The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWATER AND SEWERAGE REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REPORT Engineer's Report Water and Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 Prepared for Augusta Utilities Department Prepared by CH2MHILL Utility Management Solutions NOVEMBER 2004 . t It . It . . . It . It It It . . It t I I I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contents Acronyms .................. .................... ........... ..................................................................... ..... .................. v 1.0 Introd ucti on ...... .......... ................ ................................... ................ ........ ........ ..... ....... ....... ...1-1 1.1 Authorization and Purpose................................................................................. ..1-1 1.2 References.... ................. ............. ...... ............... ................. ............. ......................... ..1-2 1.3 Assumptions ......... ......................... ..................... ...... .......... ............................. .... ...1-3 2.0 System History and Organization, and County Growth ............................................2-1 2.1 Organizational Structure...................................................... ......... ........................2-2 2.1.1 Augusta......... ........................................ ...... ...................... ........... ............... 2-2 2.1.2 System Management.......................... ...... ......... ........................................2-2 2.2 Augusta Population Trends...................... ....... .......................................... ...........2-6 3 .0 Water System................................................................................ .............................. ......... 3-1 3.1 Overview of Potable Water System ..................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Water Service Area....... ............................. ........ ...... ......... ......................................3-2 3.3 Water Supply ...................... ................................................ ......................... ........... 3-3 3.3.1 Raw Water Pumping..................... ............... ...................................... ....... 3-4 3.3.2 Raw Water Transmission and Storage ...................................................3-5 3.4 Water Treatment Facilities............................................... .................... .......... .......3-6 3.4.1 Highland Avenue WTP System Processes............................................. 3-6 3.5 Finished Water Storage, Chemical Feed Systems, and High Service Pumping......................... ............................ ........................ .....................................3-7 3.5 .1 Finished Water Storage............................................................................. 3-7 3.5.2 Chemical Feed Systems ............................................................................ 3-8 3.5.3 High Service Pumping.................. ............... ........................................ ..... 3-8 3.6 Water Distribution System .............................................. .................. .................... 3-9 3. 7 Water Quality. ...... ....................................... ............. .................................. ...........3-14 3.8 Projected Water Demand........................ ..................... .............. ......................... 3-14 3.9 Regulatory Impacts... ................ ...................... ...... ............................................... 3-17 3.9.1 Existing Regulations.................... ................ ....... ........ .................. ..........3-18 3.9.2 Recently Promulgated Regulations ......................................................3-19 3.9.3 Future Regulations..... ......................... ...... ......... ...... ............................... 3-20 4.0 Wastewater S ys tern .................. .......................... ....................... .........................................4-1 4.1 Overview of Wastewater System .........................................................................4-1 4.2 Wastewater Collection and Conveyance ............................................................4-2 4.3 Wastewater Treatment Facilities..... .............. ........... .......... ............. ...... ...... ......... 4-3 4.4 Projected Wastewater Flows....... ............................ ............ .... ..............................4-5 4.5 Regulatory Impacts ............. ............................................... .......... ........... ............... 4-6 4.5.1 Watershed Management.............................. .............. ........ ......................4-7 4.5.2 Total Maximum Daily Load Development............................................4-7 4.5.3 NPDES Permitting and Nutrient Management ....................................4-7 4.5.4 Onsite Septage Systems ..................... ....... ...... ............... ......... .............. .... 4-8 4.5.5 Residuals Management and 503 Regulations........................................4-8 4.5.6 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan...................................................4-9 CONTENTS (CONTINUED) . 41 . 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0 6.0 Tables 2-1 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 3-7 3-8 3-9 3-10 3-11 3-12 3-13 3-14 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-5 5-1 4.5.7 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan ........................4-9 4.5.8 Municipal Storm Water Discharge Permit...........................................4-10 Proposed System Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................... 5-1 5.1 Planning Criteria and Assumptions ....................................................................5-1 5.2 Cost Opinions for Recommended Projects .........................................................5-3 5.3 Summary of Capital Improvements ....................................................................5-4 5.3.1 Water Treatment........................... .................. ...................................... ..... 5-5 5.3.2 Water Distribution System............................................................. ..........5-6 5.3.3 Wastewater Treatment.......................................................... ....................5-8 5.3.4 Wastewater Conveyance ...................................................... .................... 5-9 5.3.5 System-wide Improvements........................ ......... .................................5-12 5.4 Anticipated Future Work....................................................................... .............5-13 Financial Perf ormanc e .................................................................................................. ..... 6-1 6.1 Historical Performance................................................................................ ..........6-1 6.2 Water and Sewer Rates .......................................................................................... 6-1 6.3 Financial Policies.......................................................... .................................... ...... 6-4 6.4 Projected Operating Results.................................................................................. 6-5 6.4.1 Revenues................................................................................... ..................6-5 6.4.2 Expenses..................................................................... .................. ...... ........6-8 6.4.3 Debt Service................................................................................................ 6-9 6.4.4 Debt Service Coverage ............................................................................ 6-10 6.4.5 Operating Fund Balances .......................................................................6-10 6.5 Capital Financing.................................................................................... ..............6-12 6.6 Conclusions........................................................................................... ................6-12 Population Forecasts Water Withdrawal Permits Existing Equipment at the Raw Water Pump Station Water Treatment Plants and Chlorination System Summary of High Service Pumping Pressure Gradient Summary Surface Water Storage Facilities Surface Water Pumping Facilities Groundwater System Storage Facilities Groundwater System Pumping Facilities Water Demand 2003 The 10 Largest Water Customers (for the 12-month period ending December 31, 2003) Projected Water Consumption Projected Water Usage by Customer Class Summary of Stage 1 DfDBP Rule Limits Wastewater Treatment Plants Owned by Augusta J. B. Messerly WPCP Effluent Limitations Spirit Creek Effluent Limitations Wastewater Flows (mgd)1 10 Largest Wastewater Customers 10 Largest Wastewater Customers 2004 Series Bond Projects - Summary of Estimated Costs III . . I . It It . . It . . It . . . . It . . I It It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 5-2 2004 Series Bond Projects-Summary of Estimated Water Treatment Costs 5-3 2004 Series Bonds Projects - Summary of Estimated Costs for Water Distribution Projects 5-3.1 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Costs for Water Distribution Other System Improvements 5-3.2 2004 Series Bonds Projects - Estimated Costs for Water Distribution State Highway Projects 5-4 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated Wastewater Treatment System Costs 5-5 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs 5-5.1 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Planninw'OperationsjMonitoring 5-5.2 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Interceptor Upgrades 5-5.3 2004 Series Bonds Projects - Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: 1/1 Reduction 5-5.4 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Unsewered Pockets 5-5.5 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: ExpansionsjExtensions 5-6 2004 Series Bonds Projects - Summary of Estimated System-wide Costs 6-1 Historical Water and Sewer System Operating Results 6-2 Water and Sewer Rates (Effective 4f1I2004) 6-3 Comparison of Typical Monthly Residential Customer Bills 6-4 Water and Sewer System Operating Results 6-5 Operating Fund, Sources and Uses of Cash Flows 6-6 Funding Decisions Figures 2-1 Location Map 2-2 Organizational Chart 2-3 Projected Growth by Region 3-1 Service Areas and Major Water Distribution Lines 3-2 Existing Wells and Treatment Plants 3-3 Water Pumping Stations 4-1 Wastewater System Service Areas 4-2 Drainage Basins 5-1 Projects Totally Funded Under Previous Bond Programs 5-2 Projects Partially Funded Under Previous Bond Programs 5-3 Water Distribution Construction Projects 5-4 Wastewater Conveyance Construction Projects Appendices A Population Growth within Census Tracts B Future Water Treatment Regulations IV Action Limit Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies American Society of Civil Engineers August Utilities Department American Water Works Association Best Management Practice booster pump station Code of Federal Regulations cubic feet per second Certified Government Financial Manager Capital Improvement Plan Capacity, Maintenance, Operation, and Management Certified Public Accountant Chartered Pension Executive Contact Time Clean Water Act Disinfectants I Disinfection Byprod ucts Rule ductile iron Department of Natural Resources Dissolved Oxygen United States Environmental Protection Agency State of Georgia, Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division Federal Advisory Committee force main feet per second square feet Full-time Equivalent Fiscal Year Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority gallons per capita per day gallons per day gallons per minute per square foot groundwater treatment plant Haloacetic Acid Heterophic Plant Count infiltration and inflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acronyms AL AMWA ASCE AUD AWWA BMP BPS CFR cfs CGFM CIP CMOM CPA CPE CT CWA D/DBP DI DNR DO EPA EPD FAC FM fps fF FTE FY GEFA gpcpd gpd gpml ft2 GWTP HAA HPC III v It It It It It . . It It . . It I It It It It It I It It . . It It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ACRONYMS (CONTINUED) IDSE IESWTR IT kgal LRAA LT1ESWTR L T2ESWTR MCL(G) MG mgjL mgd MS4 MSA msl NPDES NTU O&M PAC PE PRY PS PSI PVC RMP SDWA SPCCP SWAP SWP3 SWTR TDH TM TMDL TSS TTHM UV WEF WPCP WTP WWTP Initial Distribution System Evaluation Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule Information Technology 1,000 gallons Locational Running Annual Average Long-Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule maximum contaminant level (goal) million gallons Milligrams per Liter million gallons per day Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Metropolitan Statistic Area mean sea level National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Nephelometric Turbidity Unit Operations and Maintenance Powdered Activated Carbon Professional Engineer Pressure-Reducing Valves pump station pounds per square inch polyvinyl chloride risk management plan Safe Drinking Water Act Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan Source Water Assessment Plan Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Surface Water Treatment Rule Total Dynamic Head Technical Memorandum Total Maximum Daily Load Total Suspended Solids total trihalomethanes Ultraviolet Water Environment Federation Water Pollution Control Plant water treatment plant wastewater treatment plant VI It . It It It . It It It . . It It . It It . It I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Authorization and Purpose CH2M HILL was retained to prepare this Engineer's Report (" the Report") as an analysis of the feasibility of issuing $160,000,000 Augusta, Georgia Water and Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 (the "Series 2004 Bonds"). CH2M HILL has served as the overall program manager for the $42 million, $94 million, and $130 million water and sewerage (also referred to as "wastewater") capital improvement programs in Augusta, funded by the 1996, 2000, and 2002 bond issues, respectively. CH2M HILL also completed the Augusta Master Plan 2000, approved by the Augusta-Richmond County Commission on July 19, 2000, which presented a multiple phase capital improvement plan (CIP). This plan identified capital improvements to be financed through the Series 2000 and 2002 Bonds. During the years 2005 through 2013, approximately $189,600,000 in capital improvements to the Augusta water and wastewater system will be funded by proceeds of the Series 2004 Bonds and interest earnings thereon, plus approximately $31,700,000 in system revenues. The proceeds of the Series 2004 Bonds will be applied in the following approximate amounts, subject to final pricing: . $157,899,704 - (including expected interest earnings of approximately $11,800,000) will finance improvements to the Augusta water and wastewater system; . $13,362,549 - costs of issuance (including underwriter's discount, legal fees, bond insurance and surety bond fees, the cost of settling a rate lock entered into in anticipation of the Series 2004 Bonds, rating fees, and other miscellaneous costs associated with issuance of the Series 2004 Bonds); . $10,041,109 - original issue premium; and . $10,606,759 - to finance a portion of capitalized interest through 10/1/09. The "System" is defined as the water and wastewater facilities that are owned and operated by Augusta, Georgia (Augusta) together with all water and wastewater facilities acquired or used by Augusta in furnishing water and wastewater services. Major components of the System are referred to herein as the "Water System" and the "Wastewater System." This Report contains the following sections: . Section 1 - Introduction - outlines authorization and purpose of the Report, study references, and assumptions. . Section 2 - System History and Organization, and County Growth - provides an overview of the System's history, organization, management, and county population trends. 