Table 4 summarizes the plan for recovering the capital costs from
sewer customers.
Table 4: Paying for Capital Costs
Cost Element
Description
Payment Method
When to Pay
Common -
Common & shared portions of system—
Sewer Connection
Pay upon connection to sewer
GENERAL
treatment plant, influent pipeline, reuse area
Charge
system
Shared-
Collection system—sewer lines, local pump
LID Assessment
Pay over 15 to 20 years when
LOCAL
stations and service laterals in the right-of-way
sewer line comes to
neighborhood
On -Site -
Connection between home/business and
Up to property
Pay upon connection to sewer
SIDE SEWER
sewer stub at property line
owner
system
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 7
Equivalent Residential Units
For planning purposes, the system is described in equivalent residential units (ERUs). This allows the
costs to be determined on a per residential unit basis. The approved Facility Plan assumes an ERU is
equal to 2.2 population equivalents, 60 gallons per day (gpd) per person, 132 gpd per one residential
dwelling unit, or 4,000 gallons of water per month per dwelling unit.
There are an estimated 599 ERUs in the initial phase to be connected in the first year, based on Tetra
Tech's flow and loads analysis (presented in the Facility Plan) using population projections from Jefferson
County. This was confirmed with water customer records from Jefferson County PUD in 2006. The
20 -year total is 4,201 ERUs in the approved 2008 Facility Plan (see 100% Design Cost Estimate of the
Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline for planned ERUs and flow for the Initial Phase 1). For the
"Core & Rhody Drive Areas and Pause" scenario described earlier, there are 2,272 projected ERUs in the
20 -year planning period. Both of these scenarios include assumptions of new development and
redevelopment to increase sewer customers in each of the 20 years.
The County will need to adopt policies and procedures to administer the sewer utility, including the
definition of assigning ERUs to multifamily residential, multi -unit commercial and higher strength
commercial customers.
Estimated Cost per ERU for Initial Phase (Core and Rhody)
Given the estimated project cost and components described above, Table 5 summarizes the estimated
cost per ERU for the initial phase of Core and Rhody Drive areas. (See Appendix I for a map of the initial
phase.) The cost for an average connection would be $16,600 per ERU plus on-site costs (described in
more detail below). The common and shared costs are divided by the initial capacity of 2,482 ERUs. The
initial collection system costs are divided by the Core & Rhody Drive area of 2,272 ERUs.
Table 5: Estimated Cost per ERU for Initial Phase
CONNECTION CHARGE + LID ASSESSMENT FOR CORE + RHODY
This alternative divides the initial Phase 1 system costs by the initial
Core + Rhody ERUs
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
$19,486,000
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)
$782,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
Subtotal
$20,243,013
Initial Capacity ERUs
2,482
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$8,200 per ERU
b. + LID Assessment
Initial Collection System Costs
$17,298,000
Establish LID (20% of assumed $8,000,000 LID)
$1,600,000
Subtotal 20 -Year Collection System Cost
$18,898,000
Core & Rhody Drive 20 -Year ERUs
2,272
b. LID Assessment paid over 20 years
$8,400 per ERU
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
$16,600 per ERU + On -Site Costs
The connection charge of $8,200 per ERU is based on the initial common/shared facilities required to
provide capacity for Core + Rhody Drive areas ($20.2 million) divided by the initial capacity of 2,482 ERUs
for the Phase 1 treatment facilities. The initial collection system LID assessment is based on the
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 8
estimated cost for Core and Rhody areas ($18.9 million) divided by the 2,272 ERUs planned in those
areas at build -out and averages $8,400 per ERU.
This phasing provides 210 ERUs of additional capacity (2,482 ERUs available minus 2,272 ERUs in initial
phase) at the treatment plant that could be sold before the need to expand the treatment facilities. The
estimated costs are shown on a per-ERU basis. An ERU is equal to a residential dwelling unit or 4,000
gallons of water per month (see also Equivalent Residential Units).
In addition, each property will be responsible for installing the side sewer on its property to connect the
home or business to the system at the property line. This cost will vary by property depending on the
length of the sewer on each lot, the amount of pavement/landscaping restoration, etc. Recent
contractor activity indicates an average of $3,000 per residential gravity connection (see On -Site Costs
below).
Once a property is connected to the sewer, monthly sewer rates will begin (see also Initial Monthly
Sewer Rate).
The 2008 Facility Plan estimated sewer costs per ERU based on the total 20 -year facility costs (initial
phases and subsequent expansions) divided by the 4,201 ERUs anticipated to connect over the 20 -year
planning period, as required for Growth Management Act planning. (See Appendix B, Scenario 1). This
financial plan tests the sustainability of the initial phase if there is a long pause before expansion into
the residential areas. Therefore the initial phase common and shared costs are divided by the initial
capacity of 2,482 ERUs, which includes 2,272 ERUs Core & Rhody plus 210 additional ERUs of capacity
built into the plant before a major expansion is needed. (See Appendix B, Scenario 2). While the 2008
Facility Plan showed that it was feasible to sewer the entire UGA in the 20 -year planning horizon, it is
more conservative to plan for the initial phase and then a long pause, since expansion of the sewer into
residential areas may take significantly longer given the funding challenges and lack of re -development
pressure in these built -out areas. This would be a more traditional method of growing a sewer system—
expanding when there is demand. This would allow the system to "get off the ground" and function and
grow with demand and as dictated by the availability of funding—from developer extensions, LIDS,
grants, borrowing, monthly rates, etc.
On -Site Costs
In addition to paying the connection charge (for common and shared costs) and LID assessment (for the
collection system), individual property owners will be responsible for installing the side sewer on their
property to connect their home or business to the system at the property line. This cost will vary by
property depending on the length of the sewer on each lot, the amount of pavement/landscaping
restoration, etc. The Facility Plan estimate was $3,500 per residential connection. Based on recent
contractor activity, this is currently estimated to average $3,000.
The 10% design effort completed by Tetra Tech in late 2013 estimated a range of costs for the Core area
($4,800) and Rhody Drive area ($13,200). Some properties are below the sewer line and cannot be
served by gravity service. Instead, these properties will require a grinder pump to pump the effluent up
to the sewer line. These costs are estimated to average $21,900 in the Core area and $23,500 in the
Rhody Drive area.
Because this range was so wide, local contractors were contacted in fall 2015 to obtain examples of
recent bids. (See Appendix J). A contractor active in the Mason County Belfair area provided an average
residential connection for an existing home of $2,000 to $3,000 including decommissioning the existing
septic tank. The same contractor suggested commercial gravity connections were averaging an
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 9
additional $200 to $300 over the residential connections. For pumped systems, the residential average
is $8,000 including grinder pump and electrical connection. Larger commercial pumped systems require
a larger duplex grinder pump system and average $20,000.
Another contractor provided bid tabulations for grinder pump connections for the Sacheen Lake Water
& Sewer District. These pumped residential connections averaged $7,600 including existing system
connection and septic tank pumping. (See Appendix J)
Local Improvement District
A local improvement district is a financing mechanism that allows a capital improvement that benefits
certain properties to be financed by the benefitting properties. A special benefit district would be
formed to include the benefitting properties. Then the cost financed by the LID would be shared among
the properties within the LID through a special assessment. The special assessment can be paid outright
without interest or over a number of years with interest based on the underlying financing. Roads and
sewer collection systems are the type of improvements that are well suited for an LID to allow the
special assessments to be paid over a number of years.
The LID would be administered by Jefferson County and all properties within the LID boundary would
receive a special benefit assessment. The assessment can be paid over a 15- to 20 -year period. State law
provides this financing mechanism to the County under Revised Code of Washington 36.94.220. The
formation of a special benefit district must follow certain procedures, including specific notices and
hearings, and a test that demonstrates that the assessment cannot exceed the special benefit received
from the improvement (availability of sewer). The special benefit reflects the value of the property
before and after sewer is available. The limit to financing available under an LID is the amount of special
benefit.
For more information on LIDS, the Municipal Research and Services Center has prepared the Local and
Road Improvement Districts Manual for Washington State. It is available at the center's website,
www.MRSC.org.
The estimated average LID assessment of $8,400 per ERU is shown in Table 5 for the initial phase.
However, the LID costs are not anticipated to be spread on an ERU basis. A separate feasibility study
was conducted in 2013 by a specialized appraisal firm (Macaulay & Associates, LTD) to determine the
special benefit and ensure that the project meets the required statutory test that the assessment cannot
exceed the special benefit. The process of establishing LIDS is specified in law and Jefferson County has a
team identified to assist. The property owners will have the option to pay their total assessment up-
front without interest or pay the assessment with their property taxes over 15 to 20 years. The number
of years for repayment will be determined when the final financing is obtained.
Special Benefit Appraisal
A draft Formation Special Benefit /Proportionate Assessment Study was prepared for the Core and Rhody
areas in November 2013 by Macaulay & Associates, LTD. The draft estimated special benefit (or increase
in property values resulting from the availability of sewer) for the initial area was $13,289,000. A typical
project would proceed with a cost (or amount to be financed by an LID) within the range of 50%-75% of
the special benefit to provide economic incentive for property owners to participate in the project. For
this project, the range would be $6,645,000 to $10,000,000 to be financed by the LID. In order to meet
this test, either the amount of the collection system to be financed would need to be reduced or the
property values increased in relation to the project cost (over which only the "market" has influence).
Obtaining grants would reduce the amount to be financed.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 10
In order to bring the costs into a more affordable range, the County has estimated that $21 million in
additional grants will be required. $12 million are necessary to bring the LID assessments into a feasible
range and the remaining grant would be applied to the common and shared facilities. Table 6
demonstrates costs per connection could be reduced to $7,400 per ERU plus on-site costs if $21 million
in additional grants is obtained.
Table 6: Estimated Cost per ERU with $21 Million in Additional Grants
CONNECTION CHARGE + LID ASSESSMENT FOR CORE + RHODY I Future Grants = $21,000,000
This alternative reflects LID Assessment Available with Special Benefits Studv in 2014.
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
Subtotal
Initial Capacity ERUs
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
b. + LID Assessment
Initial Collection System Costs
Establish LID (20% of assumed $6,400,000 LID)
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
Subtotal 20 -Year Collection System Cost
Core & Rhody Drive 20 -Year ERUs
b. LID Assessment paid over
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
AFFORDABILITY
$3,370,000
$19,486,000
$782,000
-$3,394,987
-$9,000,000
$11,243,013
2,482
$4,600 per ERU
$17,298,000
$1,060,000
$12,000,000
$6,358,000
2,272
800 per ERU
r ERU + On -Site Costs
Each funding program uses its own measure to determine affordability and hardship. The primary
programs have begun working together to come to common use of measures where possible. The
median household income (MHI) is a fairly common measure for determining affordability of a sewer
system. The typical measure is that sewer costs of approximately 2% of median household income on a
monthly basis are considered affordable. The sewer costs would include the connection fees, LID
assessment and monthly sewer rates. This is very difficult to achieve for a new system and is why most
funding programs have some form of recognizing hardship and providing assistance:
• PWTF had a lower interest rate and a longer repayment period
• The Department of Ecology has lower interest rates and potential for a grant portion (up to
$5 million)
• USDA -Rural Development has lower interest rates and adjusts the grant portion of the offer
• The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has its own hardship requirement.
Washington State Office of Financial Management estimates median household income for the state and
counties. For projected 2014, the most recent available, Washington State annual MHI is shown as
$58,686 (1% increase from 2012). Jefferson County MHI is shown as $48,189 (a 4% decrease from 2012)
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 11
per year or $4,016 per month. At 2%, the sewer cost would need to be approximately $80.00 per
month. The County would need substantial grant funding to bring the new system costs in at an
affordable level (using the above measures of affordability) and will be seeking to attract grants to assist
in this effort.
The Department of Ecology publishes a median household income table as part of its funding guidelines
each year. This includes the American Community Survey (ACS) data that is based on the June 2014
5 -year estimate. The Port Hadlock/Irondale census -designated place is shown with annual MHI of
$30,775, 2% at $616 or monthly 2% at $51.00. In the same table, Washington State is shown with annual
MHI of $59,374. In the two years since 2012, Washington State has increased 1 percent and Port
Hadlock/Irondale has decreased 4 percent.
While the numbers vary by source, it is clear that Jefferson County, and particularly the Port
Hadlock/Irondale area, has lower MHI than the Washington State average. Table 7 summarizes the
comparison of MHI to Washington State for the two published sources.