1-1 1-2 . . 41 . . . . . . . I . tI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 · Section 3 - Water System - describes the current Water System service area, facilities, operations, and assets. · Section 4 - Wastewater System - describes the current Wastewater System's service area, facilities, operations, and assets. · Section 5 - Proposed System CIP - provides the planning criteria and assumptions used for identifying needed capital improvements and it describes the purpose and function of categories of planned improvements. · Section 6 - Financial Performance - describes historical and projected financial performance, Augusta's financial policies, and a funding analysis for the Series 2004 Bonds. 1.2 References CH2M HILL reviewed and relied upon information provided by the Augusta Utilities Department (the "Department"). As part of previous and current project assignments CH2M HILL has independently verified a significant portion of this information. Although CH2M HILL offers no assurances regarding information not independently verified, it has no reason to believe that the information is invalid for the purposes of this Report. Information used to complete this Report included: · Interviews with Department staff · Preliminary Official Statement, Augusta, Georgia Water and Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2004, dated November, 2004. · Augusta Utilities Department, 2004 Budget Workbook · Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia, Annual Financial Statements, 1997-2003 · Augusta-Richmond County Utilities, Financial Statements and Accompanying Information for the year ended 1997-2003 · City of Augusta, Georgia and Richmond County, Georgia, Combined Water and Sewerage Funds, Combined Balance Sheets, 1997-2003. · Augusta-Richmond County Utilities, Miscellaneous Statistical Data for the years ended 1997-2003 (prepared by Augusta Utilities Department) · Augusta-Richmond County Comprehensive Plan 2004, (prepared by Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission) · Technical Memorandum: Population Trends and Water/Wastewater Flow Projections, July 12, 2004 (prepared by Diane Reilly, Consulting Economist) · Technical Memorandum: Future Water Treatment Regulations, July 14, 2004 (Steve Lavender, CH2M HILL) . . t . . . . . . . . . I It . . I t It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 . Water & Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2002, Engineer's Report, June 13, 2002 (prepared by CH2M HILL) . James B. Messerly Water Pollution Control Plant Master Plan, 2003 (prepared by CH2M HILL) . Master Plan 2000 for Water and Wastewater Systems, Augusta Utilities Department, Technical Memorandum 5.2: Augusta-Richmond County Wastewater Conveyance System Evaluation, April 4, 2002 (prepared by CH2M HILL) . Master Plan 2000 for Water and Wastewater Systems, Augusta Utilities Department, Summary of Recommendations for Expansions and Improvements, February 4, 2000 (prepared by CH2M HILL) . Water Distribution System Analysis for Augusta Utilities Department September 2001 (prepared by CH2M HILL) . GA Optimization Study of Augusta Utilities Department Distribution System Master Plan - Design Data Summary, August, 2004 Draft (prepared by CH2M HILL & Optimatics) . Highland Avenue Water Treatment Plant Basis of Design Report, Volume 1 and 2, April 2003 (prepared by Gannett Fleming) . Augusta Canal Power Utilization and Raw Water Pumping Engineering Study, July 6, 1998 (prepared by ZEL Engineers). . Preliminary Engineering Design Report - Upgrade Raw Water Pumping, June 2002 (prepared by ZEL Engineers) 1.3 Assumptions CH2M HILL also made certain assumptions about future conditions with regard to the System. While these assumptions are reasonable for the purposes of this Report, actual conditions may differ from those assumed. To the extent that future conditions differ from those assumed, results will vary from those forecast. CH2M HILL's principal assumptions regarding future conditions are: . Augusta-Richmond County population will increase from the 2000 level of 199,775 to 224,715 by 2025, according to the Augusta-Richmond County Comprehensive Plan 2004. In addition, many areas of Augusta are under development as a result of a shift in growth patterns. This will require that the Department expand water and wastewater infrastructure to serve new customers. . Augusta has adopted a policy to mandate conversion to central wastewater collection when service is available. The Department has plans to ensure enforcement but conservatively estimates that actual connections will occur over a period of 3 years following completion of new collection lines in unsewered areas. . System water consumption and wastewater flows will increase in proportion to the forecast increases in the number of water and wastewater accounts and per capita flows. 1.3 14 . 41 t . . . . I . . I I I . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 · System per capita residential water consumption will decrease by an estimated 2 percent over the next 20 years due to the implementation of local and statewide water conserva- tion measures and response to improved water use metering and projected rate increases. · The Augusta-Richmond County Commission will adopt the rate increases necessary to implement the financial plan outlined in Section 6. Additional assumptions used in preparing the CIP are described in Section 5. . . . . It . . . I . . . it . . It I II . . . . .. . It . it . . It . . . I . . . . . . . . ., 2.0 System History and Organization, and County Growth Augusta, Georgia is a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, created on January 1, 1996, pursuant to Acts of the General Assembly of the State of Georgia, which authorized the consolidation of the municipal corporation known as "The City Council of Augusta" and the political subdivision known as "Richmond County, Georgia" (the "Consolidation Charter"). See Figure 2-1 for the County's location in Georgia. N A o 55 110 220 3~les CH2MHILL \~lAugustI'InxdIllf04fig21.mxd JKH 9113104 Figure 2.1 Location Map Augusta, GA Augusta owns the water supply, treatment, and distribution system, as well as the wastewater collection and treatment system. The Department is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the water treatment and distribution facilities (the "Water System"), as well as the wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities (the "Wastewater System") that serve Augusta's service area. In addition, the Department provides customer service functions including meter reading and customer billing, revenue collections, and inspection of new construction. 2-1 2-2 . . . . . . I . . . . . . t I . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 2.1 Organizational Structure 2.1.1 Augusta On January 1, 1996, Augusta was created as a consolidated city-county government, whose territorial jurisdiction extends to all of what was formerly Richmond County. Blythe and Hephzibah, small municipalities with estimated current populations of 720 and 3,945, respectively, still hold their own municipal charters within the consolidated territory. The relationship between Augusta and Blythe and Hephzibah is similar to that of counties and municipalities within the territorial limits of such counties. As a result of consolidation, Augusta is able to provide public services throughout its territorial limits through a single organization and management structure. Augusta has a municipal form of government. Under the Consolidation Charter, the governing authority of Augusta is a board of commissioners designated as the Augusta- Richmond County Commission (the" Commission"). The Commission consists of a Mayor, who is the chief executive officer of the Commission, and 10 commissioners. 2.1.2 System Management The System is managed by Augusta through the Department. The Administrator of Augusta, who is appointed by the Commission upon recommendation of the Mayor, oversees the management of the operations and capital program of the Department. The chief managerial officer of the Department is the Director, who is appointed by the Commission. Interim Administrator. Frederick 1. Russell, age 51, was appointed Interim Administrator in June, 2004 following the resignation of former Administrator, Mr. George Kolb. Mr. Russell served as Augusta's Deputy Administrator, Public Safety Portfolio, from January 2002 until he assumed the Interim Administrator position. Mr. Russell has a Master of Science in Criminal Justice from Nova University and a Bachelor of Science from Virginia Tech. He attended the FBI National Academy, 150th Session. Some of the former positions he has held include: Deputy Chief, Richmond, Virginia Police Department; Executive Director, Virginia State Crime Commission; Chief of Police, City of Bedford, Virginia. Director of Finance. David Persaud, age 47, has been the Director of Finance of Augusta since June 3, 2002. Mr. Persaud was the Director of Finance for Chatham County, Georgia from November 1985 through May 2002. From August of 1984 through November 1985, Mr. Persaud was the Director of Finance of the City of Mount Dora, Florida. From February 1982 through August 1984, Mr. Persaud was the accountant for Glynn County, Georgia. Prior to August 1984, Mr. Persaud was employed in the private sector. Mr. Persaud received a B.S. degree in Business Administration and Accounting from the University of Coastal California and a Masters degree in Public Administration from Savannah State University. He is a Certified Government Financial Manager (CGFM) and has a Chartered Pension Executive (CPE) certification. Director. N. Max Hicks, P.E., age 64, has been the Director of the Augusta Utilities Department since June 4,1996. From 1991 to 1996, Mr. Hicks was the General Superintendent and the Assistant General Superintendent, respectively, of the City's Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Works Office. From 1989 to 1991, Mr. Hicks was Public Works Director for the City of Toccoa, Georgia. Prior to that, he was a Partner, Director, and Vice President of the consulting engineering firm of Zimmerman, Evans, and Leopold, Inc., Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Hicks studied Engineering and English at Charlotte College (now University of North Carolina at Charlotte), Charlotte, North Carolina, and Economics and Accounting at the University of South Carolina at Aiken, Aiken, South Carolina. Mr. Hicks is a Licensed Professional Engineer and Land Surveyor in Georgia. Mr. Hicks received the 2002-2003 Government Civil Engineer of the Year Award from the South Carolina section of the ASCE; the Best Friend Award from the Georgia Water Wise Council in 1998; and was the 1996 recipient of the Elizabeth McIntyre Award for Outstanding Service in Water Supply from the Georgia Water and Pollution Control Association. His technical society memberships include the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), American Water Works Association (AWW A), Water Environment Federation (WEF), Surveying and Mapping Society of Georgia, and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) where he serves on the Regulatory Committee and the Management Committee. Assistant Director of Finance & Administration. Steven J. Little, c.P.A., age 48, has been the Assistant Director of Finance and Administration of the Augusta Utilities Department since December of 2001. From 2000 to 2001, he was the Assistant to the Chief Financial Officer at the national headquarters for Electrolux Home Products, makers of Frigidaire appliances, located in Augusta, Georgia. Prior to that, he was the Chief Financial Officer for a start-up medical referral company and its sister corporation in Aiken, South Carolina. His previous experience includes over 10 years of public accounting, with an emphasis in auditing local governments, and internal auditing for a private utility company. Mr. Little is a certified public accountant. He is currently serving as Vice Chair of the Finance and Administration Sub-Committee of the Water Environment Federation's Utility Management Committee. He received a B.B.A. degree in Accounting from Iowa State University in 1982. Assistant Director, Wastewater Treatment. D. Allen Saxon, Jr., age 48, has been the Assistant Director of Wastewater for the Augusta Utilities Department since March 5,2001. Mr. Saxon previously served as the Supervisor of Water Pollution for the City for 17 years until September of 1994, when he resigned to further his education. He is an active member of the Georgia Water & Pollution Control Association and the Water Environment Federation. Mr. Saxon was Georgia's 1990 recipient of the William D. Hatfield Award from the Water Environment Federation. Mr. Saxon earned a B.B.A. degree in 1983 from Augusta College and an M.S. degree in 1996 from Georgia State University. Mr. Saxon is certified as a Class I Wastewater Treatment System Operator by the State of Georgia. Assistant Director, Water Production. Clifford A. (Drew) Goins, age 49, has been the Assistant Director of Water Production for the Augusta Utilities Department since May 29, 2001. Mr. Goins has been employed by the City for almost 23 years in various capacities. He began his employment with the City as a Resident Engineer in 1982 until his promotion to Assistant Commissioner of Public Works and Director of Engineering in 1990. From 1993 through 1996, Mr. Goins served as the acting Commissioner of Public Works and Director of Engineering while the Commissioner of Public Works was reassigned to the position of acting City Administrator. After serving in that capacity, Mr. Goins served as the Assistant Director of Public Works and Engineering until he accepted his current position. Mr. Goins has been a 10th District Chapter Director for American Public Works Georgia and a 2.3 2-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 committee member of the American Public Works National Engineering & Technology. He received a Bachelor of Civil Engineering Technology Degree from Southern Technical Institute in 1981. Assistant Director, Engineering & Construction. Douglas A. Cheek, P.E., age 40, has been the Assistant Director of Engineering and Construction for the Augusta Utilities Department since May 29, 2001. From August of 1998 until May of 2001, Mr. Cheek served as the City Engineer for Augusta. From July of 1988 until July of 1998, Mr. Cheek served as the Bridge Construction Liaison Engineer and Project Engineer for the Georgia Department of Transportation's Metro Atlanta District Office. In June of 1988, Mr. Cheek received a Bachelor of Civil Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia. He also studied Biology at Clayton State College in Morrow, Georgia from 1982 to 1984. Mr. Cheek is a Registered Professional Engineer in Georgia. Customer Service Superintendent. Alma Stephenson, 57, has been the Superintendent of Sales, Collections, and Customer Service of the Augusta Utilities Department since June 4,1996. Ms. Stephenson has been employed by the City for 27 years. She was appointed Director of Consolidated Revenue/Manager of the Water Works Office and Sales Department in June of 1995, after serving for 8 years as the Assistant Director of Consolidated Revenue/Manager of the Water Works Office and Sales Department. The Department. The Department has 284 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions authorized in its fiscal year (FY) 2004 budget and, as of June 11, 2004, had 52 open positions (9 for the new water treatment plant that will begin training and operation in December 2004). Figure 2-2 illustrates the current organization of the Department. No employees of the System are represented by labor organizations or are subject to provisions of collective bargaining agreements, and the Commission is not aware of any union organizing efforts. The System's plant operators and maintenance and repair personnel are required to meet the certification levels prescribed by the State of Georgia Board of Certification of Water and Wastewater Operators. Augusta pays for continuing education programs to ensure that System personnel are qualified, and achieve and maintain certification of their qualifica- tions. The System's operators meet or exceed the minimum credentials required by the State of Georgia. Additionally, all field employees must attend safety meetings and participate in safety training programs; these cover shoring and trenching, confined space entry, lock-out! tag- out, and other safety topics. 