Table 7: Compare MHI to Washington State
Office of Financial Management Department of Ecology App L
Annual Median Household Income 2014 ACS Jun14
Washington State $58,686 $59,374
Jefferson County $48,189
Port Hadlock/Irondale census designated place $30,775
Percentage of State MHI 82.1% 51.8%
USDA -Rural Development also considers MHI in determining the mix of grant to loan. The ACS data in
Table 7 is acceptable. If a community does not feel that the ACS data properly reflects its community, it
may conduct an income survey performed by an independent third party. If an income survey is
performed, the result must be used instead of the ACS data.
In order to qualify for CDBG, an income survey has been required in the project area, to be conducted by
a third -party. With the American Community Survey data on-line following the 2010 Census, it is
possible that some published data may be acceptable. Any pre -requisites should be coordinated with
the CDBG program staff prior to beginning a survey effort.
SOURCES OF CONSTRUCTION FUNDING
State and Federal Appropriations
Jefferson County has been working with state legislators to attempt to acquire a state appropriation to
help reduce the cost of the system to residents. With the current state budget issues, this is not easy to
accomplish and the County is continuing its efforts. The County has also been attempting to acquire
another federal appropriation and is finding that the federal budget issues have reduced the
opportunities. The County will continue these efforts as well.
Key Funding Programs
With state and federal budget challenges, the typical funding programs have experienced a reduction in
the capital available to grant and loan. Each program requires that the project come in at the
appropriate time and attempt to fit into the program's parameters. If the fit is not there, then the
County will wait for the next year or two-year period to fit in. The key programs include:
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 12
• Public Works Trust Fund (PWTR current funding partner—The County has obtained one low-
interest loan from this program for $10 million at 0.5% interest over 20 years. A five-year
deferral is provided for a new system to allow time to construct the system before debt
repayment begins. The PWTF program has been undergoing changes in the legislature, and the
2014 list that included an additional loan for this project was not funded. It appears that the
interest rates have been increased to be 60% of the interest rate on bonds (approximately 2.7%).
The annual or biennial rounds are typically open with applications due by May. The PWTF Board
develops a draft list in August to be forwarded to the legislature. Funds are available the
following July, assuming the legislature passes the bill. This program is currently on a funding
hiatus, subject to future state legislative action.
• Department of Ecology Water Quality Assistance, current funding partner—The application cycle
is once per year, with applications due by the end of October and funds available the following
July. In order to apply for construction funding, the County must have Ecology -approved plans
and specs. (The County has obtained Ecology approval for the WWTF and reuse facilities and
would need to complete design and obtain approval for the collection system. Depending on
how long the funding pursuit lasts, some approval areas may need to be revisited). Ecology uses
an interest rate and grant continuum to assist in funding hardship communities. The higher the
level of hardship, the lower the interest rate:
• The non -hardship interest rate is 60% of the bond market rate each year; 2016 loans are
at 2.4% for 20 years.
• Moderate hardship (2% to 3% MHI) is 1.6% interest.
• Elevated hardship (3% to 5% MHI) is 0.8% interest.
• Severe hardship (5%+ MHI) is 0.0% interest.
A maximum grant of $5 million is available for hardship projects. So far, 30 -year repayments
have not been allowed but have been discussed as potential. Additional principal forgiveness
may be available for green projects, possibly in the $500,000 to $1,000,000 range.
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)—This federally funded program has seen
reductions in recent years. It may still be possible to apply for up to $1 million to help reduce the
cost to the lowest income residents connecting in the initial phase. The County must prioritize
this project in order to apply for and use the funding. The application would be through the
Department of Commerce at the State of Washington. An income survey would likely be
required in order to apply and would take some time to complete.
• U.S. Department of Agriculture -Rural Development, current funding partner—This federally
funded program is already a funding partner and is tracking the project to be a partner in the
construction of the system. The state allocation is typically about $5 million in grants and
$21 million in loans per year. The state has been successful in obtaining more than its share
from the national office for good projects, such as this one. The split would likely be 25% grant
and 75% loan with up to 40 -year repayment. The grant is the last portion of funding to be used
for construction. The current interest rate for intermediate hardship communities is 2.75%
(adjusted every quarter). There is an open application process that does not have an annual cut-
off. It is assumed that this application would be prepared and submitted at the same time as for
other construction funding and the programs would work together.
• USDA—Community Programs—There is a grant program specific to connection charges for
income qualified low-income property owners. The property owner would apply directly to the
program.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 13
Washington State Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB)—The CERB program could
be used to supplement a grant of up to $1 million if funds are available. This program focuses on
economic development and job creation and retention. A private partner would likely need to
sign a letter of commitment to the number of jobs.
SEWER OPERATING BUDGET
Once the system is constructed, the sewer utility will need to manage and operate the system. An
estimated sewer operating budget has been developed based on the annual O&M cost projections from
Tetra Tech. Other elements have been added, including billing, state taxes and administration. A
reserve fund for emergencies and future capital also must be built up over time.
Estimated Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs
Tetra Tech estimated the annual O&M costs for each year based on the anticipated facilities in service,
flow and ERUs connected for the 20 -year planning period. Tetra Tech also prepared a version for the
initial system (Core + Rhody Drive area and Pause). This did not change the initial costs because there
was no change in the initial facilities. The labor estimate of 1.24 full time equivalent (FTE) staff members
reflects the level of effort necessary to complete the recommended O&M tasks (appropriate for
contracting for services). Based on operating experience from other small wastewater treatment
facilities in the area, Jefferson County was more comfortable with 2.0 FTEs if operating the new system,
to ensure coverage of the key certified operator positions. Table 8 summarizes the annual costs.
Table 8: Estimated Annual O&M Costs
Port Hadlock Sewer O&M Program
Annual Cost
Operations & Maintenance
Labor - FTE = 2.0
$187,000
Other Annual O&M Costs
$111,900
Total Annual O&M Costs (unescalated)
$298,900
Alternative Operations & Maintenance
Labor - FTE = 1.24 + growth
$116,500
Other Annual O&M Costs
$111,900
Total Annual O&M Costs (unescalated)
$228,400
Other annual O&M costs, including, power, chemicals, biosolids handling, and supplies, are included in
the estimated annual O&M costs. An allowance for membrane replacement is also considered an annual
cost in this analysis. Appendix E provides more details on the O&M costs.
Initial Sewer Operating Budget
The financial plan treats the capital costs related to construction of the sewer facilities as separate from
the annual operating costs of running the utility from day to day. The sewer operating budget includes
operations and maintenance, billing, state taxes and administration, contributions to a replacement fund
for short-lived assets and building a reserve for emergencies and future expansion of the sewer
treatment facilities. Table 9 shows the initial sewer operating budget at $621,000, or $87.00 per ERU per
month based on 599 ERUs. See Appendix E.2 for further information about the operating budget.
Tetra Tech estimated short-lived assets that would need to be replaced in spans of 1 to 5 years, 6 to 10
years and 11 to 15 years. Like the annual O&M, the cost of replacing the equipment, etc. was converted
to a cost per ERU. A cost was determined for each 5 -year interval and added together for a total of
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 14
$9.83. This was rounded up to $10.00 per ERU. The short-lived asset calculations are included in
Appendix D.
The emergency reserve is assumed to be built up over a number of years at $50,000 per year.
Table 9: Initial Sewer Operating Budget
Initial Monthly Sewer Rate
The initial monthly sewer rate is estimated to be $87.00 per ERU based on the estimated operating
budget of $620,850 shown in Table 9.
The estimates and allowances contained in the 2008 Facility Plan (totaling $60.00 per ERU per month)
have been updated to reflect an estimated initial sewer operating budget following a review of the
Mason County Belfair Sewer Program and typical Jefferson County indirect and interdepartmental
charges, as seen with the Solid Waste utility. The current estimate of $87.00 per ERU per month is less
than other new systems (Belfair is $96.00 per ERU per month with the County funding debt payments)
but is higher than some methods of determining affordability. These measures should be clearly
discussed with potential funding sources to be sure all are of a common understanding before
proceeding. Grants are not generally available for annual operating budget costs. The following
alternatives are available for the County's consideration in order to reduce the sewer program costs to a
more affordable level:
Contract for operations and maintenance services to reduce the operator staffing to the levels
estimated by Tetra Tech. Options include Jefferson County PUD; Water & Wastewater Services,
LLC, which provides contract services to Fort Flagler State Park wastewater treatment plant;
West Sound Utility District, which has offered services in past years; and others that may be
qualified and available.
Contract for billing and receipting with Jefferson County PUD. A cost estimate has not been
obtained to determine how the costs might compare. Certain details would need to be
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 15
Monthly Cost per
Port Hadlock Annual Sewer Program
Initial Budget
ERU
Operations & Maintenance
Labor - FTE = 2.0
$187,000
Other Annual O&M Costs
$111,900
Total Annual O&M Costs (unescalated)
$298,900
$42.00
Administration/Billing/State Tax
Billing - Salary/Benes, 0.5 FTE
$28,750
Management & Accounting Management
$51,700
Communication/Travel/Advertising
$5,500
Insurance (Liability & Property)
$30,000
State Excise Tax
$14,000
Interfund Professional Service
$50,000
Professional Services/Consulting
$20,000
Subtotal Administration
$199,950
$28.00
Short -Lived Assets
$72,000
$10.00
Build up Emergency Reserve
$50,000
$7.00
Estimated Operating Budget
$620,850
$87.00
Initial Monthly Sewer Rate
The initial monthly sewer rate is estimated to be $87.00 per ERU based on the estimated operating
budget of $620,850 shown in Table 9.
The estimates and allowances contained in the 2008 Facility Plan (totaling $60.00 per ERU per month)
have been updated to reflect an estimated initial sewer operating budget following a review of the
Mason County Belfair Sewer Program and typical Jefferson County indirect and interdepartmental
charges, as seen with the Solid Waste utility. The current estimate of $87.00 per ERU per month is less
than other new systems (Belfair is $96.00 per ERU per month with the County funding debt payments)
but is higher than some methods of determining affordability. These measures should be clearly
discussed with potential funding sources to be sure all are of a common understanding before
proceeding. Grants are not generally available for annual operating budget costs. The following
alternatives are available for the County's consideration in order to reduce the sewer program costs to a
more affordable level:
Contract for operations and maintenance services to reduce the operator staffing to the levels
estimated by Tetra Tech. Options include Jefferson County PUD; Water & Wastewater Services,
LLC, which provides contract services to Fort Flagler State Park wastewater treatment plant;
West Sound Utility District, which has offered services in past years; and others that may be
qualified and available.
Contract for billing and receipting with Jefferson County PUD. A cost estimate has not been
obtained to determine how the costs might compare. Certain details would need to be
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 15
negotiated, including collections of past due accounts. Jefferson County will be responsible for
making debt repayment.
At a point in the growth of the utility, a minimum emergency fund balance should be established and the
rest would be available for expanding the sewer treatment system or funding debt service associated
with the expansion. A rate study should be planned for 3 to 5 years into operations to review and
update the rates, reserves and financial plan.
The sewer reserve is not planned to fund any collection system expansion. Instead, the sewer collection
system or sewer lines will be expanded by future local improvement districts or developer extensions.
20 -Year Cash Flow Test
The 20 -year projected cash flow has been updated to reflect current estimates of funds flowing into and
out of the sewer fund. Two alternatives are provided in Appendix H with grants of $21 million:
• With Funding Program Grants ($10 million) and Loans ($20.7 million) + State/Federal
Appropriations ($11 million)—Appendix H.1. includes funding program grants of $5 million from
Ecology and $5 million from USDA -RD, with $11 million in additional grants from either state or
federal appropriations. In addition to using the existing PWTF loan ($8.3 million available), the
initial phase would require total loans of $20.7 million with borrowing the initial on-site costs
($2.7 million) to provide incentive for initial connections. This scenario includes formation of an
LID for $7 million.
• With State/Federal Appropriations ($21 million) and borrowing ($18 million)—Appendix H.2.
shows the projected cash flow with an additional $21 million in either state or federal
appropriations and a total of $18 million in borrowing, including the existing $8.3 million from
the existing PWTF loan. This assumes that an LID will not be formed and the County will not
borrow for the on-site costs.
These alternatives are provided to demonstrate the variety of funding opportunities that may be
available. Additional PWTF loans may or may not be available, depending on actions in the legislature.
One test assumed funding only from funding programs, including $10 million in grants ($5 million from
Ecology and $5 million from USDA -RD). The program grants in addition to the existing PWTF loan are not
sufficient to fund the initial phase, therefore this scenario is not included.
CONCLUSION
The funding of this project is a major undertaking that will require piecing together a financing package
from various sources. When doing so, the County should consider the ongoing administrative burden of
managing several funding sources. The 20 -year cash flow examples in Appendix H include splitting the
funding sources by the major system elements (general, local and on-site). Two alternatives are
provided to demonstrate the variety of funding opportunities that may be available. Additional PWTF
loans may or may not be available, depending on actions in the state legislature. The other alternatives
include the following:
a) Use the existing $10 million PWTF loan and take advantage of funding assistance program grants
(estimated to be $5 million from Ecology and $5 million from USDA -RD) to help make the project
affordable to the community. The remainder would be financed by loans from the same
programs. Even with the programmatic grants ($10 million), an additional $11 million is needed
from federal/state appropriations to establish a reasonable connection charge and an affordable
LID (total grants equal to $21 million).
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 16
b) Attempt to finance without forming an LID by selling general obligation bonds ($10.8 million),
use the existing PWTF ($8.3 million) and appropriations/grants totaling $21 million. This would
eliminate the difficulty and cost of forming an LID but would require higher connection fees or
monthly fees to cover bond payback.
c) Supplement the examples by applying to CDBG for a $1 million grant to help reduce the cost for
the lowest income residents.
d) Continue monitoring grant programs for potential new sources or the return of the State and
Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program.
e) Continue the pursuit of state and federal appropriations.
Once connected to the system, it is estimated that monthly rates for ongoing operations would be
$87.00 per equivalent residence. Other properties (commercial and industrial) would calculate the
number of ERUs by dividing their monthly water usage by 4,000 gallons. It may be possible to reduce this
cost by contracting or sharing services.
In order to keep up with the interest on the financing package, it will be important to adjust the
connection charges each year in the future. The County will also have 210 additional ERUs beyond those
estimated to be needed for the initial phase area that can be sold to properties that require more
sewage service, used to accommodate developer extensions that may wish to connect, or for additional
LIDS. After 210 ERUs, a major expansion of the treatment facilities will be required.
A commentabautERUs—This plan is based on an assumption of how many and when ERUs will
connect. This is especially critical in regard to the revenue (how quickly it is received) and the costs per
ERU (how much). A cash flow model is available in Appendix H. There are currently 599 ERUs estimated
in the initial Core and Rhody area. The cash flow model makes assumptions about the rate of additional
connections each year (about 10% increase per year). A slower than predicted connection rate could
result in a revenue shortfall, necessitating increased rates or subsidies from other sources to cover the
deficit.
A potential shortfall in the number of connections could require an interfund loan or some mechanism
to meet the debt repayment. However, the initial operating budget was divided by 599 ERUs to
determine the monthly fee of $87.00 per ERU. Additional customers would bring down the cost per ERU
and help cover inflation during the first six years. The rates should be reviewed annually with the budget
process.
The County will also need to adopt policies and procedures to administer the sewer utility, including the
definition of assigning ERUs to multifamily residential, multi -unit commercial and higher strength
commercial customers.
Given this updated financial plan, it is recommended that Jefferson County convene a meeting of the
financial Tech Team (established at the Infrastructure Assistance Coordinating Council conferences) to
discuss the County's options for moving forward. The Tech Team is led by Peter McMillin of USDA -RD
and includes representatives from PWTF, Ecology, CDBG, CERB, Growth Management and other relevant
funding assistance programs.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page 17
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Additional Funding Needed for Construction of Initial Phase—Includes the initial capital
costs with construction management, the funding secured to date, and additional funding needed for
construction of the initial phase Core and Rhody Drive areas.
APPENDIX B. Sharing Capital Costs—This appendix details two alternatives for sharing the costs of
constructing a new sewer system: B.1 Without Additional Grants; and B.2 With $21 Million in Additional
Grants. Each page shows:
Capital costs spread over the full 20 -year connections (this does not fit the initial Core + Rhody
and pause scenario)
Initial capital costs spread over the ERUs for Core + Rhody Drive areas (includes connection
charge + LID assessment)
Initial capital costs spread for Core + Rhody Drive areas (all costs in the connection charge, no
LID).
APPENDIX C. Potential Impact on Sample Property Types—Appendix C.1 identifies the potential impact
on a variety of sample property types in the Core & Rhody Drive areas based on the project budget,
additional grants to be obtained, connection charge and range of special benefits. Because the
assessments can be paid over a number of years, Appendix C.2 demonstrates the estimated annual
payments for a variety of sample assessment amounts.
APPENDIX D. Short -Lived Assets— This appendix presents the analysis of short-lived asset replacement
provided by Tetra Tech.
APPENDIX E. Annual O&M Costs—E.1 includes the 20 -year estimated annual operations and
maintenance costs by Tetra Tech. E.2 includes the difference in cost between 1.24 FTE vs. 2.0 FTE.
E.3 shows the estimated O&M costs for the initial phase Core and Rhody Drive areas.
APPENDIX F. Estimated Sewer Program and Monthly Rate per ERU—The table and graphic
demonstrate the portion of the sewer program for O&M, billing/state tax/administration, replacement
for short- lived assets and emergency reserve. The monthly rates do not include debt service.
APPENDIX G. Estimated PWTF Debt Payments—A debt schedule is estimated for the existing $10 million
PWTF Loan and the alternative of borrowing only $1.7 million to complete the local match for the EPA
grant and 10% design on the collection system.
APPENDIX H. 20 -Year Sewer Outlook—Two alternatives are provided for funding the initial phase of Core
and Rhody Drive areas:
H.1. Use funding programs for grants ($10 million) & loans ($20.7 million) + add $11 million
state/federal appropriations for total additional grants = $21 million
H.2. Assume no LID, additional state/federal appropriations ($21 million), existing PWTF loan
($8.3 million) and general obligation bonds ($10.8 million). No borrowing for initial on-site costs.
These alternatives are provided to demonstrate the variety of funding opportunities that may be
available. Additional PWTF loans may or may not be available depending on actions in the legislature.
APPENDIX I. Map of Initial Phase (Core & Rhody Drive areas)
APPENDIX J. Recent Contractor Costs for On -Site Connections
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-1
APPENDIX A. Additional Funding Needed for Construction of Initial Phase
ESTIMATE AT 100% DESIGN WWTF,10% DESIGN COLLECTION SYSTEM
UPDATED COSTS ($2014)
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS (excludes Facility Plan and previous planning/UGA efforts)
Preliminary/Other
Land Acquisition
$1,400,000
Completed
Environmental/Cultural Review
$276,000
Completed
Permitting
$60,000
Completed
Other Preliminary (fund, public involvement, etc.) 30%
$316,000
Completed
Public involvement/information
$73,000
Ongoing
Other (Value Engineering/LID/Legal)
$500,000
Ongoing
County Project Administration
$525,000
Ongoing
Utility Operations Startup
$220,000
Subtotal Preliminary
$3,370,000
Water Reclamation & Pipeline - Common
Construction 1
$15,496,000
Design: 30%
$500,000
Completed
Design: final & bid documents
$1,785,000
Completed
Project Restart @ 1%
$155,000
Construction Management @ 10%
$1,550,000
Subtotal Common
$19,486,000
Future Storage and UV3 to complete initial capacity
$782,000
Year 6
Total Common Facilities (Treatment, Reuse & Pipeline)
$23,638,000
Initial Collection System: Core & Rhody
Construction z
$13,818,000
Land Acquisition for Pump Stations
$25,000
Design @ 15%
$2,073,000
Construction Management @ 10%
$1,382,000
Establish LID (20% of assumed $8,000,000 LID)'
$1,600,000
Subtotal Initial Collection System
$18,898,000
Total System w/Initial Collection System
$42,536,000
Option: Include Initial Side Sewer Cost 3
$2,675,000
Total Project Cost
$45,211,000
LESS: FUNDING IN HAND
$13,394,987
Additional Funding Needed
$31,816,013
Funding Needed with Initial Side Sewer (Rounded)
$31,900,000
1 Tetra Tech Water Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline 100% Cost Estimate 12-30-2013 ENR Adjusted
2. Tetra Tech 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Core and Rhody Drive Collection
System includes
A. mainline sewers in right-of-way and pump stations
B. service laterals in right-of-way.
3. Tetra Tech 10% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Core and Rhody Drive Collection
System includes
C. Service Connection on Private Property.
4. The LID is assumed to be able to accommodate $8,000,000 based on 60% of special
benefit. The cost to establish
an LID includes
a required 10% guaranty fund, 6.5% allowance for interim interest & financing, and
3.5% allowance for final
bond financing costs
(total 20% of LID -financed construction).
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-2
FUNDING SECURED TO DATE
Source Amount
GRANT
WA Dept. of Ecology Reclaimed Water Grant $197,797 Preliminary design 30%
USDA -RD Predevelopment $25,000 National Environmental Protection Act compliance
SAAP Federal Appropriation (EPA Admin) $970,000 2010 federal appropriation toward design
Subtotal Grant $1,192,797
AL
LOCAL
2011 LTGO Bond Issue to be repaid by Rural Co. $2,202,190 45% local match for SAAP & portion land acquisition, .09 Rural
Sales Tax (PIF Fund) Co Sales Tax sunsets in 2027
Subtotal Local $2,202,190
LOAN -
2011 PWTF loan $10,000,000 Other preliminary, land acquisition, begin construction
Subtotal Loan $10,000,000 Approx. $1.7 million used through 2014
TOTAL FUNDING TO DATE $13,394,987
LTGO = Limited -tax general obligation SAAP = Special Appropriation Act Projects (EPA grant program)
PIF = Public Infrastructure Fund USDA -RD = U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development
PWTF = Public Works Trust Fund program
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-3
APPENDIX B.1. Sharing Capital Costs—No Additional Grants
Port Hadlock UGA Wastewater Treatment UPDATED 10/12/15
FUNDING ALTERNATIVES FOR CAPITAL COSTS' GRANTS = SO
1 CONNECTION CHARGES FOR COMMON & SHARED TREATMENT/REUSE FACILITIES + LID FOR COLLECTION
This alternative divides all 20 -year costs by all 20 -year ERU's
This alternative divides the initial Phase 1 system costs by the initial Core+Rhody ERU's
a. 20 -year costs / 20 -year ERU's
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Water Reclamation & Pipeline- Common
$19,486,000
Future Water Reclamation Facilities
$12,198,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
$31,659,013
20 -Year ERU's
4201
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$7,600 per ERU
b. + LID Assessment
to be determined by individual phase
20 -year Collection System Costs
$51,088,096
Establish Multiple LID's
$4,904,000
Subtotal 20 -year Collection System Cost
$55,992,096
20 -Year ERU's
4201
b. LID Assessment paid over 20 -years
$13,400 per ERU
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
$21,000 per ERU + On -Site Costs
2 CONNECTION CHARGE + LID ASSESSMENT FOR CORE+RHODY
This alternative divides the initial Phase 1 system costs by the initial Core+Rhody ERU's
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
$19,486,000
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)z
$782,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
$20,243,013
Initial Capacity ERU's 2482
$37,541,013
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$8,200 per ERU
b. + LID Assessment
$16,500 per ERU + On -Site Costs
Initial Collection System Costs
$17,298,000
Establish LID (20% of assumed $8,000,000 LID)
$1,600,000
Subtotal 20 -year Collection System Cost
$18,898,000
Core & Rhody Drive 20 -Year ERU's 2272
b. LID Assessment paid over 20 -years
$8,400 per ERU
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
$16,600 per ERU + On -Site Costs
3 ALL IN CONNECTION CHARGE FOR CORE+RHODY (NO LID)
This alternative assumes initial costs are divided by Core+Rhody ERU's for connection charges. There is No LID.