1-1-'" 5a5~ a.::i:U) ~~~ Y>~ffi <l::wU) Iii !_ *-~lllln ~~t~ '~! "II I ~ 'II illl !I!H it tll ill nlll i ; ~ ~ij Hj ~ · Ii 1111 A JI) ". I.;. I. ') II il H L ~ ~! li~ ~ ~ ~J !!. II .. I I. f I' => U i n lilt WI H ~ If I ~ i~ ~ ~ II " II I. rII~ ~ Wlilli1UF 11 ~rl~ m ! ~ ~ .. I.~. ,.ll....:..._p.......... '....'... .~!Ii.... ...~..~.. .... 'I:.... ~lh1!: I ~ - II 11:1 l -IJIII ~~bM fit! ~ 1m Lit. I ~ ~~~l:llil i1iiU II ~ I ! ~ I ~ c!~h . i - I d ... Ii II J J J II J J J ! ! 111)1 1)1 I! I II II II! I I ! II I J II 1111 L- ---, 8 I I I Ip I I f I J II I I I ~ I I I I III I nb ~ III II J! ,) II J J I: II J I, I I I II) I, 1)11)1 II II1I11 II! I I I I I f II ioUJio I ~ I I I ~ I I f I J I I J I I F== I I I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ N N't::- .('O~ N..c ! (.) ('0 :::::IC:~ 98 11.('0=:3 .~~ c: ('0 ~ o ..J ..J - J: I II UI 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 2.2 Augusta Population Trends After growing by 5.3 percent from 1990 to 2000, the total population of Augusta declined slightly between 2000 and 2003, from 199,775 to 198,149 according to the u.s. Bureau of the Census. Statewide, the population in Georgia, which grew by 26.4 percent during the 1990s, has increased by 5.5 percent from 2000 to 2003. Despite the slight population decline over the last 3 years, Augusta ranks seventh in the State in terms of population behind five metropolitan Atlanta counties (Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, Cobb, and Clayton) and Savannah's Chatham County. While the growth rate of Augusta has been relatively modest compared to the accelerated growth experienced elsewhere in the State, Augusta's previously undeveloped areas have experienced significant population growth. This redistribution of population has hastened some of the requirements for planned capital improvements. The projected growth by census tracts (Appendix A) from 2000 to 2010 is shown in Figure 2-3 by regions. Note that Regions 1, 2 and 5 represent the older, more developed City of Augusta prior to consolidation. The general population shift within Augusta to more rural areas, which previously had limited services or were not served, will require the Department to expand System capacity in these areas. Economic development is largely affected by factors beyond Augusta's direct control including growth in adjacent counties and the health of the Augusta Metropolitan Statistical Area's (MSA) economy. However, economic development and growth manage- ment policies of the local government will significantly impact the pattern of population distribution within the County. The projections used by CH2M HILL in forecasting water and wastewater flows (see Sections 3.8 and 4.4) used the forecast presented in the Augusta-Richmond County Comprehensive Plan 2004, with adjustments made for the u.s. Army's Fort Gordon on-base population. Table 2-1 presents the projected population, including that for Fort Gordon, for Augusta through 2025 (obtained from the u.S. Bureau of the Census). As shown in the table, future growth is expected to be similar to that experienced by the City from 1990 to 2000. TABLE 2.1 Population Forecasts Augusta, 1990 (estimate) through 2025 1990 2000 2010 2020 2025 Area (Census) (Census) (projected) (projected) (projected) State of Georgia1 6,506,531 8,230,094 Percent Change 26.5% Augusta-Richmond Countyl 189,719 199,775 208,356 219,759 224,715 Percent Change 5.3% 4.3% 5.5% 2.3% Augusta1 195,182 203,564 214,705 219,642 Percent Change 4.3% 5.5% 2.3% Hephzibah 1 3,880 4,042 4,263 4,263 Percent Change 4.2% 5.5% 0.0% Blythe1 713 750 791 810 Percent Change 5.2% 5.5% 2.4% lAugusta-Richmond County Comprehensive Plan 2004, prepared by Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission) . . . . . . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Foct GJrdon not irl;luded Data represents ~roximate value for enlire region. Pctual vaiarce within blocks may be significant. SavannM River N A L2 4 6 8 Miles Figure 2.3 Population Growth by Region (Based Upon Census Tracts) Augusta, Georgia CH2MHILL \\boomeMlprojects3\augustalmxd\er04fig23.mxd oKH 9116,Q4 2.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 Water System 3.1 Overview of Potable Water System Augusta owns and operates a potable water system serving 60,105 residential and 8,008 commercial and industrial customers as of July 31, 2004. The City may draw surface water from the Savannah River and groundwater from the Tuscaloosa Aquifer that lies beneath the City. Currently water is drawn from the Savannah River through the Augusta Canal that was constructed in the 1840-1870s. Raw water is pumped from the Augusta Canal to raw water holding basins located at the Highland Avenue Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The water from the Tuscaloosa Aquifer is pumped by wells to groundwater water treatment plants (GWTP) Nos. 1, 2, and 3. The water system consists of a raw surface water supply with a monthly average allotment of 75 million gallons per day (mgd) and ground water supply with a monthly average allotment of 18.4 mgd. The system has raw surface water storage capacity of approximately 124 million gallons (MG), five raw surface water pump stations with aggregate raw water pumping capacity of 88 mgd, and 26 active wells with aggregate groundwater pumping capacity of 23.1 mgd. The system includes four water treatment plants and a rural chlorina- tion system with an aggregate rated capacity for treatment of raw water of 83.7 mgd and an aggregate rated treated water pumping capacity of 66.7 mgd. In addition, the system has treated water storage capacity of 43.2 MG and a water distribution network of approximately 1,010 miles of pipelines. Currently Augusta can be supplied with 80 mgd of treated water from the four operating water treatment plants: Highland Avenue WTP with 601 mgd production capacity, GWTP No.1 with 5 mgd capacity, GWTP No.2 with 10 mgd capacity, and GWTP No.3 with 5 mgd capacity. Plans call for a reduced groundwater use in the near-term. Highland Avenue WTP is soon to be expanded and upgraded to produce a continuous 60 mgd (discussed in Section 5). The new N. Max Hicks Tobacco Road WTP (Hicks WTP) with a capacity of 15 mgd is to be completed and operational in early 2005 and will replace water supplied by GWTP No.1, and part of the production of GWTP No.2 (5 mgd). This will reduce average groundwater usage to 10 mgd. By year 2020, the N. Max Hicks Tobacco Road WTP capacity will be increased to 40 mgd and these two GWTPs will become an active reserve source for the system. As active reserve, they will be used regularly to maintain system performance but will not be considered part of the primary water supply source. The surface water treated at the Highland A venue and Hicks WTPs will be the primary source at that time. Various associated pipeline, storage, and pump station facilities are to be added or upgraded to permit the transition from current to near-term and to long-term supply sources and to meet projected water demands. 1 The Highland Avenue WTP can produce a continuous 45 mgd but for short periods of high demand can treat up to 60 mgd. 3.1 3-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 3.2 Water Service Area The Water System supplies water to residential, commercial, and industrial customers located within the County. The service area encompasses approximately 210 square miles (approximately 88 percent of the land area of the County exclusive of Fort Gordon) containing an estimated population in excess of 180,000. The population of Fort Gordon is estimated to be 19,835. The water systems of Fort Gordon and the Cities of Blythe and Hephzibah currently provide water service within their respective jurisdictions in the County. In April 2003, a Technical Proposal was developed by the Department for Water System Utilities Privatization of Fort Gordon Army Installation. The proposal has not been accepted as of October 2004. The anticipated flows to supply Fort Gordon have been considered when defining future demands to assure availability of system capacity. Figure 3-1 presents the areas currently served by the Water System with overlays of major water distribution lines. Generally, the service area can be characterized as having complete water service coverage for potential customers who wish to connect to the Water System. Projects defined in Section 5 as part of the ClP will continue to enhance the Water System's ability to serve this area. D Augusta Water Service Area* - Major Water Unes -- Streets . Aug.Jsta Servi;e hea does not in;lude Fort Gordon, Hepzibah or Elythe N A L 1.-2 4 6 6Mlle. Rgure 3-1 Water System Service Plea and Major Water Distrtlution Lines Augusta, Georgia CH2MHILL \\boomer\hlprojects3\auguslalrnxd\ertl4fig31.mxd ~H 9115,Q4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 3.3 Water Supply The Water System's primary source of raw water is the Savannah River, withdrawing directly from the river as well as from the Augusta Canal, which is fed by and located parallel to the river. The Water System has four raw water intakes on the canal, two primary and two secondary, plus an additional diesel-engine-driven standby raw water pump that can pump from either the canal or the river. The raw water supply is pumped from the Water System's raw water facilities located between the Augusta Canal and the Savannah River to the Highland A venue WTP through a system of parallel raw water lines. There are four raw water transmission lines: a 30-inch-diameter cast iron pipe, 36-inch steel pipe, a 60-inch ductile iron (DI) pipe, and an inactive 42-inch pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe. In addition, Augusta is permitted to withdraw supplemental raw water from the Tuscaloosa Formation aquifer through 32 wells: 26 actively producing, 5 deactivated, and 1 inactive. The Water System is currently permitted to withdraw groundwater under Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division (EPD) Permit No. 121- 0007 to pump 18.4 mgd maximum month average; and 17.4 mgd maximum annual average. See Figure 3-2 for the location of the wells and WTPs in the service area. The HWTP has a rated capacity of 60 mgd and the City's three GWTP together add 18 mgd: GWTP No.1 with a capacity of 5 mgd (Peach Orchard Road WP No. 201), GWTP No.2 with a capacity of 10 mgd (Bush Field WP No. 202), and GWTP No.3 with a capacity of 5 mgd (Little Spirit Creek WP No. 230). A portion of Well Field No.1 (5 mgd) was inactivated and one well abandoned and replaced by the capacity of GWTP No.3. The Georgia Water Quality Control Act authorizes the EPD to regulate the withdrawal of water from lakes, streams, and aquifers in Georgia. Augusta holds permits for raw water sources as noted in Table 3-1. TABLE 3.1 Water Withdrawal Permits Permitted Withdrawal (mgd) Raw Water Source Monthly Average 24 hour Max. Day Surface Water: Highland Avenue WTP source: Savannah River/Augusta Canal EPD Permit No. 121-0191-06 60.0 60.0 Hicks WTP source: Savannah River EPD Permit No. 121-0191-09 (modified) Groundwater: 15.0 Monthly Average 21.0 Annual Average 26 Active Wells - located at GWTP Nos. 1, 2, and 3 plus two individual sites (Rural Chlorination Sys.) EPD Permit No. 121-0007 Note: mgd = million gallons per day 18.4 17.4 3-3 3-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 [!] Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP) [!] Surface Water Treatment Plant (WTP) . Raw Water Pumping station (RWPS) . Kept on Rural Chlorinatio o Treatment Plant 4 8 ~iles N A o 1.... 2 CH2MHILL \\boomeMlprojecls3\augusta\mxdler04fig32.mxd..KH 9/15104 In 1991, Georgia EPD issued to former Richmond County a permit for withdrawal of raw water from the Savannah River of 30 mgd monthly average and 37 mgd maximum daily capacity. The intake was located just north of Interstate 20 where a new WTP was initially planned (EPD Permit No. 121-0191-09), referred to as the North Location. The plant at this location was not constructed. After the consolidation of the former City of Augusta and Richmond County, all permits were also consolidated. In June 2000, EPD approved the transfer of 15 mgd monthly average capacity to the current secondary raw water intake (EPD Permit No. 121-0191-06), increasing the monthly average/24-hour maximum day withdrawal capacity from the Savannah River to 60 mgd. The remaining 15-mgd capacity from the North Location will be relocated to a new WTP intake discussed further in Section 5. The new permit with EPD has been tentatively approved and Augusta is anticipating its final approval by December 2004. The conditions of that draft permit are shown in Table 3-1. 3.3.1 Raw Water Pumping Withdrawal of raw water from Augusta's primary raw water supply is accomplished via a raw water pump station (PS) that has an aggregate pump capacity of 88 mgd and is located at the Water System's water intake on the Augusta Canal. Raw water pumping is accom- plished primarily using two pumps, Units 1 and 4, with capacities of 20 mgd and 30 mgd, respectively. Units 1 and 4 are powered by water-driven turbines, originally constructed in 1952 and 1975, respectively, and improved in 1993 and 1999. Unit 1 is a two-stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 centrifugal pump and Unit 4 is a single-stage centrifugal pump. Units 2 and 3 are older pumps, each with a capacity of 9.0 mgd, which are used as supplemental supply for peak demands and when one of the other units is taken out of service for maintenance. These pumps were originally constructed in 1898, were improved in 1939, and received major upgrading in 1999. A fifth unit, Unit 5, is a standby diesel-engine-driven raw water pump, with a water intake which can be used in the Augusta Canal or the Savannah River, and a raw water pumping capacity of 20 mgd. This standby auxiliary pump was originally constructed in 1975 and is housed in the same building as Unit 4, which received major upgrading in 1999. See Table 3-2 for detailed information on the five raw water pumps. Table 3-2 outlines information on the raw water pump station equipment as well as their general condition. The Department maintenance staff has rated the pumps based upon equipment age, performance, and reliability. Those rated "good" are considered reliable for continuous use with little maintenance, while those rated "fair" are older and considered reliable only for occasional use. For pumps rated" fair", maintenance is more difficult due to age of equipment and wear. Upgrading of the pump station is part of the planned capital improvements described in Section 5. TABLE 3.2 Existing Equipment at the Raw Water Pump Station Pump Flow Capacity Turbine Flow Installed No. (mgd) (cfs) Capacity Comments NO.1 20 550 1,650 hp Good condition NO.2 9 250 750 hp Fair condition No.3 9 250 750 hp Fair condition NO.4 30 814 2,500 hp Good condition No.5 20* o (Diesel-driven) 2,000 hp Good condition * 17 if withdrawing water directly from the river Source: Augusta Utilities Department, Water Treatment Division Note: cfs = cubic feet per second 3.3.2 Raw Water Transmission and Storage Raw water is currently transmitted from the PS to raw water holding basins at the Highland A venue WTP via three pipelines: a 30-inch cast iron pipe, a 36-inch steel pipe, and a 60-inch ductile iron (DI) pipe. (A 42-inch pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe has been taken out of service to be evaluated for possible use as a backup supply line.) The pipelines have a total capacity range of 102.15 to 163.40 mgd or a firm carrying capacity with the 60-inch line out of service of 38.7 to 61.88 mgd, at typical velocity ranges of 5 to 8 feet per second (fps) for pumped flow. The Highland Avenue WTP has raw water storage capacity of approximately 379 acre-feet or 124 MG at two raw water holding basins that serve the Water System. They provide pre- settling of suspended matter in the raw water as well as storage during times of low river or canal flows. Water flows by gravity from these holding basins to the WTP. 3-5 3-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 3.4 Water Treatment Facilities Augusta owns two Surface WTPs and three GWTPs, as summarized in Table 3-3. TABLE 3.3 Water Treatment Plants and Chlorination System Rated Plants Capacity for 2003 Production Date of EPD Operating Permit Treatment of of Treated Water Original Dates of No. CS2450000 Raw Water (maximum day) Construction Improvements Highland Avenue WTP 60.0 mgd 34.7 mgd 1939 1949,1954,1987, Permitted to 60 mgd but improvements, 1994,2000,2002 currently under design, are necessary before plant can sustain that production level. Current sustainable capacity 45 mgd. N. Max Hicks WTP 15.0 mgd NA 2003-2005 New Initial phase capacity of 15 mgd currently under construction with completion scheduled for January 2005. Ultimate site capacity of 60 mgd. Peach Orchard Road(GWTP No.1) 5.0 mgd 5.51 mgd 1966 1969, 1996 Original capacity of 10 mgd reduced to 5 mgd in 2001; the new GWTP No.3 replaced lost capacity. Highway 56 Loop (GWTP No.2) 10.0 mgd 7.92 mgd 1979 1985, 1992, 1996 Little Spirit Creek (GWTP No.3) 5.0 mgd 4.98 mgd 2001 Rural Chlorination System 2.7 mgd Operational 1972 Each year since Reserve only 1981 Totals 97.7 mgd 53.11 mgd* .Current operating limit 78.4 mgd The rural chlorination system is served by three wells identified as Brown Road, Plantation Road, and Kimberly-Clarke Wells; at each well there is a chlorine solution feed system for disinfection, a caustic soda solution feed system for pH adjustment, and fluoridation via addition of hydrofluosilicic acid. The Kimberly-Clarke well has been taken out of service and the other two wells placed on reserve and will be used only to meet critical demands. 3.4.1 Highland Avenue WTP System Processes The following processes used by the Department are standard for similar water treatment systems and comply fully with regulatory requirements. Using this treatment technology results in treated water that complies with permit criteria and satisfies user demands for a high quality, reliable water supply. Pre-Flash Mixing and Flow Splitting: Pre-treatment chemicals are added just downstream of the raw water venturi meter and control valve. These chemicals include chlorine, lime, and alum. (Polymer, when added, is injected upstream of the flow meter.) It It . . . . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Flocculation: Flocculation is provided through six flocculation basins-the effluents from the first two are combined and split among sedimentation basins 1, 2, and 3. Each of the remaining four sedimentation basins has a dedicated flocculation basin. Sedimentation Basins: Flow into sedimentation basins 1, 2, and 3 is through a series of 12 inlets for each basin. Settled water from these first three basins enters a settled water flume; a second settled water flume receives flow from the remaining four sedimentation basins. The two settled water flumes combine in the filter influent flume. Filtration: The Highland Avenue WTP includes 10 dual-media, two-celled filters, each with a surface area of approximately 1,050 square feet (ft2). At the current rated capacity of 60 mgd, the filtration rate is 4.0 gallons per minute (gpm)/ft2 with all filters in service. Each filter includes Leopold underdrains, 8 inches of gravel, 9 inches of sand, and 20 inches of anthracite. Backwash troughs are cast-in-place concrete. Rotary surface wash arms with nozzles are included for cleaning the expanded media during backwashing. Filter effluent piping includes a rate-of-flow controller for each filter. Post Flash Mixing: Post flash mixing occurs in a two-compartment basin, with each compartment having a pitched blade turbine mixer. Post-treatment chemicals (fluoride, lime, phosphate, and chlorine solution) are added as the filtered water enters the basin in the transition piece from a 72-inch pipe to a 6-foot by 4-foot rectangular opening. 3.5 Finished Water Storage, Chemical Feed Systems, and High Service Pumping Once the water is treated, distribution throughout the system requires high service pumping and storage in order to maintain a reliable, continuous supply for residential, commercial, and industrial customer uses. The systems described below are maintained at a level to provide operating pressures throughout the system that exceed EPD requirements of 35 pounds per square inch (psi) minimum line pressure. The Department generally maintains line pressures of 60 psi to 120 psi measured at remote fire hydrants located in residential areas. This pressure level is within A WW A guidelines, promotes high levels of customer satisfaction, and provides adequate pressures to support fire protection. 3.5.1 Finished Water Storage The Highland Avenue WTP finished water storage tanks (clearwells) supply the lower pressure zones directly by gravity while the remaining capacity is pumped to the Water System's storage facilities located in various pressure zones. The treated water is then fed by gravity or pumped throughout the water distribution network. There are five clearwells at the Highland A venue WTP, with a total storage capacity of 15.45 MG: . Clearwell No.1 - 1.25 MG . Clearwell No.2 - 3.0 MG . Clearwell No.3 - 5.0 MG . Clearwell No.4 - 1.6 MG . Clearwell No.5 - 4.6 MG 3.7 3-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Clearwell No.2 was modified in 2000 to provide baffling for disinfection concentration and increased contact time (CT). This will facilitate continued compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act (SDW A) regulations. The current configuration directs all treated water through Clearwell No.2. Two 30-inch influent pipes were added in the 2000 WTP upgrade between the post flash mix basin and Clearwell No.2. Several large diameter pipes connect Clearwell No.2 with the four other finished water clearwells. 3.5.2 Chemical Feed Systems The chemical feed system at the Highland Avenue WTP has 10 components including: a liquid lime system that has two bulk tanks and three lime slurry feed pumps; a dry lime system used as a backup to the liquid feed system: a chlorination system with five chlorine cylinders on-line and five that serve on a standby basis; a polymer feed system used when required by high turbidity levels; a powdered activated carbon (PAC) system used when required for taste and odor problems; a phosphate feed system for corrosion control in the Water System; a liquid alum system used for flocculation enhancement; a liquid fluoride system via the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid; a dry fluoride system used as a backup to the liquid fluoride system; and a potassium permanganate slurry system for oxidation of iron and manganese during the treatment process. 3.5.3 High Service Pumping There are three sets of high service pumps at the Highland A venue WTP: the generator building pumps (also identified as the old Fort Gordon high service pumps), the filter gallery pumps, and the auxiliary pumps plus the Stovall Booster Pump Station (BPS). An additional set of inline booster pumps is located at the Wrightsboro Road BPS. Table 3-4 lists each system's pumping capacities in gpm, elevation of the pressure zone served (nominal mean sea level [msl], feet) and the difference in elevation the pumps must pump against (head, feet). The pressure zone is designated in elevation (ft msl) of the water surface in storage tanks serving the area when the water is at the full tank level. Reworking of the high service pumps is included as part of the Highland Avenue WTP improvements listed in Section 5. It It . It It . It I I It I It . It . I It I It It . It It I . It It It . I It It . I I . I . . I . It I ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 3-4 Summary of High Service Pumping From To Head (ft) Elevation Elevation Total Dynamic Head Flow Location (msl) (msl) (TDH) (gpm) Stovall BPS 433 420 66 3,000 Aux. High Service Pump 433 564 173 8,100 Aux. High Service Pump - Diesel 433 564 173 8,100 High Service Pump - Diesel 433 564 160 2,000 High Service Pump 433 564 160 5,600 High Service Pump - Backup 433 564 160 2,000 High Service Pump 433 564 160 3,500 ----- Fort Gordon Pump 433 630 or 597* 310 1,250 Fort Gordon Pump 433 630 or 597* 300 2,500 Fort Gordon Pump 433 630 or 597* 300 2,500 Fort Gordon Pump 433 630 or 597* 300 1,250 Wrightsboro Road Pump 564 630 100 700 Wrightsboro Road Pump 564 630 100 900 Wrightsboro Road Pump 564 630 100 900 *This station can pump to either pressure zone. 3.6 Water Distribution System The water distribution system includes approximately 1,048 miles of pipelines ranging in size from 6 inches to 24 inches in diameter. Most of the pipelines are made of cast iron or ductile iron (DI). Approximately 20 percent of these pipelines have been in service for 50 years or more, with the oldest pipelines installed approximately 140 years ago. Finished water is distributed from the Highland Avenue WTP by gravity and by pumping. Finished water is pumped using the Filter Gallery PS, the Auxiliary High Service PS, and the Fort Gordon (PS). Gravity flow is used to supply the 417-ft msl gradient (Intermediate- North) and the 310-ft msl gradient (Low). The Filter Gallery PS and the Auxiliary High Service PS are used to supply the northern part of the system, which has pressure zone elevations of 564-ft msl and 500-ft msl. The Fort Gordon PS is used to supply the western part of the Water System and can supply either the 597-ft msl system or the 630-ft msl system. The Wrightsboro Road PS was refurbished in 2000 to supply the 630-ft msl pressure zone from the 564-ft msl pressure zone. Finished water is pumped from GWTP No.1 into the Intermediate-South pressure gradient (417 ft msl) and from GWTP No.2 into the Pine Hill pressure gradient (457-ft msl). GWTP No.3 pumps finished water into the Pine Hill high-pressure gradient (521-ft msl). Distribution system pump stations situated at various locations are used to feed isolated higher pressure zones. See Figure 3-3 for the locations of the distribution system pumping stations and associated pressure zones. 3-9 3-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 [!] Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP) o Surface Water Treatment Plant (WTP) & Water Pumping statioos o Pressure Zooes 4 6 8 "'ila, Figure 3.3 Water Pumping Stations Augusta, Georgia N A o L 2 CH2MHILL \\boomerlhlprojacls3laugu,ta\mxdlar04fig33.mxd ..KH 9115104 Water levels in the finished water clearwells at the Highland Avenue WTP and the system pressure requirement at the 417-ft msl gradient limits gravity flow from the clearwells into the 417-ft msl (Intermediate-North) pressure zone. Areas in the 417-ft msl (Intermediate- South) pressure zone not served from the Highland Avenue WTP are supplied from GWTP No.1. In addition to the pressure zones listed above, the distribution system contains several smaller pressure zones created by the significant variations in elevation throughout Augusta. These isolated pressure zones are fed using individual wells, BPSs, or pressure- reducing valves (PRVs) to meet the Department's operating pressure requirements. A summary of pressure zones is presented in Table 3-5. . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It . It . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 TABLE 3.5 Pressure Gradient Summary System Surface Water Plant Pressure Zones Overflow Elevation (ft) Super High High Adjusted High Intermediate-North Low Groundwater Plant Pressure Zones High Pine Hill High Pine Hill Intermediate-South 630 564 500 417 310 597 521 457 417 Water Source Fort Gordon PS or BPS from the 564 pressure zone High Service and Auxiliary High Service PS PRV from the 564 pressure zone Gravity or BPS from the 433 pressure zone PRVs from the 433 pressure zone BPS from the 417 pressure zone or the Fort Gordon PS GWTP No 3 GWTP No 2 and Pine Hill Wells 1 and 2 GWTP No. 1 or BPS from the 433 pressure zone In addition, the distribution system is equipped with several storage tanks and BPSs. A summary of the distribution system storage facilities for the surface water plants is presented in Table 3-6. A summary of the surface water system pumping facilities is presented in Table 3-7. TABLE 3-6 Surface Water Storage Facilities Location Location Elevation Pressure Systems Served Gallons Capacity Highland Ave WTP Clearwell1 433 1,250,000 Highland Ave WTP Clearwell 2 433 3,000,000 Highland Ave WTP Clearwell 3 433 5,000,000 Highland Ave WTP Clearwell 4 433 1,600,000 Highland Ave WTP Clearwell 5 433 4,600,000 .--------------------.-.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Clearwells 433 All 15,450,000 Berckmans Road 417 417 500,000 Highland Ave Tank 564 564 500,000 Highpointe Tank 564 564 1,000,000 Walton Way Extension 500 500 750,000 Belair Road 630 630 1,000,000 Total Elevated Storage 3,750,000 3-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 3.7 Surface Water Pumping Facilities Head (ft) Rate (gpm) Location From To Summary of Surface Water System Pumping Stovall BPS 433 Aux. High Service Pump 433 Aux. High Service Pump - Future 433 Aux. High Service Pump - Future 433 Aux. High Service Pump -- Diesel 433 High Service Pump - Diesel 433 High Service Pump 433 High Service Pump - Backup 433 High Service Pump 433 Fort Gordon Pump 433 Fort Gordon Pump 433 Fort Gordon Pump 433 Fort Gordon Pump 433 Wrightsboro Road BPS 564 Wrightsboro Road BPS 564 Wrightsboro Road BPS 564 Total Surface Water Pumping 417 564 564 564 564 564 564 564 564 630 or 597 630 or 597 630 or 597 630 or 597 630 630 630 98 168 1,500 8,000 o o 8,000 2,000 5,600 2,000 3,500 1,250 2,500 2,500 1,250 1,100 1,100 500 40,800 168 160 160 160 160 310 300 300 310 85 85 145 Table 3-8 presents a summary of groundwater system storage facilities. TABLE 3-8 Groundwater System Storage Facilities Location Groundwater System Ground Storage GWTP No. 1 Clearwell GWTP NO.2 Clearwell GWTP No.3 Clearwell Faircrest Avenue Faircrest Avenue Windsor Spring Road Richmond Hill Road Golden Camp Road Algernon Morgan Road Cedar Ridge Rose Hill Wallie Drive Total Ground Elevation System Gallons 162 128 240 436 417 417 417 417 417 470 417 412 457 417 457 521 597 597 417 597 597 417 597 521 457 457 500,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 250,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 300,000 20,550,000 Groundwater System Elevated Storage Brown Road Highway 56 521 457 521 457 3,000,000 500,000 3-12 . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT It WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 . TABLE 3.8 . Groundwater System Storage Facilities Location Elevation System Gallons . Tobacco Road 597 597 500,000 . Fairington Drive 597 597 250,000 Georgetown 597 597 500,000 . Lumpkin Road 597 597 250,000 . Old Waynesboro Road 521 521 500,000 Greenland Road 597 597 500,000 . Total Elevated 6,000,000 It . Table 3-9 presents a summary of groundwater system pumping facilities. . TABLE 3.9 . Groundwater System Pumping Facilities Location From To Head (ft) gpm . Summary of Groundwater System Pumping . GWTP No. 1 - Pump 1 162 417 270 1,800 . GWTP No. 1 - Pump 2 162 417 270 1,800 . GWTP No. 1 - Pump 3 162 417 270 1,800 GWTP No. 1 - Pump 4 162 417 270 1,800 . GWTP No. 1 - Pump 5 162 417 270 1,800 . GWTP NO.2 - Pump 1 128 457 332 1,900 . GWTP No.2 - Pump 2 128 457 332 1,900 GWTP No.2 - Pump 3 128 457 332 1,900 . GWTP NO.2 - Pump 4 128 457 332 1,900 . GWTP NO.2 - Pump 5 128 457 332 1,900 . GWTP NO.3 - Pump 1 240 521 337 1,850 . GWTP No.3 - Pump 2 240 521 337 1,850 GWTP NO.3 - Pump 3 240 521 337 1,850 . GWTP No.3 - Pump 4 240 521 337 1,850 . Morgan Road BPS 417 597 174 2,317 . Morgan Road BPS 417 597 174 2,317 . Cedar Ridge 417 521 100 1,000 Cedar Ridge 417 521 100 1,000 . Brown's Road BPS 417 521 130 1 ,400 . Brown's Road BPS 417 521 130 1 ,400 . Brown's Road BPS 417 521 130 1 ,400 Faircrest BPS 417 597 266 1,050 . Faircrest BPS 417 597 266 1,050 . Faircrest BPS 417 597 266 1,050 . Faircrest BPS 417 597 266 1,050 Rose Hill BPS 521 457 183 400 . Rose Hill BPS 521 457 183 400 . Rose Hill BPS 521 457 183 400 . Richmond Hill BPS 417 597 260 1,050 . Richmond Hill BPS 417 597 260 1,050 . 3-13 . . 3-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 3.9 Groundwater System Pumping Facilities Location From To Head (ft) gpm Norton Road BPS 433 417 59 1,375 Norton Road BPS 433 417 59 1,375 Norton Road BPS 433 417 65 1,800 Golden Camp BPS - Vertical 417 597 265 1,050 Golden Camp BPS 417 597 265 1,050 Golden Camp BPS 417 597 265 1,050 Golden Camp BPS 417 597 265 900 Total Groundwater Pumping 53,284 The distribution system delivers water to customers through meters at each point of service connection, which are read once per month for billing purposes. The 2001 ratio of non-billed water to purchased water or unaccounted for water (representing water that was lost because of unmetered usage or leaks), was approximately 13 percent (monthly average). This lost and unaccounted for water rate is not unusual for water systems of Augusta's vintage. The significant number of older, large meters contributes significantly to this amount of unaccounted for water. The Department is in the process of replacing all older meters, including the smaller residential units. 3.7 Water Quality As a retail water system, Augusta is required to conduct appropriate testing of distribution system water quality. The results of this testing indicate that the Water System is in compliance with regulatory criteria. The system's raw water supply has been of such high quality that it is considered ideal for the surface water treatment processes used by Augusta. See Section 3.9 on regulatory impacts for further discussion of water quality requirements 3.8 Projected Water Demand During 2003, Augusta billed customers for approximately 11,997 million gallons of water. Table 3-10 presents the average daily water consumption, including unaccounted for water, and the number of customers by class. The Water System's 10 largest customers are presented in Table 3-11; these customers represented 14.7 percent of 2003 sales.2 Total water sales for year ending December 31, 2003 were $19,487,941. TABLE 3.10 Water Demand 2003 Actual 2003 water consumption (million gallons)1 Water Demand Average Daily (mgd) 13,731 37.6 2 No independent investigation has been made of the stability or financial condition of any of the customers listed in Table 3-11. Consequently, no definitive representation can be made as to whether such customers will remain major customers of the Water System. I I . . It . . . . I . It It It . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 3.10 Water Demand 2003 Actual 2003 water consumption (million gallons)l Maximum Daily (mgd) Number of Water Connections (December 31) Residential Commercial and Industrial Total 11ncludes unaccounted-for water. 13,731 53.1 59,851 7,989 67,840 TABLE 3.11 The 10 Largest Water Customers (for the 12-month period ending December 31, 2003) Thousand Gallons (kgal) Metered 555,323 200,866 199,822 193,620 170,409 164,302 162,271 153,507 148,881 145,501 2,094,502 Customer Nutra Sweet Co. Shapiro Packing Co. Avondale Mills Inc. (Sibley) Castleberry Food Co. Huron Tech Corp. MCG Amoco Searle Kendall Monsanto Dairy Total % of Total Water Revenues 3.44 1.48 1.47 1.42 1.26 1.38 1.22 1.15 1.10 1.08 15.00 Annual Billing $720,978 $310,579 $308,499 $298,376 $263,013 $289,756 $255,237 $240,004 $229,546 $226,121 $3,142,109 Source: Augusta Utilities Department. Augusta's projection of future water production needs is based on the County's anticipated total population, including Fort Gordon's on-base population.3 These future demands for Fort Gordon are included with the industrial customers in the 2010 through 2025 projections. EPD released its Water Conservation Plan Guidelines on May 24, 2004. The plan establishes benchmarks for water use efficiency statewide and voluntary and mandatory educational, regulatory, and financial conservation incentives were set forth. The utility's compliance with the plan is expected to result in a decline in per capita use. It is projected that per capita residential and commercial demands will fall by 2 percent by the year 2025, from 154 gallons per capita per day (gpcpd) to 151 gpcpd. Table 3-12 presents Augusta's 2003 and projected per capita, commercial and residential water usage in gallons per day (gpd). This usage rate is determined by dividing the estimated total water produced in 2003 to meet residential and commercial demand by the total population4. This rate then includes both customer-billed usage and unaccounted for water. Industrial needs are presented separately because they are not directly linked to 3 The geographical distribution of population is not a factor in plant-level planning, but is important for planning water transmission. 4 Because of limitations in the billing data for 2002 and earlier years, only 2003 data can be correlated to demands by customer class. The demands projected are based on only 2003; and therefore, are expected to have more long-term variability than if they had been based on 5 to 10 years of average per capita demands. 3-15 3-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 population growth. The projected annual average production in mgd and maximum day production are planning-level estimates (e.g. + / - 10 percent) of the future needs of the Department's service area. TABLE 3.12 Projected Water Consumption 2003 to 2025 Total Population Per capita Water Usage, gpd (commercial and residential) Industrial Usage, mgd (beyond 2003 includes 5 mgd allowance for Fort Gordon) 2003 190,3951 154 10.1 2010 200,6022 153 16.4 2020 212,0052 152 16.8 2025 216,9612 151 17.0 Annual Avg. Water Usage, mgd 37.6 47.1 49.0 49.7 Max. Day Water Usage, mgd3 52.7 67.8 70.7 71.9 1Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, after adjusting for the on-base population of 7,752 at Fort Gordon, as estimated by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census. 2Population projections are from the Augusta-Richmond County Comprehensive Plan 2004, but exclude the estimated on-base population at Fort Gordon. 3Maximum day projections are based on a residential peaking factor of 2.04, a commercial peaking factor of 1.2, and an industrial peaking factor of 1.0. These factors assume a current long-term average peaking factor of 1.5 system-wide. The system-wide peaking factor will fluctuate over time as industrial and non- industrial sectors grow at different rates. While the Department is taking actions to encourage conservation, it should be noted that the development pattern and population distribution will also affect per capita water consumption. For example, more dense development generally results in lower per capita demands, as outdoor watering is limited due to smaller lot sizes. Conversely, low-density development, including estate-sized lots, tends to result in more outdoor watering and consequently higher per capita demands. Projected residential and commercial water use is directly related to population growth. Industrial needs, however, generally are independent of population growth. It is assumed that current industrial water use, exclusive of conservation, will increase by 5 percent over the planning period (2003 through 2025). In addition to the current industrial demands, Fort Gordon is expected to begin purchasing water from the utility. These future Fort Gordon demands are projected to be 5.0 mgd. Table 3-13 summarizes projected water usage by customer class. The peaking factor for industrial usage is assumed to be 1.0; in other words, maximum day and average annual needs are assumed to be, for analytical purposes, equal. Commercial consumption is expected to have a maximum day peaking factor of 1.2 times average day demand. Based on long-term trends, the system-wide peaking factor is assumed to be 1.5. All additional peak day needs are assumed to be associated with residential consumption. The peak demands associated with residential consumption were calculated to be 2.04 times average daily demands. These peaking factors are employed to determine the peak day requirements for capacity sizing in the Department's facilities. System-wide, the peaking factor will change over time as the industrial demands grow at a different rate than non- industrial demands. . . It I . . . . . . . . . t . It . . . It . . . . . . It . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 The population of Richmond County is expected to increase from 198,149 persons in 2003 to 224,715 persons by 2025. This growth, combined with additional demands of 5.0 mgd from Fort Gordon, means average annual water demands are expected to increase from 39.5 mgd to 49.8 mgd (74.7 mgd, maximum month). To meet projected demands, the Department has authorized design of upgrades to the Highland A venue WTP and will be completing con- struction of the new N. Max Hicks WTP (15 mgd) in January 2005. The current withdrawal permits for raw water from the Savannah River will be sufficient to meet surface water supply needs for both facilities, as discussed in Section 5. TABLE 3.13 Projected Water Usage by Customer Class 2003 to 2025 Class 2003 2010 2020 2025 Residential Avg. Annual Water Usage Max. Day Water Usage {Peaking factor: 2.04)1 Commercial Avg. Annual Water Usage Max. Day Water Usage {Peaking factor: 1.2)1 Industrial Avg. Annual Water Usage Max. Day Water Usage {Peaking factor: 1.0)1 System-wide Avg. Annual Water Usage 37.6 47.1 49.0 49.8 Max. Day Water Usage 1 52.7 70.7 73.4 74.7 1 Peaking factors assume a current long-term average peaking factor of 1.5 system-wide. The system- wide peaking factor will fluctuate over time as industrial and non-industrial sectors grow at different rates. 21ncludes Fort Gordon demands of 5.0 mgd. 16.6 33.7 17.3 35.3 18.2 37.1 18.5 37.7 12.8 15.3 13.4 16.1 14.1 16.9 14.3 17.2 8.2 8.2 16.42 16.42 16.82 16.82 17.02 17.02 3.9 Regulatory Impacts The Department has responded to the challenges of the 1996 Amendments to the SDW A and is in compliance with all applicable rules. However, drinking water regulations have recently been changed, imposing still more stringent regulations, with additional regulations planned for the near future. These recently promulgated and planned SDW A regulations will have an impact on Augusta's drinking water treatment plants and distribution system. The Department has taken a proactive approach for compliance with the recently promulgated and the proposed regulations by developing water quality goals that are more stringent than current regulations. These water quality goals will position the Department to meet future regulations. Drinking water regulations that impact the Department can be divided into three categories: . Existing regulations . Recently promulgated regulations . Future regulations 3-17 3-18 . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 The following is a brief discussion of each category and the impact on the Department drinking water system. 3.9.1 Existing Regulations EPD has issued rules (Rules and Regulations of the Department of Natural Resources [DNR], Chapter 391-3-5- Safe Drinking Water) to establish policies, procedures, requirements, and standards for implementing drinking water regulations. 3.9.1.1 Surface Water Treatment Rule The Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), promulgated in 1992, establishes treatment techniques instead of maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for the control of Giardia, viruses, heterotrophic plate count (HPC) bacteria, and Legionella. The SWTR required all water systems to maintain a filtered water turbidity of 0.5 Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU) and to provide a minimum level of inactivation of Giardia and viruses by maintaining adequate contact time with the primary disinfectant. In addition, the SWTR required all water systems to maintain a detectable chlorine residual in the distribution system. The Department is currently in compliance with all of the SWTR requirements. 3.9.1.2 Total Coliform Rule The Total Coliform Rule was promulgated on June 29, 1989. Total coliforms include both fecal coliforms and E. coli. Compliance with the Coliform Rule is based on the results of sampling in the distribution system. The frequency and number of collected samples are a function of the system size (number of people served). The Department has maintained compliance with the Total Coliform Rule by (1) maintaining adequate distribution system disinfectant residual and (2) frequently flushing low flow areas. 3.9.1.3 Primary Contaminants EPD currently regulates a list of 83 contaminants that includes inorganic and organic compounds. These contaminants do not occur at concentrations of concern in most surface waters that are not subject to contamination. Surface waters used by the Department, from the Savannah River, have concentrations of regulated contaminants well below Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) prescribed limits. 3.9.1.4 Lead and Copper Rule On June 7, 1991, the EP A published Action Limits (ALs) and national primary drinking water regulations for lead and copper. Under this regulation, lead and copper levels must not exceed ALs of 0.015 mg/L and 1.3 mg/L, respectively, in 90 percent of the samples collected. Actions required for AL exceedances include collecting source water samples, conducting public education, conducting a corrosion control study, and establishing a corrosion control program. This rule also requires that lead and copper be monitored at consumers' taps every 6 months. Samples at consumers' taps must be taken at high-risk locations, which include homes with lead solder installed after 1982, lead service lines, and lead interior piping. Revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule were promulgated in April 2000. The revisions reduced the frequency of monitoring required for low lead and copper tap levels and updated the analytical methods used for analyzing lead and copper levels. . I It . . . . . . . . .. It . . It . . I . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 The Department currently controls the corrosivity of its finished water by adding a phosphate-based corrosion inhibitor. The Water System has continuously been in compli- ance with the lead and copper ALs. 3.9.1.5 Risk Management Plans (RMPs) The EP A set a deadline of June 21, 1999, for all utilities that store hazardous chemicals (including chlorine gas) above a specified threshold limit, to prepare a risk management plan (RMP). The regulation outlines requirements for preventing or minimizing the conse- quences of catastrophic releases of toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive chemicals. The threshold level for chlorine is 2,500 pounds. The RMP must include evaluations of buildings and equipment to protect the safety of workers around chlorine facilities and to develop an emergency response plan if a leak occurs. Key information developed must be submitted to EP A and posted on the Internet for public access. The Department has prepared an RMP for the Highland Avenue WTP. In addition, the Department is improving the existing safety program that provides guidance to operators on correct chlorine operations and maintenance procedures and the emergency response plan to be used if there is a leak. The Department is planning to install on-site chlorine generation at the Highland Avenue WTP and the new Hicks WTP to eliminate safety and security concerns associated with chlorine gas. 3.9.1.6 Residuals Management The State of Georgia currently prohibits the direct discharge of water treatment residuals to a receiving stream. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required which specifies an acceptable pH and total suspended solids (TSS) concentration for the discharge of any waste or decant stream from WTPs. The Highland Avenue WTP is currently discharging all of the waste streams to Turknett Pond. An NPDES permit was obtained by the Department to allow discharge of decant from the Turknett Pond. Settled sludge in the pond is dredged when needed by the Department. 3.9.2 Recently Promulgated Regulations 3.9.2.1 Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) The IESWTR was promulgated in December 1998 and established a 2-log Cryptosporidium removal requirement for filtered systems. Under this rule, conventional treatment is assumed to meet the Cryptosporidium removal requirement by maintaining 95 percent of the time a filtered turbidity of 0.3 NTU, and at no time exceeding 1.0 NTU. The IESWTR also requires individual filter monitoring and additional requirements related to distribution system tank covers. The Highland Avenue WTP is in compliance with the IESWTR requirements. 3.9.2.2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts (D/DBP) Rule - Stage 1 Stage 1 D/DBP Rule limits resulted in maximum contaminant level (MCL) requirements shown in Table 3-14. The Department has taken these requirements into consideration for both its upgrade of the Highland WTP and for the new WTP currently under construction. 3-19 3-20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 TABLE 3-14 Summary of Stage 1 DIDBP Rule Limits Final Stage 1 MCls Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs): 80 micrograms per liter (J.lg/L) Haloacetic Acids (HAA5): 60 J.l9/L Bromate: 10 J.l9/L Chlorite: 1.0 mg/L Final Stage 1 Maximum Residual Disinfectant levels Free Chlorine: 4.0 mg/L as CI2 Chloramine: 4.0 mg/L as CI2 Chlorine Dioxide: 0.8 mg/L as CI02 3.9.2.3 Filter Backwash Rule The Filter Backwash Rule was promulgated in June 2001 and applies to all systems that use conventional or direct filtration and that recycle spent filter backwash water. The HWTP does not practice recycling. The new Hicks WTP will discharge all produced waste streams, including backwash, to the James B. Messerly Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). Therefore, the Filter Backwash Rule is not expected to have any impact on the existing or proposed water plants. 3.9.2.4 Arsenic Rule The Arsenic Rule was promulgated on January 22, 2001. This rule established an MCL of 0.01 mg/L. The Arsenic Rule applies to both Community and Non-Transient, Non- Community Water Systems. Systems must meet this requirement by January 2006. Despite the new lower limit, it is not anticipated that the arsenic regulations will have an impact on the Department. Arsenic is not expected to occur at concentrations of concern in the surface water supply. 3.9.3 Future Regulations The EP A is currently in the process of developing additional regulations related to microbial and disinfection byproducts. The planned regulations are being developed as a follow up to the IESWTR and Stage DBPs. See Appendix B for a detailed discussion of these regulations. It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.0 Wastewater System 4.1 Overview of Wastewater System The Wastewater System customer population, as of July 31, 2004, was comprised of 47,744 residential and 5,900 commercial and industrial customers. The Wastewater System consists of two WPCPs with an aggregate permitted treatment capacity of 48.34 mgd and a collection system comprised of 28 pumping stations and approximately 680 miles of collection sewers. The Wastewater System provides sewer services to an area of approximately 106 square miles with an estimated population in excess of 150,000. Figure 4-1 shows the areas currently served by the Wastewater System with overlays of wastewater collection lines and the location of the WPCPs. D Wastewater Service Area' A Water PoIlutioo Control Plant (WPCP) - Sewer Lines . Aul1Jsta Ser'li:;e Ivea does not imude Fort Gordon, Hepzibah or Bythe N A Ii...... b....2 4 8"'Hes Figure 4-1 Wastewater System Service Hea and Treatment Plants Augusta, Georgia CH2MHILL \\boome<\hlprojects3\augusla\mxdler04fig41.mxd .J<H 9115,Q4 Augusta has the non-exclusive right to provide water and wastewater service within the County. The wastewater systems of Fort Gordon and the Cities of Blythe and Hephzibah provide wastewater service within those jurisdictions in the County. The Department's service area includes all or parts of eight drainage basins shown in Figure 4-2. 4-1 4.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 N A 4 8Miles o 1 2 CH2MHILL \'lloomer'h'crolects3\auQUsta'mxd\er04i<J42.mxd J<H 9/21/04 Figure 4-2 Drainage Basins AUGusta GA 4.2 Wastewater Collection and Conveyance Augusta's wastewater collection system dates from storm water drains constructed in downtown Augusta prior to 1900. Over time, wastewater was diverted into the storm water drains, and Augusta's downtown storm water drains evolved into a combined storm water and wastewater collection system. Until 1968, this system emptied into the Savannah River without treatment. In the 1980s and early 1990s, Augusta eliminated all known combined sewers by constructing trunk wastewater mains to keep wastewater separate from storm water.5 Augusta's wastewater collection and conveyance system consists of 8 drainage basins, 28 wastewater pumping stations, and approximately 680 miles of collection pipes which transport primarily sanitary sewage. Approximately 80 percent of the wastewater collection system is drained by gravity; the remainder requires pumping at least once. The wastewater collection system includes pipes ranging in size from 8-inch to 72-inch diameter. Approximately 20 percent of the wastewater collection system has been in service for 50 years or more. The wastewater collection system includes standby pumps and a standby power system. 5 It is possible that undocumented interconnections of the two systems were not eliminated and remain. As a result, the Department has an ongoing program to verify complete separation of the storm water drain and wastewater collection systems. I I . . It . . . I . . . . I It It . . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 The piping in the wastewater collection system was constructed using a wide variety of materials, including clay, brick, concrete, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), that create signifi- cant problems for maintenance of the system. The ongoing system evaluations of the Spirit, Butler, and Rocky Creek basins have identified major infiltration and inflow (1/1) rates. An estimated 10 percent of current wastewater flows are contributed by 1/1. Rehabilitation is underway for portions of these basins and further CIP projects identified in Section 5 but significant reduction of 1/1 will be addressed by the Department's ongoing 1/1 operation and maintenance program. 4.3 Wastewater Treatment Facilities Augusta owns two WPCPs as summarized in Table 4-1. TABLE 4-1 Wastewater Treatment Plants Owned by Augusta 2003 Treated Wastewater Permitted Date of Average Maximum Treatment Capacity Original Day 7 -Day Dates of Receiving WPCP (Monthly Avg, mgd) Construction (mgd) (mgd) Improvements Stream James B. Messerly 46.1 1968 33.94 53.77 * 1976, 1984, Butler (also known as the 1995, 1997, Creek Butler Creek WPCP) 2001,2002 Spirit Creek WPCP 2.24 1988 4.08 5.27 * 1995 Spirit Creek Totals 48.34 38.02 59.04 *Excessive flows resulted from major 1/1 into collection systems following significant rainfall. The J. B. Messerly WPCP has two separate treatment trains, the North Plant and the South Plant. The North Plant, constructed in 1976, was originally designed to provide only pri- mary treatment.6 Later, an oxidation ditch was constructed to provide secondary treatment capacity of approximately 17.8 mgd. In 1984, the South Plant was constructed with a design capacity of 28.4 mgd. Flow equalization basins were added in 1995. In 1997, the first stage of a wetlands system was constructed to provide additional ammonia-nitrogen removal. In 2001, the second stage of the wetlands system was completed along with the first phase of various retrofit projects to significantly improve plant performance. These retrofits included improvements to secondary clarifiers, primary clarifiers, sludge pumps, and various mech- anical and electrical systems throughout the plant. In 2002, the third stage of the wetlands system was completed and the second phase of retrofit projects initiated. The retrofit projects have now been successfully completed. In 2004, the final retrofit projects will be complete. The success of the entire retrofit program that was started in 2001 is evidenced by the WPCP's recent performance that, for the first time in many years, has maintained full compliance for over a year. 6The primary treatment system includes the primary clarifiers, primary sludge pumps, and scum pumps. This system removes settled solids from screened and degritted wastewater. The secondary treatment system includes aeration basins, aeration blower systems, and secondary clarification. 4.3 4-4 . . . . I . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Based on the continuation of existing trends, the WPCP is projected to reach its hydraulic capacity by 2019. However, due to insufficient capacity of biological treatment units, the WPCP may reach its process capacity within the next 5 years. Therefore, it is essential that WPCP expansion begin immediately.? The James B. Messerly WPCP Master Plan8 was developed to address current and future needs including recommendations regarding the Spirit Creek WPCP. Recent improvements to the WPCP, along with operational diligence, will keep the plant within compliance limits until the expansion defined in the master plan is completed. The J. B. Messerly WPCP receives domestic wastewater from the surrounding community as well as a significant flows (2,770 million gallons in 2003) from 20 major industrial contribu- tors. The J. B. Messerly WPCP was originally rated, based on "normal strength" wastewater, to have a treatment capacity of 46 mgd, and is currently permitted for a capacity of 46.1 mgd (monthly average). The influent strength of the wastewater has increased over the years as a result of additional industrial waste and reduction in collection system 1/1. This increased organic loading has reduced effective capacity. The recently completed upgrades noted above, and further improvements discussed in Section 5, will restore the full capacity of the J.B. Messerly WPCP and will also address future permit compliance. The Department's planned improvements to the wastewater treatment system are expected to maximize use of existing plant components and increase the level of reliability in meeting stringent effluent limits. The J. B. Messerly WPCP discharges under NPDES Permit GA0037621, which was issued in 1996, was modified in January 2002, and expires in June 2006. Table 4-2 presents the plant's permit information. TABLE 4.2 J. B. Messerly WPCP Effluent Limitations Parameter Flow - m3/day (mgd) BOD 5-day - mg/I (kg/day) TSS - mg/I (kg/day) Ammonia as N - mg/I (kg/day) Fecal Coliform Bacteria Total Residual Chlorine - mg/I * Daily maximum limitations ml milliliters kg/day kilograms per day Discharge Limitations Monthly Average Weekly Average 174488 (46.1) 218016 (57.6) 10 (1,747) 15 (2,184) 30 (5243) 45 (6551) 1.5 (262) 2.25 (328) 200/100 ml 400/100 ml 0.013 0.013' m3/d cubic meters per day mg/I milligrams per liter mgd million gallons per day The Spirit Creek WPCP treatment process consists of primary treatment shredding and screening, secondary treatment in aerated lagoons, disinfection, and polishing lagoons. The Spirit Creek WPCP discharges under NPDES Permit GA0047147, issued in 1999, which expires in October 2004. The "James B. Messerly Wastewater Treatment Master Plan" completed in 2003, also delineates needs of the Spirit Creek WPCP. Table 4-3 presents the plant's permit information. 7 See Section 5.0 for discussion of planned improvements. 8 Prepared by CH2M HILL, 2003 . . . . . . It . . . . It I . . It . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 4-3 Spirit Creek Effluent Limitations Discharge Limitations Parameter Flow - m3/day (mgd) BOD 5-day mg/I (kg/day) TSS mg/L (kg/day) Ammonia as N mg/I (kg/day) Fecal Coliform Bacteria Total Residual Chlorine mg/I Daily maximum limitations ml milliliters kg/day kilograms per day Monthly Average 8,478 (2.24) 30 (255) 30 (255) 17.4 (148) 200/100 ml 0.24 Weekly Average 10,598 (2.80) 45(318) 45(318) 26.1 (185) 400/100 ml 0.24< m3/d mg/I cubic meters per day milligrams per liter 4.4 Projected Wastewater Flows The projected population and proportion of water accounts connected to the wastewater system were considered to estimate future wastewater flows. WPCP service area population projections were constructed by allocating population by tract estimated in the 2000 Census to WPCP service area. Population projections for the service areas were then developed by assuming that those Census tracts that have experi- enced population growth will continue to do so, and will represent the same share of the total population increase projected for growing tracts. This population increase will come from either population growth or from population shifts within the County. For tracts with declining population, the rate of decline is projected to remain stable through the planning period. The estimated proportion of households connected to the Wastewater System was estimated using the proportion data available from the 1990 Census9, with adjustments made to reflect growth in the systems since 1990. This proportion is expected to continue to change over time as new residences and businesses, as well as some portion of the residences not served currently, connect to the Wastewater System. Using an assumption that per capita and per employee wastewater flows will remain constant over the forecast period, residential and commercial wastewater flows are assumed to grow in proportion to the growth in the population connected to the Wastewater System. Table 4-4 presents the population and percentage change in population receiving sewer service, as well as projected annual average flows and maximum month flows. The maxi- mum month flows are based on the historical relationship between annual average flows and maximum month flow at the J.B. Messerly WPCP, as well as the expected relationship at Spirit Creek after the completion of the major 1/1 improvements in its collection system. The Spirit Creek WPCP will treat a maximum of 2.2 mgd after 2005 once the Spirit Creek Pump Station project is completed with the remainder of flows in this collection system going to the JBM WPCP. Section 5 further describes the project. 