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
$19,486,000
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)z
$782,000
Initial Collection System Costs
$17,298,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
$37,541,013
Core+RhodyERU's 2272
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$16,500 per ERU + On -Site Costs
1 All costs are shown in 2014 dollars. This assumes that all connection charges would increase each year to reflect
cost escalation to be sure that future facilities costs would be covered.
z The County would have an option to fund the future facilities improvements (3 -day storage and UV -3 total $782,000)
through rates. The above scenarios include those costs in the connection charges.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-4
APPENDIX B.2. Sharing Capital Costs—With $21 Million Additional Grants
Port Hadlock UGA Wastewater Treatment UPDATED 10/12/15
FUNDING ALTERNATIVES FOR CAPITAL COSTSI GRANTS = 521.000.000
1 CONNECTION CHARGES FOR COMMON & SHARED TREATMENT/REUSE FACILITIES + LID FOR COLLECTION
This alternative divides all 20 -year costs by all 20 -year ERU's
This alternative divides the initial Phase 1 system costs by the initial
a. 20 -year costs / 20 -year ERU's
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Water Reclamation & Pipeline - Common
$19,486,000
Future Water Reclamation Facilities
$12,198,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
-$3,394,987
$31,659,013
20 -Year ERU's 4201
-$21,000,000
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$7,600 per ERU
b. + LID Assessment
to be determined by individual phase
20 -year Collection System Costs
$51,088,096
Establish Multiple LID's
$4,904,000
Subtotal 20 -year Collection System Cost
$55,992,096
20 -Year ERU's 4201
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
b. LID Assessment paid over 20 -years
$13,400 per ERU
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
-$5,000 -$21,000,000
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
$16,000 per ERU + On -Site Costs
2 CONNECTION CHARGE + LID ASSESSMENT FOR CORE+RHODY
This alternative divides the initial Phase 1 system costs by the initial
Core+Rhody ERU's
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
$19,486,000
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)Z
$782,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
-$9,000,000
-$21,000,000
$11,243,013
Initial Capacity ERU's 2482
Core+RhodyERU's 2272
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$4,600 per ERU
b. + LID Assessment
Initial Collection System Costs
$17,298,000
Establish LID (20% of assumed $6,400,000 LID)
$1,060,000
Less: FUTURE GRANT FUNDING
-$12,000,000
Subtotal 20 -year Collection System Cost
$6,358,000
Core & Rhody Drive 20 -Year ERU's 2272
b. LID Assessment paid over 20 -years
$2,800 per ERU
c. Connection Charge + LID Assessment this Scenario
$7,400 per ERU + On -Site Costs
3 ALL IN CONNECTION CHARGE FOR CORE+RHODY (NO LID)Z
This alternative assumes initial costs are divided by Core+Rhody ERU's for connection charges. There is No LID.
a. Initial Common & Shared Costs
Preliminary/Other
$3,370,000
Common/Shared Treatment/Reclamation Facilities
$19,486,000
Future to Meet Capacity (3 -day storage, UV -3)z
$782,000
Initial Collection System Costs
$17,298,000
Less: Existing Grants & Local PIF Funding
-$3,394,987
- GRANT FUNDED
-$21,000,000
$16,541,013
Core+RhodyERU's 2272
a. Connection Charge due upon connecting
$7,300 per ERU + On -Site Costs
1 All costs are shown in 2014 dollars. This assumes that all connection charges would increase each year to reflect
cost escalation to be sure that future facilities costs would be covered.
Z The County would have an option to fund the future facilities improvements (3 -day storage and UV -3 total $782,000)
through rates. The above scendarios include those costs in the connection charges.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-5
APPENDIX C.1. Potential Impact on Sample Property Types
This collaboration between KI&A and Jefferson County was to identify the potential impact on a variety of sample property types based on the project budget, additional grants,
connection charge and ranges of special benefits. The property type samples below are based on the scenario where Total Assessments = $6,358,000 + Connection Charge =
$4,600 per ERU + On-site depends on the individual property.
SUMMARY
Port Hadlock UGA Wastewater Treatment - Initial LID Property Examples
Estimated Collection System Project Cost to be funded by grants & LID
ALLPROPERTIES WITHIN THE ND WILLRECEIVE AN ASSESSMENT- TO BE PAID OVER 20 YEARS + CONNECTION CHARGES ARE PAID WHEN CONNECTING TO SEWER + ON-SITE COSTS
Additional Grant Toward Common & Shared = $9,000,000
I TT_in_n�ner FRIT
ERU's for
Connection
Charge
Additional Grant Toward Initial Collection System =$12,000,000
Based on existing water
meters & water usage
11
Total UD Assessments this Scenario
$6,358,000
2
$9,200
1 meter
Property Use
Example Properties
Estimated
Assessment - Pay
Over 20 Years
1 Restaurant 1
large Restaurant property @ 62,000 sq it lot size
$28,700
2 Restaurant 2
Small Restaurant property @ 16,000 sq ft lot size
$7,200
3 Restaurant 3
large Restaurant property @ 54,000 sq ft lot size
$19,100
4 Restaurant 4
Small Restaurant property @ 13,000 sq ft lot size
$7,200
5 Grocery
large Grocery with parking @ 150,000 sq ft (multiple lots)
$169,800
6 Gas Station
Gas Station property @ 19,000 sq ft lot size
$7,200
7 laundry
laundry property @ 30,000 sq ft (2 lots)
$31,100
8 School
Primary School Campus @ 470,000 sq ft
$81,300
9 Library
Library Property @ 120,000 sq ft
$28,700
10 Building Supply etc.
Building Supply property @ 108,000 sq ft
$28,700
11 Building Supply etc.
Nursery property @ 17,000 sq ft
$7,200
12 Building Supply etc.
Lumber property @ 350,000 sq ft (2 lots)
$78,900
13 Building Supply etc.
Equipment Rental property @ 38,000 sq ft
$19,100
14 Vacant
Vacant property @ 30,000 sq ft, comm'I on highway
$28,700
15 Multiple Units
Small Motel (12 units)
$7,200
16 Multiple Units
Senior Housing Complex (32 units, 4 buildings)
$43,100
17 Multiple Units
Apartment Complex
$86,100
18 Mobile Home Park
Mobile Home Park @ 922,000 sq ft (75 units, 2lots)
$95,700
19 Business Park
Office/Business Park @ 100,000 sq ft
$47,800
20 Strip Mall
Small Strip Mall/Shopping (3 lots, 3 buildings)
$62,200
21 Professional Office
Medical/Dental/Vet property @ 8,000 sq ft
$7,200
22 Professional Office
Medical/Dental/Vet property @ 38,000 sq ft
$19,100
23 Auto Works
Auto Mechanic property @ 12,000 sq ft
$4,800
24 Auto Works
Auto Mechanic property @ 44,000 sq ft
$16,700
25 Auto Works
Auto Mechanic property @ 110,000 sq ft
$57,400
26 Residential - Sing Fam Single Family Res @ <15,D00 sq ft (Core RR -5 - UGA-C)
$7,200
27 Residential -Sing Fam Single Family Res @ <15,000 sq ft (Core RR -5 - UGA-C)
$12,000
28 Residential - Sing Fam Single Family Res @ 72,000 sq ft (Rhody RR -5 - UGA-LDR)
$14,400
29 Residential - Sing Fam Single Family Res @ 78,000 sq ft (Core RR -5 - UGA-MDR)
$23,900
30 Residential -Sing Fam Single Family Res @ 44,000 sq ft (Rhody RR -5 - UGA-C)
$28,700
Additional Grant Toward Common & Shared = $9,000,000
I TT_in_n�ner FRIT
ERU's for
Connection
Charge
Estimated
Connection
Charge
Based on existing water
meters & water usage
11
$50,600
1 meter
2
$9,200
1 meter
6
$27,600
1 meter
5
$23,000
1 meter
18
$82,800
1 meter
2
$9,200
1 meter
31
$142,600
2 meters
9
$41,400
1 meter
7
$32,200
2 meters
2
$9,200
1 meter
8
$36,800
1 meter
1
$4,600
1 meter
2
$9,200
1 meter
to be determined
no meter
2
$9,200
1 meter
6
$27,600
4meters
23
$105,800
1 meter
75
$345,000
1 meter
4
$18,400
1 meter
6
$27,600
3 meters
1
$4,600
1 meter
3
$13,800
1 meter
1
$4,600
1 meter
1
$4,600
1 meter
2
$9,200
1 meter
1
$4,600
per sing fam connection
1
$4,600
per sing fam connection
1
$4,600
per sing fam connection
1
$4,600
per sing fam connection
1
$4,600
persing fam connection
Questions to be clarified and discussed -
For multiple units -will ERU's be assigned per unit? 1 or less than 1 per unit? Connection charge is shown by water usage in this version
What will definition of single family and multiple units be -these are good examples above to think about
There can always be a different method of calculating connection charges and charging monthly bills
What about multiple unit commercial buildings -strip mall, business park, laundry has 2 lots 2 buildings and 2 meters
Onsite costs include
connecting the
building/home to the
sewer stub at the
property line. The
costs will vary by
property.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-6
APPENDIX C.2. Sample Annual Payments on Assessments
With an LID, the property owner has the choice to pay the assessment at the beginning with no interest, or over a
specified period of years with interest. The annual assessment amount including interest would be added to the
property tax statement each year year. The following table provides examples of the annual payments for a variety of
assessment amounts.
SAMPLE LID ASSESSMENT
ASSl1MPTIONS-
ANNUAL PAYMENTS 20
PAYMENTS PER YR 1
ANNUAL INTEREST 3.50%
EXAMPLES OF SAMPLE ASSESSMENTS & RELATED ANNUAL PAYMENTS
ASSESSMENT:
$4,800
$7,200
$12,000
$14,400
$28,700
YEAR 1
408
612
1,020
1,224
2,440
YEAR 2
400
599
999
1,199
2,389
YEAR 3
391
587
978
1,174
2,339
YEAR 4
383
574
957
1,148
2,289
YEAR 5
374
562
936
1,123
2,239
YEAR 6
366
549
915
1,098
2,188
YEAR 7
358
536
894
1,073
2,138
YEAR 8
349
524
873
1,048
2,088
YEAR 9
341
511
852
1,022
2,038
YEAR 10
332
499
831
997
1,987
YEAR 11
324
486
810
972
1,937
YEAR 12
316
473
789
947
1,887
YEAR 13
307
461
768
922
1,837
YEAR 14
299
448
747
896
1,787
YEAR 15
290
436
726
871
1,736
YEAR 16
282
423
705
846
1,686
YEAR 17
274
410
684
821
1,636
YEAR 18
265
398
663
796
1,586
YEAR 19
257
385
642
770
1,535
YEAR 20
248
373
621
745
1,485
TOTAL PAYMENTS
$6,564
$9,846
$16,410
$19,692
$39,247
CAUTION: This sample has been prepared for discussion purposes only and is not
intended to indicate what the actual interest rate or payments will be. The interest
rate will be determined by the market when project financing is complete and final.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-7
APPENDIX D. Short -Lived Asset Replacement Analysis (provided by Tetra Tech)
Subject: Estimated 20 -Year Cash Flow
Tt source file: 100% Cost Estimate 12-30-2013.ENRadjusted & S Liv Assets & 20yr cash
Date: 17 -Jan -14
Assume grinder pumps will be financial responsibility of affected properties - either through surcharge or direct replacement.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-8
Short Lived Asset Cost by Years
1 to
5 Year
5 to
10 Year
10 to 15 Year
Project Component
Base Cost
%
$
%
$
%
$
COLLECTION SYSTEM PUMP STATIONS
Pump Station 1
Pumps
$40,000
2%
$800
10%
$4,000
75%
$30,000
Valves
$20,000
$-
$-
10%
$2,000
Instruments, PLC & programming
$30,000
2%
$600
10%
$3,000
75%
$22,500
Generator
$50,000
2%
$1,000
10%
$5,000
75%
$37,500
Pump Station 2
Pumps
$30,000
2%
$600
10%
$3,000
75%
$22,500
Valves
$15,000
$-
$-
10%
$1,500
Instruments, PLC & programming
$25,000
2%
$500
10%
$2,500
75%
$18,750
Generator
$40,000
2%
$800
10%
$4,000
75%
$30,000
Pump Station 3
Pumps
$30,000
2%
$600
10%
$3,000
75%
$22,500
Valves
$15,000
$-
$-
10%
$1,500
Instruments, PLC & programming
$25,000
2%
$500
10%
$2,500
75%
$18,750
Generator
$40,000
2%
$800
10%
$4,000
75%
$30,000
Pump Station 4
Pumps
$30,000
0%
$-
2%
$600
10%
$3,000
Valves
$15,000
$-
$-
$_
Instruments, PLC & programming
$25,000
0%
$-
2%
$500
10%
$2,500
Generator
$40,000
0%
$-
2%
$800
10%
$4,000
TREATMENT PLANT
Influent Pump Station
Pumps
$50,596
2%
$1,012
10%
$5,060
75%
$37,947
Valves
$22,096
$-
$-
10%
$2,210
Sampler
$4,125
2%
$83
10%
$413
100%
$4,125
Instruments
$34,090
2%
$682
10%
$3,409
75%
$25,568
Headworks
Odor control
$67,550
$-
10%
$6,755
75%
$50,663
Gates
$23,200
$-
2%
$464
5%
$1,160
Screens
$300,000
2%
$6,000
10%
$30,000
75%
$225,000
Sampler
$6,819
2%
$136
10%
$682
75%
$5,114
Instruments
18,600
2%
$372
10%
$1,860
75%
$13,950
Admin Building
furniture
$27,304
2%
$546
10%
$2,730
75%
$20,478
HVAC: furnace, fans, heat pump
$12,359
2%
$247
10%
$1,236
75%
$9,269
Plumbing fixtures
$23,112
$-
5%
$1,156
50%
$11,556
Lab equipment
$59,740
2%
$1,195
10%
$5,974
75%
$44,805
Instruments, PC & programming
$72,650
2%
$1,453
10%
$7,265
75%
$54,488
reatment Facility
HVAC: furnace, fans, heat pump
$17,281
2%
$346
10%
$1,728
75%
$12,961
Plumbing fixtures
$5,360
$-
5%
$268
50%
$2,680
MBR equipment, excluding membranes
$1,538,747
1%
$15,387
5%
$76,937
50%
$769,374
Feed forward pumps
$9,000
2%
$180
10%
$900
75%
$6,750
Gates
$38,000
$-
$-
10%
$3,800
Monorail hoist & davit cranes
$22,800
$-
5%
$1,140
50%
$11,400
UV equipment
$166,000
2%
$3,320
10%
$16,600
75%
$124,500
C3 pumps
$58,179
2%
$1,164
10%
$5,818
75%
$43,634
Valves
$72,050
$-
$-
10%
$7,205
Sampler
$6,819
2%
$136
10%
$682
75%
$5,114
Chemical system
$3,048
2%
$61
10%
$305
75%
$2,286
Instruments PLC & programming
$61,820
2%
$1,236
10%
$6,182
75%
$46,365
Site
Generator
$206,900
2%
$4,138
10%
$20,690
75%
$155,175
TOTAL 01111111111111
$3,398,245
Max interval duration (years)
5
10
15
Year for ERUs
3
8
13
TOTAL
$43,894
$231,153
$1,944,575
NNUAL (divide by maximum interval duration)
$8,779
$23,115
$129,638
ERUs in midpoint of interval
776
1480
2825
Cost/ERU/ Mo
$4.71
$1.30
$ 3.82
Total Cost/ERU/Mo
$9.83
otal Cost/ERU/Mo (Rounded)
$10
Subject: Estimated 20 -Year Cash Flow
Tt source file: 100% Cost Estimate 12-30-2013.ENRadjusted & S Liv Assets & 20yr cash
Date: 17 -Jan -14
Assume grinder pumps will be financial responsibility of affected properties - either through surcharge or direct replacement.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-8
APPENDIX E.I. Annual O&M Costs -20 -Year Plan (provided by Tetra Tech)
Jefferson County Port Hadlock Wastewater System
Sewer Operating Budget
Prepared by Katy Isaksen & Associates _
This version of estimated Sewer Utility operating costs is a combination of Tetra Tech estimates for O&M and sh,maived assets, administration estimates by KI&A based on typical utility costa and V.- based on Jefferson County cost allocation. Versions indude O&M beginning with 1.24 FTEs and building
each year as connections and flow increase (would be typical for mritmrting/shared service) OR O&M begins with 2.0 FTE and remains ur til the need to increase (more likely for a G -y department). For discussion purposes, the 2.0 FTE version is compared for the 20 -year Facility Plan ERUs and for Core+
Rhody Only. Both scenarios have the same start-up costs and ERUs and would grew for increased connections/flow and inflation (not shown in this version).