9 The 2000 Census did not collect information on the source of wastewater disposal. 4-5 ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE 4-4 Wastewater Flows (mgd)1 2003 to 2025 2003 2010 2020 2025 Total WPCP Flows Sewered Population 149,683 169,938 182,576 191,008 Percent Change 13.53% 7.44% 4.62% Average Annual Flow (mgd) 38.02 40.34 42.89 44.62 Max. Month Flow 3(mgd) 46.33 49.21 52.33 54.44 1 The figures presented in this table will be impacted by changes to the overall level of III in the WPCP service areas. 2 "Modeled" figures, shown here, assume improvements to Spirit Creek collector system. Modeled figures are presented to illustrate the expected change from 2003 to 2010. 3 The maximum month flows are 122 percent of the annual average flows based on historical relationships. The combined volume of the 10 largest customers represented 21.4 percent of 2003 sales. The 10 largest wastewater customers of the Wastewater System are presented in Table 4-5. No independent investigation has been made of the stability or financial condition of any of the customers listed in Table 4-5. Consequently no representation can be made as to whether such customers will continue as major customers. TABLE 4-5 10 Largest Wastewater Customers (for the 12-month period ending December 31, 2003) Customer Nutra Sweet Castleberry Food Co. Shapiro Packing Avondale Mills Proctor & Gamble EKA Nobel Searle Kendall AMOCO Monsanto Dairy Total kgal Metered 788,979 222,483 198,856 198,822 164,322 154,312 153,507 148,881 145,138 145,133 2,320,433 Annual Billing (based upon water consumption plus additional sewer surcharges) $1,388,607 391,344 836,592 429,447 278,262 405,892 263,119 390,155 462,220 500,405 $5,346,043 27.67% % of Total Sewer Revenues 7.19% 2.03 4.33 2.22 1.44 2.10 1.36 2.02 2.39 2.59 Source: Augusta Utilities Department 4.5 Regulatory Impacts The Augusta Utility Department (AUD) Wastewater System is subject to a broad array or regulatory requirements. The following regulatory issues affecting the Wastewater System are discussed below: 4-6 . . It . It . It . . . . It . . . It It . It . . . . . . It . . It . It . . . . . . . . It . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 . Watershed Management . Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Development . NPDES Permitting and Nutrient Management . Onsite Septage Systems . Residuals Management and 503 Regulations . General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Industrial Activity . Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWP3s) . Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan . Municipal Stormwater Discharge Permit . Security and Vulnerability 4.5.1 Watershed Management The EPD has formulated a policy to require municipalities to conduct watershed assessments and develop watershed management programs to address non-point pollution sources. These studies are required to acquire or renew NPDES discharge permits and/ or to modify or renew surface water withdrawal permits. In addition, EPD requires Source Water Assessment Plans (SWAP) for water supply watersheds to assess the potential for water supply contamination. The Department has acted proactively and completed a watershed assessment for the County area that drains into the Savannah River. Simultaneously, the Department completed a SWAP for the Savannah River watershed upstream of the current water intake. Recommendations for source water protection will be developed in the next phase of study, as required by the SDW A. Addressing these issues early better positions the Department to address watershed protection and maintain an "partnership" position with the Georgia EPD. 4.5.2 Total Maximum Daily Load Development The Clean Water Act (CW A) provides a trigger mechanism for requiring development of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) when a water body does not meet water quality standards. When setting a TMDL, the regulatory agency must consider the designated uses of the water body, water quality standards, various pollutant sources, and the ability of the water body to assimilate pollutants. The State of Georgia has a court-mandated schedule for development of TMDLs that is the most aggressive in the country. The proposed TMDLs for the Savannah River basin must be developed by June 2004. The current 303d list of impaired water bodies lists fecal coliforms, dissolved oxygen (DO), and metals as the water quality parameters not meeting standards in portions of the Savannah River basin. Results of the watershed assessment and the recommendations in the watershed management plan will provide Augusta with an approach for watershed management to meet the anticipated TMDLs. 4.5.3 NPDES Permitting and Nutrient Management The NPDES is a federal program for regulating the discharge of pollutants to the waters of the United States. In Georgia, the EPD has been delegated the authority to administer the program. EPD has adopted a "zero tolerance" policy for permit violations and is imposing penalties or issuing Consent Orders specifying actions that the permittee must take when 4-7 4-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 violations occur. Augusta facilities were not designed with a "zero tolerance" perspective, and therefore do not have the level of redundancy that would be included in a facility designed today. Although operational excursions and facility bypasses are expected to be infrequent, Augusta's infrastructure is being continuously upgraded with projects to prevent overflows and bypasses, retain pollutants, and upgrade treatment capabilities to enhance the ability to achieve 100 percent compliance with permit conditions. Many of the CIP projects are defined in Section 5. As a result of interstate discussions on water resources, EPD decided to mandate maximum retention of a community's water consumption to minimize the amount of water lost. This will require the Department to continue efforts to rehabilitate system facilities, including replacement of some major lines. EPD is working on the implementation strategy and policy now. Permit conditions may change to restrict the consumptive retention of water, which may in turn necessitate the elimination of onsite septage systems where feasible and a revision to the water pricing structure. EPA's proposed Capacity, Maintenance, Operation, and Management, also referred to as CMOM, program will require increased accountability for operation and maintenance of wastewater collection systems. This proposed program has been in development for several years, and has been undergoing federal administrative review since January 2000. It is anticipated that when the CMOM program is implemented, it will use NPDES permits as the enforcement vehicle. The Department has already begun implementation of elements of the forthcoming CMOM requirements. Currently, the State of Georgia requires nutrient removal only in basins where water quality in lakes downstream of a discharge are found to be adversely impacted by the discharge. However, the federal EP A is currently considering nationwide nutrient discharge limitations due to concerns about off-shore waters. The greatest concern is in the Gulf of Mexico, but any shallow waters such as those along the Georgia coast could be affected by this possible policy change. 4.5.4 Onsite Septage Systems The design of septage systems is regulated by the Georgia Department of Health (Georgia Code Chapter 290-5-26). Local jurisdictions establish minimum lot requirements for septage systems and requirements for connection to a central wastewater collection system. With the increasing emphasis on minimizing water consumption and water quality issues in watershed management, it will be necessary to evaluate policies related to septage systems and prepare for an expanded role for central wastewater collection systems in the future. Augusta has adopted a policy to mandate conversion to central wastewater collection when service is available and is implementing a program to extend service to 10,000 new customers in the next 10 years. This policy and program will limit the potential impacts of pending regulations related to onsite septage systems. 4.5.5 Residuals Management and 503 Regulations The EP A mandates that wastewater residuals be managed in compliance with its 503 regulations. Since 1993, these regulations have required that utilities obtain 503 permits and provide annual documentation of compliance with regulatory requirements. The 503 regu- lations identify different classes of sludge and mandate minimum practices for treatment, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 handling, and disposal of each class of sludge. General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Industrial Activity In 1993, EPD issued NPDES Permit 000000 - Authorization to Discharge Under the National Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity. This permit requires properties with certain activities - those included in a specific list of SIC Codes - to file a Notice of Intent for coverage under the permit and to prepare and maintain an SWP3 and a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan (SPCCP). In 1998, EPD issued a new general permit, GAROOOOOO, and mandated that any entity with the intent to use that general permit would have to update its plans and conform to the new requirements of the permit. The Department plans to update and modify all SWP3s to conform to the additional conditions in the 1998 storm water permit, and identify new locations which might be subject to an SWP3. 4.5.6 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan As part of the compliance requirements for the General Permit for Industrial Activity, EPD requires that covered properties prepare a SWP3. This plan describes the stormwater discharge points, the potential pollution sources on the site and the material handling and housekeeping practices used to prevent contamination of stormwater runoff. EPD has issued a general stormwater permit that can be used by any location wishing to conform to the permit conditions, as opposed to applying for a site-specific permit. During the original round of storm water permit issuance, the Department complied with the general conditions for its storm water permitting. 4.5.7 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan The EP A, through 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 112, mandates that an SPCCP be prepared for any facility or location where one of several oil-based material storage thresholds are exceeded: . any tank of 660-gallon capacity or greater; . 1,320 gallons of total onsite storage; or . a 20,OOO-gallon underground tank of petroleum-based product. This requirement is administered by EPD through the General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity. In addition to the SWP3, any facility meeting the material storage triggers listed above must prepare an SPCCP. An SPCCP provides documentation on oil-based products and specifies reporting and documentation requirements for best management practices (BMPs). The Department has implemented a formal inspection of all system facilities and will document the tanks and quantities of oil-based products stored onsite. This review will either (1) identify those locations that need an SPCCP or, (2) if no SPCCP is required, satisfy the regulatory requirements. The Department will also prepare a statement for each facility as to whether that facility needs an SPCCP and what basis was used to determine the applicability of the SPCCP requirement for each facility. 4-9 4-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 4.5.8 Municipal Storm Water Discharge Permit EPD currently requires municipalities with populations over 100,000 (Phase 1 communities) to obtain an NPDES permit to operate a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). In 2003, a general permit will be prepared (Phase 2 Regulations), which will cover communities in other "urbanized areas." Each Phase 2 community, including Augusta- Richmond County, will be required to submit a Notice of Intent to be covered by the general permit, and must implement a stormwater management program that addresses the six "minimum control measures of the MS4 program: · Public education and outreach . Public participation/ involvement · Illicit discharge detection and elimination · Construction site runoff · Post-construction runoff control · Pollution prevention/ good housekeeping The stormwater management program must be phased in over the initial5-year permit period. The Department will comply at its facilities, but the Department is not the Augusta city department tasked with developing and enforcing the plan to comply with stormwater discharge permit regulations. It . It It It It It . It . . . It It . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0 Proposed System Capital Improvement Plan The Water and Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 will be used to fund the next phase of the Department's 10-year CIP initiated in 2000. Proceeds will assist in eliminating current System deficiencies, meeting current and future regulatory requirements, and accommodat- ing future demands related to system growth. Construction associated with the 2004 Program will be completed in 2009. The 2004 Bonds will be issued to qualify for the 5-year spending period provided for in Treasury Regulations for certain capital projects involving a substantial amount of construction expenditures and for which a construction period longer than 3 years is necessary. The strategy for meeting 2025 water needs defined in Table 3-12 will require surface water as the primary water source. This will require expansion and modification of the Highland A venue WTP to assure sustained operational capacity of 60-mgd in addition to the new Hicks WTP 15-mgd first phase. Upon completion of the 15-mgd facility in early 2005, the remaining wells serving GWTP No.1 will be deactivated. The system will then have a total production capability of 75 mgd from surface water supply and a reserve capacity of 10 mgd available from GWTPs. This will meet additional demand while minimizing reliance upon groundwater supply. Future expansions of the Hicks WTP (ultimately to meet demand of 60 mgd) will reduce groundwater reliance further even as demand growth continues. 