Two Scenarios are provided:
-20-Year Facility Plan, Rows 131-158
-Care+Rhody, Rows 183-203
NNUAL COSTS - WWTF
Power
Labor
Replace - parts
Lab Supplies
Chemicals
eiosolid, hauling, treatmer¢ and tipping fee
Total annual W WTF costs
NNUAL COSTS-COLLFCNON SYSTEM
Power
Labor
Grinder Pump Casts
supplies
CCN & cleaning
Total Annual Cdlecdon system costs
NNUAL COSTS -TOTAL
$17,144
$17,836
$18,599
$19,467
$107,227
$110,921
$114,640
$118,389
$17,404
$17,404
$17,404
$17,404
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$3,580
$4,100
$4,660
$5,310
$56,61
64422
$73,311
$83,427
$211,966
$220.682
$238,614
$253,996
$609
$710
$1,156
$1,339
$9,180
$9,180
$9,180
$12,240
$2,040
$2,880
$3,720
$4,560
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$6,000
Lo
i
i
i
$16,329
$17,270
$18,556
$24,139
$228,294
$241,953
$257,170
$278,135
$20,455
$21,579
$22,864
$24,320
$25,977
$28,500
$31,027
$35,137
$38,411
$42,135
$46,338
$46,432
$47,397
$48,390
$49,410
$122,170
$125,988
$129,849
$133,758
$137,723
$141,848
$146,298
$153,218
$157,946
$166,442
$170,559
$174,278
$178,126
$181,983
$185,850
$17,404
$17,404
$17,404
$17,404
$50,404
$50,618
$51,393
$52,276
$53,280
$21,422
$37,722
$37,747
$38,013
$38,348
$56,661
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$6,040
$6,870
$7,820
$8,900
$10,130
$11,520
$13,110
$14,920
$16,980
$19,330
$21,990
$22,040
$22,650
$23,280
$23,920
$94,939
$108,039
$122,947
$139,912
$159,218
$181,188
$2M,189
$234,(A
267 017
$303,862
$304,564
$312,967
$321,W2
$330,475
$339,593
$271,007
$289,880
$310,883
$334,294
$393,451
$423,673
$458,018
$500,191
$543,634
$563,191
$591,173
$603,464
$617,818
$632,476
$665,433
$1,521
$1,704
$1,886
$2,069
$2,251
$2,434
$2,616
$2,799
$2,981
$3,655
$4,166
$4,676
$5,186
$5,697
$6,207
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$12,240
$18,360
$18,360
$18,360
$18,360
$18,360
$5,400
$6,240
$7,080
$7,920
$8,760
$9,600
$10,440
$11,280
$12,120
$12,960
$13,800
$14,640
$15,480
$16,320
$17,160
$6,000
$6,000
$4000
$6,000
$6,000
$4000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,Boo
;i0
55,286
55,286
55,286
55,991
55,991
56,872
56,872
57.280
7 280
7 28
57,280
7 zoo
$25,161
$31,470
$32,492
$33,515
$35,242
$36,264
$37,287
$39,191
$40,213
$41,728
$52,605
$53,956
$55,306
$56,656
$58,007
$296,168
$321,350
$343,375
$367,808
$428,693
$459,938
$495,305
$539,382
$583,847
$604,919
$643,778
$657,420
$673,124
$689,132
$723,440
$50,458 $52,615
$189,726 $193,763
$90,733 $91,399
$10,000 $10,000
$24,580 $25,940
$348,962 $358,590
$714,459 $]32,30] $9,574,W2
$6,718 $6,718
$18,360 $18,360
$18,000 $18,840
$9,00o $9,000
14CvS 514,048
$66,125 $65,965 $838,475
$780,584 $799,272 $10,413,087
Lahoramount $116,407 $120,101 $123,820 $130,629 $134,410 $138,228 $142,089 $145,998 $149,963 $154,088 $158,538 $165,458 $170,186 $178,682 $188,919 $192,638 $196,486 $200,343 $204,210 $208,086 $212,123
45 Lahorhours(amour¢/$45.WW,hour) 2,587 2,669 2,752 2,903 2,987 3,072 3,158 3,244 3,333 3,424 3,523 3,677 3,782 3,971 4,198 4,281 4,366 4,452 4,538 4,624 4,714
2080 FTEs (2,080 hours per FTE) 1.24 1.28 1.32 1.40 1.44 1.48 1.52 1.56 1.60 1.65 1.69 1.77 1.82 1.91 2.02 2.06 2.10 2.14 2.18 2.22 2.27
This cost estimate has been prepared inconstant year dollars with all else being equal. There area number of factors that can influence the annual costs, including cost escalation, the number, size and type of customers connected, inflation, reserves and
many other factors that are beyond the control of the County. It will be important to review the budget every year to be sure the sewer utility fund will be balanced. The impact of inflation can be managed by adjusting monthly rates if the number of new
connections is not sufficient to makeup for the inflation.
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Had/ock Wastewater System Page A-9
APPENDIX E.2. Annual O&M Costs -20 -Year Plan With Labor = 1.24 FTE vs. 2.0 FTE
Y-1
L 1
2 1
3 1
46
6
-
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
16
17
18
19
20
21
ERUe
699
681
776
883
1004
1143
1301
1480
1684
1917
2181
2452
2820
3214
3608
3666
3168
ST2
3918
4088
4201
Estimated Annual 0&M Costs
FTE =1.24
+g'owth
Lobos (salary/wages, bene,, i.d,,..t)
$116,500
$121,000
$124,000
$131,000
$135,000
$139,000
$143,000
$146,000
$150,000
$155,000
$159,000
$166,000
$171,000
$179,000
$189,000
$193,000
$197,000
$201,000
$2a5,aao
$209,000
$213,009
Powe'
$17,800
$18,600
$19,800
$21,900
$22,000
$23,300
$24,800
$26,400
$28,300
$31,000
$33,700
$38,WCt
$41,400
$45,800
$50,600
$51,200
$52,600
$54,100
$55,700
$57,200
$59,400
Replacement pasts W P
$17,400
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$51,500
$50,700
$51,400
$52,300
$53,300
$21,500
$37,800
$37,800
$38,100
$38,400
$5(5,700
$90,800
$91,400
Lab Supplies
$10,000
$11,000
$10,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$11,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
Chemicals
$31600
$4,100
$4,700
$5,400
$(5,100
$6900
$7,900
$$900
$11,200
$11,600
$13,200
$15,000
$17,000
$19,400
$22,000
$22,100
$22,700
$23,300
$24,000
$24,(500
$26 Wc)
Grtntle' Pump Costs
$2,000
$2,900
$3,800
$4,(500
$s,4ao
$6300
$7,100
$8,000
$8800
$9,500
$11,500
$11,300
$12,200
$13,000
$13,800
$14,700
$15,500
$16400
$17,200
$18,000
$18,900
Supplies COII System maintenance
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$(5,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6' o
$6poo
$6,000
$(5,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
CCN&Gleaning
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$5,300
$5,300
$5,300
$(5,000
$(5,000
$(5,000
$(5,900
$(5,900
$(5,900
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$14,100
$14,100
Bio.kdo healing, t..tM tantl tipping fe
$5(5,(500
$64,500
$73,400
$83,500
$95,000
$108,100
$123,000
$141,000
$159,300
$181,200
$20(5,20
$234,700
$257,100
$303,900
$304,(500
$313,000
$321,700
$330,500
$339,(500
$349,000
$358,(500
Total Annual 0&M Costs(...... ted)
$228,400
$243,100
$257,700
$278,900
$297,000$322,4W
$344,(500
$358,100
$429,100
$451,100
$49(5,000
$540,200
$584,900
$(505,500
$644,100
$658,100
$673,900
$690,000
$724,500
$781,700
$800,400
Anneal Percent Incases.
6.4%
6.0%
8.2%
6.5%
8.(5%
6.9%
6.8%
1(5.(5%
7.5%
7.6%
'.9%
8.3%
3.5%
6.4%
2.2%
2.4%
2.4%
5.0%
7.9%
2.4%
Cost pe' ERU pe' Month
$31.78
$29.73
$27.69
$26.33
$24.64
$23.51
$2208
$20.73
$21.23
$20.05
$18.95
$18.14
$17.26
$15.70
$14.67
$14.96
$14.91
$14.85
$15.18
$15.93
$15.88
Atlministration/Billing/State Tax
a .admin
ssu$28750
msts will increase
by yeast
1.0%
Billing- Selary/B..... 0.5 FTE
$29,000
$29,300
$29,600
$29,900
$30,200
$30,500
$31,800
$31,100
$31,400
$31,700
$32,000
$32,300
$32(500
$32,900
$33,200
$33,500
$33,800
$34,100
$34,400
$34,700
Management & Accounting Mgmt
$51,700
$52,200
$52,700
$53,200
$53,700
$54,200
$54,700
$55,200
$55,800
$56,400
$57,000
$57,600
$58,200
$58,800
$59,400
$60,000
$60,600
$61,200
$61,800
$62,400
$(53,000
Gommunicetion/Tra�eVAtivertising
$S,Soo
$5,500
$5,700
$5,800
$5,900
$6,000
$6100
$6200
$6300
$6400
$6500
$6,500
$6700
$6800
$6900
$7,000
$7,100
$7,200
$7,300
$7,400
$7,500
I......c,(Liability&Psopesty)
$30,000
$30,300
$30,(500
$30,900
$31,200
$31,500
$31,800
$32,100
$32,400
$32,700
$33,000
$33,300
$33,(500
$33,900
$34,200
$34,500
$34,800
$35,100
$35,500
$35,900
$36300
State Excise Tax
$14,000
$14,100
$14,200
$14,300
$14,400
$14,500
$14,(500
$14,700
$14,800
$14,900
$15,000
$15,200
$15,400
$15,(500
$15,800
$16 GW
$16'200
$16,400
$1666
$16 oW
$17,000
Intertuntl Ptofe„ranoI Service
$50,000
$50,500
$51,000
$51,500
$52,000
$52,500
$53,000
$531500
$54,000
$541500
$551000
$551600
$561200
$561800
$571400
$58,000
$581600
$59,200
$59,800
$(50,400
$61,000
Profs„ional Services/C.... bog
$2Ct, 0
$2Ct, 0
$2Ct, 0
$20,(500
$20,800
$21,000
$21,200
$21,400
$24,(500
$21,800
$22,000
$22,200
$22,400
$22(500
$22,800
$23,000
$23,200
$23,400
$231600
$23,800
$24,000
Subtotal Atlministrafion
$199,950
$201,900
$203,900
$205,900
$20],900
$209,900
$211,900
$213,900
$21(5,000
$218,100
$220,200
$222,500
$224,800
$22],100
$229,400
$231,]00
$234,000
$23(5,300
$238,700
$241,100
$243,500
Short -Lived Assets
$72,000
$81,800
$93,100
$105,900
$120,500
$137,100
$156100
$177,(500
$202,100
$231,000
$2(51,700
$297,900
$339,000
$385,7W
$439,000
$441,000
$452,100
$46416W
$477,4W
$490,(500
$504,100
Build up Emergency Reserve
$501aao
$5a,aaa
$5a,aaa
$5o1aaa
$501000
$501000
Estimated Operating Budget
$551,350
$57(5,800
$614,700
$640,700
$675,400
$719,400
$712,(500
$759,(500
$847,200
$909,200
$977,900
$1,060,600 $1,148,700
$1,218,300
$1,312,500
$1,329,800 $1,3(50,000
$1,390,900
$1,440,(500
$1,513,400
$1,548,000
Gast pe' ERU pe' Month
$7(5.58
$70.53
$64.98
$(50.50
$5(5.04
$52.45
$45.66
$42.77
$41.92
$39.53
$37.36
$35.61
$33.89
$31.58
$29.90
$30.22
$30.08
$29.94
$30.18
$30.85
$30.71
Estimated Annual 0&M Costs
FTE=2.0
FTE=2.3
Labor (salary/wages, bene....d, act)
$187,000
$117,000
$187,000
$1'7,000
$117,000
$187,000
$117,000
$187,000
$187,000
$117,000
$117,000
$187,000
$187,000
$187,000
$21(5,000
$216,000
$216,000
$21(5,000
$216,000
$21(5,000
$216,000
Powe'
$17,800
$18,600
$19,800
$20,900
$22,000
$23,300
$24,800
$26'400
$28,300
$31,000
$33,700
$38,000
$41,400
$45,800
$51,6W
$51,200
$52,(500
$54,100
$55,700
$57,200
$59,400
Replacement parts WWTP
$17,400
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$51,500
$50,700
$51,400
$52,300
$53,300
$21,500
$37,800
$37,800
$38,100
$38,400
$56700
$90,800
$91,400
Lab Supplies
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
Chemicals
$3,6W
$4,100
$4,700
$5,400
$6100
$6900
$7,900
$8,900
$11,200
$11,500
$13,200
$15,000
$17,000
$19,400
$22,000
$22,100
$22,700
$23,300
$24,000
$24,600
$2(5,000
Grtntle' Pump Costs
$2,000
$2,900
$3,800
$4,600
$5,4ao
$6300
$7,100
$8 WG
$&Sea
$9,600
$10,500
$11,300
$12,200
$13,000
$13,800
$14,700
$15,500
$16400
$17,200
$18,000
$18,900
Supplies COII System maintenance
$4,Soo$4,500
$41500
$6,000
$6,000
$6poo
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6poo
$6,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
$9,000
CCN&Cleaning
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$5,300
$5,300
$5,300
$6 WG
$6 WD
$6 GW
$6,900
$6900
$6,900
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$7,300
$14,100
$14,100
Bio,oldo hauling, treatment antl tipping to
$56,(500
$(54,500
$73,400
$83,500
$95,000
$108,100
$123,000
$141,000
$159,300
$181200
$206,200
$234,700
$257,100
$303,900
$304,(500
$313,000
$321,700
$330,500
$339,600
$349,000
$358,(500
T.tal Annual 0&M Coats( ..... z1ated)
$298,900
$309,100
$321,700
$334,900
$349,000
$371,400
$388,(500
$409,100
$4(56,100
$493,100
$524,000
$561,200
$(501,900
$613,500
$571,100
$(581,100
$692,900
$705,000
$735,500
$788,700
803,400
$-,-
A
Annual Percent Increase
3.4%
3.8%
4.4%
4.2%
6.1%
4.9%
5.3%
13.9%
5.8%
6.3%
7.1%
7.1%
2.1%
9.4%
1.5%
1.7%
1.7%4.3%
7.2%
1.9%
Cost pe' ERU p' Month
$41.59
$37.80
$34.46
$31.62
$28.96
$27.01
$24.90
$23.03
$23.06
$21.44
$20.02
$18.84
$17.73
$15.90
$15.29
$15.48
$15.33
$15.17
$15.41
$16.08
$15.94
Atlministration/Billing/State Tax
a ssu
will increase
by l.0%Peryea'
1.0%
Billing-Selery/Benes, 0.5 FTE
5�8�750
$29,000
$29,300
$29,611
$29,900
$31,200
$30,500
$31,800
$31,100
$31,400
$31,700
$32,000
$32,300
$32,(500
$32,900
$33,200
$33,500
$33,800
$34,100
$34,400
$34,700
Management & Accounting Mgmt
$51,700
$52,200
$52,700
$53,200
$53,700
$54,200
$54,700
$55,200
$55,800
$56,400
$57,000
$57,600
$58,200
$58,800
$59,400
$(50,000
$6't'
$61,200
$(51,800
$61,400
$(53,000
Communi .b../ o-[/Advo,bn9
$5,5W
$5,(500
$5,700
$5,Soo
$5,900
$6,000
$(5,100
$6200
$6300
$6,400
$6 KC)
$(5,(500
$(5,700
$6,800
$6900
$7'CtW
$7,100
$7,200
$7,300
$7,400
$7,500
In surance(Liability&Property)
$31,000
$30,300
$30,(500
$30,900
$31,200
$31,500
$31,800
$32,100
$32,400
$32,700
$33,000
$33,300
$33,600
$33,900
$34,200
$34,500
$34,800
$35,100
$35,500
$35,900
$36300
State Excise Tax
$14,000
$14,100
$14,200
$14,300
$14,400
$14,500
$14,(500
$14,700
$14,800
$14,900
$15,000
$15,200
$15,400
$15,600
$15,800
$1(5,000
$1(5,200
$1(5,400
$1(5,(500
$1(5,800
$17,000
n ff. d Prof.„;anal Service
$51,000
$50,500
$51,000
$51,500
$52,000
$52,500
$53,000
$53,500
$54,000
$54,500
$55,000
$55,600
$5(5,200
$5(5,800
$57,400
$58,000
$58,(500
$59,200
$59,800
$(50,400
$(51,000
Profs„ional Service,/Consalfing
$20,000
$20,2W
$21,400
$20,600
$20,800
$21,000
$21,200
$21,400
$21,600
$21,800
$22,000
$22,200
$22,400
$22,600
$22,800
$23,000
$23,200
$23,400
$23,600
$23,800
$24,000
Subtotal Atlministrafion
$199,950
$201,900
$203,900
$205,900
$2aJ,900
$209,900
$211,900
$213,900
$21(5,000
$218,100
$221,200
$222,500
$224,800
$227,100
$229,400
$231,700
$234,000
$236300
$238,700
$241,100
$243,500
ShoR-Lived Assets
$72,000
$81,800
$93,100
$105,900
$120,500
$137,100
$15(5,100
$177,(500
$202,100
$231,000
$261,]00
$297,900
$339,000
$385,700
$439,000
$441,000
$452,100
$4(54,(500
$477,400
$490,(500
$504,100
Build up Emergency Reserve
$50,000
$51,000
$51,000
$51,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$51,000
$51,000
$51,000
$50,000
$50,000
$5a,oaa
$5o,00a
$50,000
$51,000
$51,000
$50,000
$51,000
$50,000
$51,000
EstimatedOperating Budget
$(521,850
$(542,800
$667,700
$696,700
$727,400
$717,400
$806,600
$'51,600
$934,200
$991,200 $1,055,900
$1,131,500 $1,214,700
$1,27(5,300
$1,389,500
$1,402,800 $1,429,000
$1,455,900
$1,501,600
$1,570,400
$1,601,000
Cost pe' ERU pe' Month
$8(5.39
$78.(50
$71.75
$(55.79
$(50.36
$55.95
$51.6.
$47.89
$46.22
$43.09
$40.34
$37.99
$35.84
$33.09
$31.65
$31.88
$31.61
$31.34
$31.45
$3201
$31.76
This estlmoted.per.ting budget reflects.n[Iclpo[ed Increases due t..ddltl.n.l ERU's.ndfl.w. InJl.[l.n is n.tsh. b-- --d th.tgr.wth In ERU's.t13% psi ywdl.utpoce lnfl.tl.n. M.re
Imp.rt.n[lythe reduc[lons In Cast psi ERU.re not directly rOl dto oreduc[l.n In monthly rotes. The annual budget will be revlewedf.r. balanced program each y- with actual 'W"fl.w.nd casts
Any surplus funds will beheld In reserve f.rfu[sewer Improvements.
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-10
APPENDIX E.3. Annual O&M Costs -If Core & Rhody Drive Areas Only
IF Core + Rhody Only
year S eru If Core+ Rhody Only: Took Tt O&M cost - labor = year 1. ERU's are based on Jeff Co population estimates provided (2010, 2024, 2030).
1 $ 111,900 599 Assume no additional pump stations
14 $ 302,700 1950
20 $ 349,600 2272
+ Labor
1950
Am ual Percent Increase Years 1 - 14 1 0.095051
IF Core + Rhody Only (Year) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
ERU 599 656 718 787 861 943 1033 1131 1239 1356 1485 1626 1781 1950
No change in beginning size of WWTP a collection system 0.07956
Labor -FTE =1.24+growth $116,500 $121,000 $124,000 $131,000 $135,000 $139,000 $143,000 $146,000 $150,000 $155,000 $159,000 $166,000 $171,000 $179,000
Other Annual O&M Costs $111,900 $120,803 $130,414 $140,790 $151,991 $164,083 $177,138 $191,231 $206,445 $222,870 $240,601 $259,744 $280,409 $302,718
Total Annual O&M Costs (unescalated) $228,400 $241,803 $254,414 $271,790 $286,991 $303,083 $320,138 $337,231 $356,445 $377,870 $399,601 $425,744 $451,409 $481,718
Annual Percent Change 5.9% 5.2% 6.8% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.3% 5.7% 6.0% 5.8% 6.5% 6.0% 6.7%
Cost per ERU per Month $31.78 $30.72 $29.52 $28.80 $27.77 $26.78 $25.83 $24.85 $23.98 $23.22 $22.42 $21.82 $21.12 $20.58
a
FTE= 2.0 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000 $187,000
annual O&M Costs $111,900 $120,803 $130,414 $140,790 $151,991 $164,083 $177,138 $191,231 $206,445 $222,870 $240,601 $259,744 $280,409 $302,718
Total Annual O&M Costs(unescalated)
$298,900
$307,803
$317,414
$327,790
$338,991
$351,083
$364,138
$378,231
$393,445
$409,870
$427,601
$446,744
$467,409
$489,718
Annual Percent Change
3.0%
3.1%
3.3%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%
3.9%
4.0%
4.2%
4.3%
4.5%
4.6%
4.8%
Cost per ERU per Month
$41.58
$39.10
$36.83
$34.73
$32.80
$31.02
$29.38
$27.87
$26.47
$25.18
$23.99
$22.89
$21.87
$20.93
Administration/Billing/State Tax
assumecosts will increase
by 1.0%peryear
1.0%
Billing - Salary/Benes, 0.5 FTE
$28,750
$29,000
$29,300
$29,600
$29,900
$30,200
$30,500
$30,800
$31,100
$31,400
$31,700
$32,000
$32,300
$32,600
Management & Accounting Mgmt
$51,700
$52,200
$52,700
$53,200
$53,700
$54,200
$54,700
$55,200
$55,800
$56,400
$57,000
$57,600
$58,200
$58,800
Communication/Travel/Advertising
$5,500
$5,600
$5,700
$5,800
$5,900
$6,000
$6,100
$6,200
$6,300
$6,400
$6,500
$6,600
$6,700
$6,800
Insurance (Liability & Property)
$30,000
$30,300
$30,600
$30,900
$31,200
$31,500
$31,800
$32,100
$32,400
$32,700
$33,000
$33,300
$33,600
$33,900
State Excise Tax
$14,000
$14,100
$14,200
$14,300
$14,400
$14,500
$14,600
$14,700
$14,800
$14,900
$15,000
$15,200
$15,400
$15,600
Interfund Professional Service
$50,000
$50,500
$51,000
$51,500
$52,000
$52,500
$53,000
$53,500
$54,000
$54,500
$55,000
$55,600
$56,200
$56,800
Professional Services/Consulting
$20,000
$20,200
$20,400
$20,600
$20,800
$21,000
$21,200
$21,400
$21,600
$21,800
$22,000
$22,200
$22,400
$22,600
Subtotal Administration
$199,950
$201,900
$203,900
$205,900
$207,900
$209,900
$211,900
$213,900
$216,000
$218,100
$220,200
$222,500
$224,800
$227,100
Short -Lived Assets
$72,000
$81,800
$93,100
$105,900
$120,500
$137,100
$156,100
$177,600
$202,100
$230,000
$261,700
$297,900
$339,000
$385,700
Build up Emergency Reserve
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
Estimated Operating Budget $620,850 $641,503 ' $664,414 $689,590' $717,391 " $748,083 $782,138 $819,731 $861,545 " $907,970 $959,501 $1,017,144 $1,081,209$1,152,5181
Cost per ERU per Month $86.39 $78.44 $71.39 $65.11 $59.53 $54.55 $50.11 $46.15 $42.63 $39.48 $36.66 $34.15 $31.90 $29.88
Estimated Operating Budget - Escalated at 3.0% per Year - 2.0 FTE per Year
Operating Budget (Escalated @ 3.0%/yr) $620,850 $660,700 $684,300 $710,300 $738,900 $770,500 $805,600 $844,300 $887,400 $935,200 $988,300 $1,047,700 $1,113,600 $1,187,100
Cost per ERU per Month $86.39 $80.79 $73.53 $67.07 $61.31 $56.18 $51.62 $47.54 $43.91 $40.66 $37.76 $35.17 $32.85 $30.78
The reductions in Cost per ERU are not directly related to a reduction in monthly rates. The annual budget will be reviewed for a balanced program each year with actual ERU's, flow and costs.
Any surplus funds will be held in reserve for fut sewer improvements.
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-11
APPENDIX F. Estimated Sewer Program and Monthly Rate Per ERU
Port Hadlock Sewer Program
per ERU
Sewer System O&M
$42.00
Administration/Billing/State Tax
$28.00
Short -Lived Assets
$10.00
Emergency Reserve
$7.00
Estimated Monthly Rate per ERU
$87.00
Port Hadlock Sewer Monthly Rate
$87.00 per ERU per ma
$7.00,8%
$10.00, 12u
$42.00, 48% 0 Sewer System O&M
■ Administration/Billing/
State Tax
Short -Lived Assets
■ Emergency Reserve
$28.00, 32%
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-12
APPENDIX G. Estimated PWTF Debt Payments
This appendix estimates the annual payment for the existing $10 million PWTF loan. Alt. 2 shows that the County has
drawn $1.7 million through 2014 as match to the EPA grant for design of the WWTF facilities and 10% design of the
collection system.
Jefferson County Port Hadlock Wastewater System
Prepared by Katy Isaksen & Associates
DRAFT 5/27/15 Jeff Co used $1.7M of $10M loan thru 2014, remainder for construction beginning 2015
NOTE - Whether the remainder is borrowed in 2015 or 2016, the accrued interest changes but the principal & interest payments beginning 2018
are the same.
DRAW = Assume 20% loan agreement; 25% notice to proceed; 25% when 35% of loan amount spent; 25% when 60% loan amount spent; 5%
closeout.
Payments due June 1.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-13
PWTF 1: #PC12-951-052
YEAR
PWTF LOAN
PRINCIPAL
$10,000,000
REPAYMENT
INTEREST 0.50%
ANNUAL CAPITAL
EXP. OVER 20
YEARS
Balance
Est. DRAW
2012
2013
0
0
1,676,155
1,676,155
2014
0
0
1,676,155
0
2015
0
0
9,876,155
8,200,000
2016
0
0
10,000,000
123,845
2017
166,142
166,142
10,000,000
0
2018
344,828
50,000
394,828
9,655,172
2019
344,828
48,276
393,103
9,310,345
2020
344,828
46,552
391,379
8,965,517
2021
344,828
44,828
389,655
8,620,690
2022
344,828
43,103
387,931
8,275,862
2023
344,828
41,379
386,207
7,931,034
2024
344,828
39,655
384,483
7,586,207
2025
344,828
37,931
382,759
7,241,379
2026
344,828
36,207
381,034
6,896,552
2027
344,828
34,483
379,310
6,551,724
2028
344,828
32,759
377,586
6,206,897
2029
344,828
31,034
375,862
5,862,069
2030
344,828
29,310
374,138
5,517,241
2031
344,828
27,586
372,414
5,172,414
2032
344,828
25,862
370,690
4,827,586
2033
344,828
24,138
368,966
4,482, 759
2034
344,828
22,414
367,241
4,137,931
2035
344,828
20,690
365,517
3,793,103
2036
344,828
18,966
363,793
3,448,276
2037
344,828
17,241
362,069
3,103,448
2038
344,828
15,517
360,345
2,758,621
2039
344,828
13,793
358,621
2,413, 793
2040
344,828
12,069
356,897
2,068,966
2041
344,828
10,345
355,172
1,724,138
2042
344,828
8,621
353,448
1,379,310
2043
344,828
6,897
351,724
1,034,483
2044
344,828
5,172
350,000
689,655
2045
344,828
3,448
348,276
344,828
2046
344,828
1,724
346,552
0
Total
10,000,000
916,142
10,916,142
10,000,000
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-13
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-14
ALT 2: JEFF CO DRAWS $1.7M THRU 2014
YEAR
PWTF LOAN
PRINCIPAL
$1,676,155
REPAYMENT
INTEREST 0.50%
ANNUAL CAPITAL
EXP. OVER 20
YEARS
Balance
Est. DRAW
2012
2013
0
0
1,676,155
1,676,155
2014
0
0
1,676,155
0
2015
0
0
1,676,155
0
2016
0
0
1,676,155
2017
41,904
41,904
1,676,155
2018
57,798
8,381
66,179
1,618,357
2019
57,798
8,092
65,890
1,560,558
2020
57,798
7,803
65,601
1,502,760
2021
57,798
7,514
65,312
1,444,961
2022
57,798
7,225
65,023
1,387,163
2023
57,798
6,936
64,734
1,329,364
2024
57,798
6,647
64,445
1,271,566
2025
57,798
6,358
64,156
1,213,767
2026
57,798
6,069
63,867
1,155,969
2027
57,798
5,780
63,578
1,098,171
2028
57,798
5,491
63,289
1,040,372
2029
57,798
5,202
63,000
982,574
2030
57,798
4,913
62,711
924,775
2031
57,798
4,624
62,422
866,977
2032
57,798
4,335
62,133
809,178
2033
57,798
4,046
61,844
751,380
2034
57,798
3,757
61,555
693,581
2035
57,798
3,468
61,266
635,783
2036
57,798
3,179
60,977
577,984
2037
57,798
2,890
60,688
520,186
2038
57,798
2,601
60,399
462,388
2039
57,798
2,312
60,110
404,589
2040
57,798
2,023
59,821
346,791
2041
57,798
1,734
59,532
288,992
2042
57,798
1,445
59,243
231,194
2043
57,798
1,156
58,954
173,395
2044
57,798
867
58,665
115,597
2045
57,798
578
58,376
57,798
2046
57,798
289
58,087
0
Total
1,676,155
167, 6161, 843, 771
1,676,155
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-14
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-15
COMPARE DEBT PAYMENTS BY ALT:
Estimated Annual Debt Payments
YEAR
Full Loan, $10,000,000, at 0.50%
Partial Loan, $1,676,155 at 0.50%
2012
2013
0
0
2014
0
0
2015
0
0
2016
0
0
2017
166,142
41,904
2018
394,828
66,179
2019
393,103
65,890
2020
391,379
65,601
2021
389,655
65,312
2022
387,931
65,023
2023
386,207
64,734
2024
384,483
64,445
2025
382,759
64,156
2026
381,034
63,867
2027
379,310
63,578
2028
377,586
63,289
2029
375,862
63,000
2030
374,138
62,711
2031
372,414
62,422
2032
370,690
62,133
2033
368,966
61,844
2034
367,241
61,555
2035
365,517
61,266
2036
363,793
60,977
2037
362,069
60,688
2038
360,345
60,399
2039
358,621
60,110
2040
356,897
59,821
2041
355,172
59,532
2042
353,448
59,243
2043
351,724
58,954
2044
350,000
58,665
2045
348,276
58,376
2046
346,552
58,087
Total
10,916,142
1,843,771
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-15
APPENDIX H.1. Estimated 20 -Year Outlook for Initial Area (Core+ Rhody Drive) -Program Funding $10 Million Grants, $20.7 Million Loans, and $11 Million in Additional State/Federal Appropriations (Total Additional
Grants= $21 Million)
J erson County Port Hatllock Wastewater Sy-
P by Katy Isaksen& Associates
CASH FLOW PROJECTION -THIS TEST DEMONS'
M1ial C.1-0-System=Gore&E-yD areas,P
Debt service far PWTF #1 at $10M estimated straight Iii
Gons[ruclign_General 28000006 Ass. mes f.Wre stg mge&UV($782,000)Is not be funded In Nelnl0al cgsls
Construction: Local 19 000 000
Gons[ruction_ Onsite 2.760660
YEAR Construction 1 2 3 d 5 6 ]
Intiial Area: Core • Rh.dy Drive
ERU's G.nnectetl 59H 858 718 ]8] 861 943 1033
New FRU 's 599 57 62 69 1 82 90
This Scenario: LID FOR COLLECTION SYSTEM. BORROW FROM PROGRAM S WITH GRANTS $10M. ADD FEDERAUSTATE APPROPRIATION S$11M
Ggns[ructign_ Gmnt(General)
Gco y
$5,666,666
construction_ C-1 L-1)
UShRD
35,668666
FederWApp.pria (Gem
A)
$4,666,066
Fed -State Apprgpiatron(Local)
$7,668666
C --t- _ Loan PWfF#1
.0 M, 30 yrs@05%
$8,366,666
Cgnstruction:L., (GenerallConn)
Ecology, 26 yrs@08%
$2,709000
Gons[ruction_Lgan(LgcallLID)
USDARD, 36 yrs@28%
$7,660,666
Construction:Loan(Inkial 0IT-11L
USDARD, 30 yrs@28%
$2,766,666
cgnr .,charges
$1,600
wl$7M gmnt 2,755,4 262,266 285,200 317,466 340,466 377,266 414,006 450,860 490,800 538,266 593,466 848,660 713,000 77],466 236,666 239,266 243,866 248,406 257,666 282260
DD Assessments
$O1 M over 3) Yrs@28%
347,964 347964 M7,I8 347964 347964 347,984 347,964 347,964 347,964 347964 347964 347,984 347,964 347,964 347,984 347,964 347964 341,964 347,964
Si de Sewer Reimbursement
Sewer Rates
$27M aver 30 yrs@28%
$87 oer month
134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215 134,215
625.356 EGG, 6 749.592 821628 898.884 984492 1878452 1.186.]64 1293516 1,415,664 1556.340 169]544 1,859,364 2,035,806 2680066 2.142288 2.197620 2253.996 2,312,460 2371968
TOTAL SEWER REVENUE $41,780,000 3,380,]56 1,455,092 1,540,81] 1,643,888 1,]43,]42 1,866,713 1,991,326 2,133,211 2,290,017 2,465,889 2,862,612 2,873,251 3,110,221 3,WS%5 2,883,983 2,957,735 3,628,514 3,108,881 3,180,494 3,25],1]5
SEWER EXPENSE
11Maintenance no escalatio 1, increase by ERUs 298,900 381,803 317,414 327,]80 338,991 351,883 364,138 318,231 393,445 408,8]6 42],801 446,]44 46],489 489,718 584,410 519,542 535,128 551,182 567,717 584,]49
BillinglSt TaNAdminls[ration increase by 1%Nr 199959 261,950 293969 206,009 288,859 210,149 212,251 214,373 216,517 216,682 228,16 223078 225,389 227,562 229,837 232,135 234,457 236,802 239 170 241,561
PVVSF 1, $1 OM, 30yr, Syr defenal
Ecology, $6.7M, 2P,USDARD, $151M, 30yr
USDARD, $27M, 30y1
Subtotal Debt Repaymer
Phase II Treatment I encs
TOTAL SEWER
ER EXP E%PENSI
NET OPERATING 11 -
SEWER ENDING BALANCE
REPLACEMENT RESERVE ISH
EMERGENCY/REPLACEMENT
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Had/ock Wastewater System Page A-16
APPENDIX H.2. Estimated 20 -Year Outlook for Initial Area (Core+ Rhody Drive) -No LID, $21 Million in Additional State/Federal Appropriations, Existing PWTF Loan $8.3 Million) and $10.8 Million General Obligation
Bonds (Total Additional Grants = $21 Million)
Jefferson County Poet H.dI.k Wastewater System
Constructron: Grant(General)
P-gy
SO
Construct.,: Grant(Local)
US -RD
$0
I-- tate APpropdatmn(General)
$8,000,x,0
Federa05tate Appmpdation(Lgcal)
$12,000,660
Construction_ Loan PWTF#1
$83M, 3D yes@0.5%
$8308000
Cons[mction_ Loan( Gen I/Conn)
Eco logy, 2D yes@0.8%
$0
Gonstmction_ Loan(L.-VLID)
USD RD, 3D yes@28%
$0
Ggnstruction_Loanllnkial 0nSRILUSDARD,3Dyes@28%
$0
Gonstmctian_ GOBg
Less$16M LID cost
10,809,990
Gonnectan GM1arges
58,5x,
wl$21M grant 5,091,599 484,509 52],000 586,599 629,699 697,559 765,000 833,099 918,699 994,599 1,096,500 1,1 H$500 1,317,500 1,436,500 425,000 442,000 450,500 459,000 4]6,999 484,500
DD Assessments
$6_i M over 3D yrs@28%
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SMeSewerReimbursement
$27M over 30 yrs@28%
Sewer Rates
esl Earned on Balance
£B7 per month
10%
625,356 684,864 ]15 821,628 898884 984,492 1,978452 1,180,]64 1,293,516 1,415,664 1,550,346 1,697,544 1,859,364 2,035860 2,088099 2,142,288 2,197,620 2,253,996 2,312,460 2,371968
49210 43]]1 39252 35895 3358] 24848 25326 2]368 31251 36999 44.9]2 55339 6838] 84302 90,629 9]5]6 10.5069 113,119 121832
TOTAL SEWER REVENUE
SEWER EXPEN SE
$40,100,909 5,]16,855 1218,5]4 1320,353 1441380 1563,]19 1]15,0]9 1868,3x, 2,039,999 2,238884 2,441415 2,683,830 2,941816 3,232,194 3,540,687 2,597,392 2,6]4,917 2,]45,696 2,818,065 2,9 ,15 2,9]8,399
Operations&Maintenance
13,11 g/StTa4Administradon
Replacement Fund 1,- lived assets)
Reserve Fund(emergencylexpansion)
no scalatign, increase
increa se by 1%
Flat
Flat
by END, 18,01 361,893 317,414 11,71 31,11 351,113 364,138 3]8231 13,15 11,871 42],691 446,]44 461,499 419,118 51,410 519,542 53511 551,11 56],717 14,-
84,]49Billing/St
/y, 199,956 201,959 203,969 206,x,9 268,069 210,149 212,251 214,373 216,517 218682 220,869 223,0]8 225,399 22],562 229,83] 232.136 234,457 236,802 239,170 241,561
12,0x, 72,x,9 1,099 ]20x, 72,x,9 12999 1,099 ]2,0x, 72,099 72,x,9 1,x,0 1,099 72,0x, 72,099 72,069 12,x,9 1,099 ]2,0x, ]20x, 72,099
50,099 50,x,0 50,x,9 50,999 50,x,0 590x, 50,x,9 50,000 50,x,9 50,000 50,099 50,x,9 50,099 50,x,9 50,x,0 59,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,x,0
Subtotal Operatinq
De R-
PWTF1,$1DM, 30yr,Syrdeferral
D5D% estimated
620,859 631]52 13,383 655,]98 669,960 683,233 698389 714,61 731962 ]59552 ]]0,470 791,821 814,717 839280 B56247 873,678 891585 999984 928887 948310
175,9991 394,828 393,103 3913]9 389,655 387,931 386,20] 384,483 382,759 381034 379,310 3]],586 375,862 374,138 3]2,414 3]0,699 368,966 35],241 355,517 363,793
Ecology,$6-7M, 2yr
880%
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
USID A-RD,$15.1 M, 3GYr
280%
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
USD RD, $2 3G,
280%
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
GOBonds:$135M,25yr
Subtotal Oeb[Repayment
Ph -11 Treatmentlmprgvements
460%
3-0av stg raoeUV3
]35857 735857 735857 735857 735857 735857 735857 735857 ]35857 735857 735857 735857 ]35857 735857 ]35857 735857 735857 ]35857 ]35857
175x,9 1,130,684 1128,960 1,127,235 1,125,512 1,123,]88 1,122,064 1,120,349 1,118,615 1,116,891 1,115,167 1,1IS- 1,111,719 1,108995 1,108,271 1,196,547 1,11,822 1,10.3898 1,191,374 1898659
782.0x,
TOTAL SEWER EXPENSE
]95850 1,]82,43] 1,]],343 r 1,783,034 r 1,]94,5]2 2,588021 8 1,829,452 r 1,834944 r 1,850,578 8 1861443 r 1,885638 r 1,905,21 r 382,435 r 1848275 r 1,91,51B r 1,980,224 r 1,998408 r ,18082 r 2.930,261 r 2,941960
NET OPERATING INCOME
4,921006 (543,863) (451989) (335,655) (23,]93) (873,941) 47,847 21,146 388306 573971 798,193 1035,]52 1395758 1,591,413 632,784 694,693 ]49289 81,983 871,318 93,346
SEWER ENDING BALANCE
REPLACEMENT RESERVE SHORT-LIVED
EMERGENCYIREPLACEMENT RESERVE
ASSETS)
4,921,006 4,377,143 3,925,164 3,589,509 3,358,716 2,484,775 2,532,622 2,136,169 3,125,015 3,699,046 4,497,239 5,532,991 6,838,]48 8,430,161 9,062,945 9,757,639 10,506,927 11,311,911 12,183,229 13,113,569
72,000 144,x,0 216,000 288,000 360,000 432,000 504,000 576,000 648,000 720,000 792,000 864,000 936,000 1,008,000 1,080,000 1,1528x, 1,224,000 1,296,11DD 1,368,000 1,440,000
50,x,0 100,x,0 150,000 200,000 2aUDD0 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 650,000 700,000 750,Dx, 800,x,0 85080 900,x,0 951ED00 1,000,000
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Hed/a:k Wastewater System Page A-17
Updated Financial Plan for Pat Had/ock Wastewater System Page A-18
APPENDIX J.1. Recent Contractor Costs for On -Site Installations; Mason County Belfair Area
L=Flk� TETRA TEC H
TELEPHONE CONVERSATION RECORD (USE FOR BOTH INCOMING & OUTGOING CALLS)
Job No. 135-12562-13001
CONVERSATION INITIATED BY
DATE
HOUR
Kevin Dour
912412015
4:30pm
PERSON CALLED OR RECEIVING CALL
TELEPHONE NO.
EXTENSION
Ron Griffey, Zephyr Construction
360-275-2861
PURPOSE Of REFERENCE
Referred to me by Carrie at Mason County (360-427-9670 Ext_ 283
SUMMARY OF POINTS DISCUSSED AND CONCLUSIONS REACHED
Ron's company has done sewer service connections on private property in the Belfair area (both gravity
and grinder pump installations); both residential and commercial_ I contacted Ron to get information on
actual installation costs.
Ron provided me the following:
• For existing properties, costs are variable depending upon the location of the structure, difficulty
accessing the building drain, and variability on siteland restoration_
• Gravity Sewer Connections:
o Residential connections are $2,000 - $3;000/property (4 -inch from house to 6 -inch stubeut
in RM).
o Included in that price is decommissioning the existing septic tank which would be $350 -
$400 to pump and another 5350 - $40D to fill_
o Commercial Gravity connections are about $2004300 more; on average due to 6 -inch
line and sometimes longer distance from building to stubout_
• Pressure Sewer Connections:
o Residential systems are about $8,000/property. E -One Pump System (Cost of system is
$3,700-53,800), electrical connection is about $400. Rest of cost is labor, installation of 1-
134 -inch pressure line_
• Commercial systems are more expensive ($20,000/site on average) due to bigger duplex
grinder pump system.
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-19
APPENDIX J.2. Recent Contractor Costs for On -Site Installations; Sacheen Lake Water & Sewer District
James A. Sewell&As cio —
eon 4th street west
Hew port, WA 99156
504447-3624
Project Wasocw .er Colfectio-n and treatment Prayers 2013
Owner: Sac—rr LL,e Wr r & Sewer District
Date: 5126j2913 EnSine s
Suhj: Bid Tahulationfw5cheduleC Estimda
Item
Description
quantity
Unit
Unit Cart Extareed
173,800.00
S 50,000.00 $
Mmhiimtimn and Menngement
$ 35,000.00 $
34,000.00
S 5,000.00 $
5,000.00
1
Mmhiliaatimn
1
LS_
$ 20D,003.00 $
2OOOM n
2
Stormwater& Erosion Canitrnl & Maint,en «
1
LS_
$ 50,1700.00 $
50.000.00
3
Trench Safety System
1
LS_
$ 10,000.00 $
10.000.00
4
Traffic Cantro-1
1
IS.
$ 15,004.00 $
15.000.00
S 36,000.90 $
Se ices
S 20,000.OD $
217,000.00
S 11,441.00 $
1IA41LOO
5
125" HDPE kmime Sdua, -/Curb Stop and Check V2F-
41
Ea.
$ 825.00 $
31825.00
6
Pump Station lnstallati—.15e 5-m— Li—, Contrd Panel,amd Functional Testing
270
Ez
$ 4,500.00 $
1,215,000.00
7
Exisdal; System Connection, Abandonment&Siete Refi:ahifitmi_
2713
E:
$ LOOO 00 $
270.000.00
a
Sept." Pumping and Disposal
1250=
G.I.
$ 0.40 $
50,000.00
9
Cedar Creek Resort Pump Stadon[nsAbtiain w}Pressurc Semi. line
1
LS.
$ 27,500.017 $
27.500.00
10
Old Sachem Lake Resort Installation wj Pressure Service Line
1
LS_
$ 135,000.00 $
15,000.00
11
Rock Exovatimn
2..900
C.T.
$ 50.017 $
145,00000
12
1.S' HDPE Pressure Main,. Single Pipeline Trends
7,006
LF.
$ 21.50 $
150,029.00
13
2'HDPE Pressure Main,Single Pipeline Trench
879
LF.
$ 22.50 $
19,777,50
TOTAL OF BASE BID ITEMS
Saks Ta
TOTAL OF BASE BID MEMS indudiig Saks Tax
S X201,73Y.50
7.61391 $ 167,33159
$ X.3459,063.09
5&LUndergmung
Unit Cart E—ded
Unhwmeks
H.orthwest
Unit Cast Exrxreded
S 200,000.00 S
2110,000.00
$ 177:800.00 $
173,800.00
S 50,000.00 $
50,000.00
$ 35,000.00 $
34,000.00
S 5,000.00 $
5,000.00
S 10.000.00 $
10.000.00
S 10,000.00 $
10,ODD DD
S 10,004.04 $
10,000.00
S 1,000.00 $
31,000.00
S 400.00 $
345,900.00
S 4,3470.110 $
1,163,000,00
$ 5,100.00 $
1,377,000.00
S 11000.00 $
270,000.00
S 1,188.00 $
3211,760.00
S 0.30 $
37,500.00
S 0.35 $
43,750.00
S 35,000.00 $
35,000.00
S 36,000.90 $
36.000.00
S 20,000.OD $
217,000.00
S 11,441.00 $
1IA41LOO
S 50.00 $
145,DOD.00
$ 5000 $
145,00000
S 20.00 $
149,1217.00
S 22.90 $
IK13L D
S 2200 $
19,338.00
5 23.00 $
20.217.00
2,133,95809
$
X379,009.09
$
162,180:91
$
180,80300
$
2,296,138.81
$
2,559,403_00
Updated Financial Plan for Port Hadlock Wastewater System Page A-20