5.1 Planning Criteria and Assumptions The Department's CIP needs planned through 2025, uses a number of planning criteria for identifying the facilities necessary for the System. Recommendations of the Master Plan 2000, dated February 2000, were updated in the Water & Sewerage Revenue Bonds, 2002 Engineering Report, dated June 13, 2002. The Technical Memoranda (TMs) included in the Master Plan 2000 document a baseline approach to evaluating the System facilities with respect to water demands, wastewater conveyance needs, and treatment requirements. While the data used for this plan was updated in both 2002 and for this Engineering Report to reflect new information including changes in population and various regulations, the major planning criteria and assumptions used for development of the CIP have remained unchanged. These include: . Population in Augusta is shifting from developed areas to undeveloped areas where water and sewer services were previously unavailable. . Water and wastewater system demand will increase as the population grows in Augusta. Projected water demands for the design year of 2025 are for average day demand of 49.7 mgd and maximum day demand of 71.9 mgd. Wastewater flow projections are for an average daily flow of 44.62 mgd and a maximum month flow of 54.44 mgd. 5-1 ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water and wastewater treatment improvements and expansions must be planned for compliance with all current regulatory requirements, as well as changes to these requirements that are anticipated in the next 5 years. A significant number of the ClP projects defined in the Water and Sewerage Revenue Bonds, Series 2002 Engineer's Report have been completed. Several others will require additional funding from the Series 2004 Bond Issue. As an example, the Highland Avenue WTP improvements were designed and some construction funded by the 2002 Series Bonds, with the construction to be completed with the 2004 Bond Issue Capital Program. Figures 5-1 and 5-2 indicate the projects totally or partially funded under previous bond programs. The ClP projects planned for the 2004 Bond Issue Capital Program are discussed in the following paragraphs. . D Augusta Water Service Area. - Major Water Lines --- Streets - Water Distribution Projects . Water Supply Projeds . AugJsta SeM:e hea does not in:lude Fort Gordon, Hepzibah or Bylhe o 1.... 2 4 8Miles Figure 5-1 2000 & 2002 Capital Improvements - Water System Augusta, Georgia CH2MHILL l\boomeMlprojecls3\augusla\mxdler04fig51.mxd J<H 9/15104 5-2 It It It . . . It . . . . . It . . . It It It It . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 D Wastewater ServIce Ales. - Line ExtensionsIIJpgrades r= ::::! Conveyance Projects - Sewer Line . Au!Jlsta Servi:e Nea does not in:lude Fort Gordon, Hepzibah or Bythe o L 2 / / // FORT GOIUlON ( // / f // ,/ )J> N~~ ~~~S ~ A )~ BLYTH \~ V -~ \1 f~-..? '-tj' ~~,,-~------_./'" Figure 5-2 2000 & 2002 Series Capnallmprovements - Wastewater System Augusta, Georgia 4 6 SMiles CH2MHILL \\boomeMlprojecls3laugusl.\mxdler04fig52.mxd J<H 9115A:l4 5.2 Cost Opinions for Recommended Projects A cost opinion was prepared for each of the recommended projects to establish initial construction budgets for projects to be funded by the Series 2004 Bonds. The cost opinions also include, as indirect costs, engineering and other technical services. Other designated projects may include only planning or special services and not construction costs. The cost opinions were prepared using 2004 construction costs from similar projects in the Augusta area and the State of Georgia. The cost opinions were based on recent design engineering estimates or inspection of facilities, projections of equipment and facility needs, experience with similar projects, and manufacturer prices for recommended equipment. By necessity, some project cost opinions were developed in advance of detailed engineering work including preparation of specifications and detailed design drawings. For these projects, all of the required information concerning the nature and full scope of the project has not yet been obtained so cost opinions are based upon similar facilities recently constructed in this area. Rehabilitation of an existing facility (e.g., James B. Messerly WPCP or the Highland Avenue WTP) could encounter a variety of unforeseen factors that may affect project costs and schedule. Examples of these factors include contaminated soils, inaccurate piping and duct bank location drawings, concealed defects in existing construction, and incomplete demoli- tion of former structures (or abandoned in place rather than removed as shown on the 5-3 5-4 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 record drawings). For this reason, contingencies are included to cover unforeseen costs. Cost opinions also include cost values for construction allowances. These are known scope activities that cannot be quantified at this stage of cost estimation and as such, are defined through the use of allowances. These allowances have been developed as percentages of construction cost based on experience with numerous other projects and range from 10 percent to 25 percent. These allowances, at a Program level, are anticipated to be sufficient to meet project requirements. 5.3 Summary of Capital Improvements The 5-year CIP is summarized in Table 5-1 and further described in the following sections. It will provide for upgrades and development of the water treatment and distribution system, wastewater conveyance, and wastewater treatment facilities. For the Water System, the CIP provides for construction of significant improvements to the existing Highland Avenue WTP and improvements to the water distribution system. For the Wastewater System, the CIP provides for design and construction of significant improvements to the James B. Messerly WPCP and expansions and extensions to the wastewater conveyance system. TABLE 5.1 2004 Series Bond Projects-Summary of Estimated Costs Recommended Improvements Water Treatment Facilities (Section 5.3.1) Water Distribution System (Section 5.3.2) Wastewater Treatment Plants (Section 5.3.3) Wastewater Conveyance System (Section 5.3.4) System-Wide Projects (Section 5.3.5) Total System Estimated Costs $ 38,300,000 17,455,000 55,751,000 56,084,000 22,010,000 $ 189,600,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. The Series 2004 Bonds projects are discussed below. Planning-level cost estimates have been developed from available information for guidance in project evaluation. Final project costs will depend on actual labor and material costs, competitive market conditions, actual site conditions, implementation schedules, and other variables. Detailed engineering design plans have been completed for some projects and the proceeds of the Series 2004 Bonds will fund construction. Other projects for which detailed engineering design plans have not yet been developed will require 2004 Series Bond proceeds to fund both design and construc- tion. Project budgets are based upon either completed engineering plans or conceptual layouts of those yet to be designed. An allowance of 6 to 10 percent has been added to all construction costs to cover engineering and other technical (such as surveying) costs. The base construction costs are based on Augusta and Atlanta area market conditions, as of the second quarter of 2004 then adjusted for inflation based upon the anticipated scheduled construction. It It It It . . It It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 5.3.1 Water Treatment Augusta is supplied an average of 65 mgd of treated water from four operating water treatment plants: HAWTP with 45 mgd production capacity, GWTP No.1 (located at Peach Orchard Road) with 5 mgd capacity, GWTP No.2 (located at the Highway 56 Loop) with 10 mgd capacity and GWTP No.3 (located on Old Waynesboro Rd.) with 5 mgd capacity. As noted, the strategy for meeting the 2025 water needs defined in Table 3.12 contemplates employing surface water as the primary water source. This will require expansion and modification of the Highland Avenue WTP to assure sustained operational capacity of 60-mgd in addition to the new Hicks WTP 15-mgd first phase. The design for the expansion and upgrade of the Highland A venue WTP and raw water pumping system is underway and should be completed in 2004. The construction will be funded by proceeds of the Series 2002 Bonds and the Series 2004 Bonds. The system will then have a total production capability of 75 mgd from surface water supply, as required by EPD to meet the projected 72-mgd maximum day demand. A reserve capacity of 18 mgd will be available from the GWTPs. Implementation of this strategy began with the completion of GWTP No.3 in 2001, and will be continued with completion of the Hicks WTP in 2005 and the Highland Avenue WTP upgrades in 2005 through 2009. 5.3.1.1 Improvements to the Water Treatment Plant Improvements to the water treatment system to be funded by the Series 2004 Bonds are shown in Table 5-2. The HA WTP improvements currently being designed include upgrades to and expansion of the plant to meet anticipated regulatory needs and future demands. These improvements will enable the treatment plant to serve as a primary water supply for Augusta, with reliable production capacity of 60 mgd. Upon completion of design, the 2004 Series Bonds will fund construction of the recommended components noted in Table 5-2. TABLE 5.2 2004 Series Bond Projects-Summary of Estimated Water Treatment Costs Recommended Improvements Highland Avenue WTP Estimated Costs Total Estimated Cost To be Funded by 2004 Series 1,100,000 $ 36,000,000 1,200,000 1,100,000 $ 38,300,000 Water Treatment System Upgrade Raw Water Pumping Station Upgrade Relining 42 inch diameter Raw Water Supply Line Total Water Treatment System Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. $ 48,400,000 12,400,000 The largest single addition to the Highland Avenue WTP is a new multi-purpose filter building. This facility contains an administration area; a process area with control room, laboratory, operations, maintenance, and the seven new deep bed filters; and a chemical area housing treatment chemical storage and process systems except for liquid lime and powdered activated carbon systems that are housed separately. Also included are 5-5 5-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 additional pumping systems, new electrical control systems, plant piping improvements, new valves and meters, emergency generators and security upgrades. The raw water pump station will be upgraded in two phases. The first phase, funded by the Series 2002 Bonds and 2004 Bonds, will include an engine-powered pumping station with three diesel engine-driven vertical turbine pumps; interconnection to existing piping; and installation of two new lines crossing the Augusta Canal. This project will provide redundancy in pumping capacity to further assure reliable supply of raw water to the Highland Avenue WTP. Phase 2, to be constructed later, will replace the current hydropowered pumping system. 5.3.2 Water Distribution System Table 5-3 is a summary of water distribution system improvements to be funded by the 2004 Series Bonds. The construction projects are highlighted on Figure 5-3. Previously completed projects, part of the overall Master Plan 2000, are also shown to demonstrate the Departments planned progress toward the goal of total area service. TABLE 5-3 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated Costs for Water Distribution Projects Recommended Improvements Estimated Costs Primary Supply System Highland Avenue WTP to Barton Chapel Rd. 30" Water Main Doug Barnard Parkway 16" and 20" Water Main Hicks WTP to Lumpkin Rd. 20" & 24" Water Main Systems Interconnect 20" Water Line $3,800,000 3,840,000 2,3000,000 1,335,000 $11,275,000 6,180,000 $ 17,455,000 Other System Improvements (Table 5-.3.1) & Highway Projects (Table 5-3.2) Total Water Distribution System Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. It It I It . I . . . It . It . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 N A . Augusta SeM:e Jlrea does rot irdude Foct Gordon. t"epzibah or Bytle D .6LIgusta Water Service Area. Major Waler Lines - Streets Waler SUpply Projects (2000. 2002) __ Waler SUpply Projects (2004) . Water Supply Projects (2000. 2002) . Waler SUpply Projects (2004) L :b.....2 4 8 Miles Figure 5-3 2004 Series Cap~allmprovement Projects - Water System Augusta, Georgia CH2MHILL l\boomeMlprojacts3Iauguslalmxd\.r04fig43.mxd..l<H 911S,U4 5.3.2.1 Primary Supply System Improvements The 2000 Master Plan and 2002 Engineer's Report identified several distribution system improvements that will be completed as part of a program to maintain adequate system pressure and improve reliability and operating conditions. The Water Distribution System Analysis further clarified specific parameters of these improvements and identified others. The following list identifies the most critical projects from Table 5-3. These projects will strengthen delivery capability throughout the system. . The Highland Avenue WTP to Barton Chapel Road project will improve hydraulic capacity from the Highland Avenue WTP to the growing western portions of the city as well as enable an existing 18-inch line to be dedicated to supplying the Fort Gordon systems. . The Doug Barnard Parkway water main will strengthen supply to Augusta's rapidly expanding Medical Center area and the major industries located on the Savannah River in the same proximity. These areas are now supplied by the Highland Avenue WTP only and the addition of this supply line will allow the Hicks WTP to further stabilize supply to these two critical areas. . The Hicks WTP to Lumpkin Road water mains will be installed from the new Hicks WTP to add flow capacity from the new Hicks WTP towards GWTP No.1. This will 5.7 5-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 ensure effective distribution of the new WTP flows to the 417-foot pressure zone and will also supply the Doug Barnard water main. 5.3.2.2 Other System Improvements Other system improvements include multiple water distribution line improvements listed in the Water Distribution System Analysis to complete pressure distribution, strengthen supply, and support fire protection in the city. These various distribution system improvements include the following: TABLE 5-3.1 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Costs for Water Distribution Other System Improvements Hwy 25 - Thermal Ceramics $200,000 Auburn Avenue 12" Water Line Powell Rd. 12" Water 200,000 400,000 500,000 360,000 600,000 500,000 900,000 400,000 620,000 $ 4,680,000 Lumpkin Rd: Hwy 56 to Doug Barnard Pkwy Tobacco Rd. :HICKS WTP to Doug Barnard Pkwy Maddox Road Water 630 South: System Improvements - Powell Rd. Area Birdwell Road Barton Chapel Rd 16": Wrightsboro Rd. to 30" 630 North: Pumping Station Total Other System Improvements Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. State highway improvements require the Department to relocate water lines prior to roadway improvements. These relocations allow for accelerated improvement to related water system assets and location of new assets away from roadways where repair and maintenance can be costly. Highway projects to be built are: TABLE 5-3.2 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Costs for Water Distribution State Highway Projects Windsor Spring Rd - SR88 to Tobacco Rd (DOT) $ 500,000 1-20 11-520 Crossings and Improvements (DOT) Total Highway Projects: 1,000,000 $1,500,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.3 Wastewater Treatment Planned improvements to the James B. Messerly WPCP will address problems and issues noted in the James B. Messerly WPCP Master Plan. The James B. Messerly WPCP will be upgraded, rehabilitated, and modified by implementing process modifications and adding . It It It It It It It . . It I . It . . . . . . It . . . . . It . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 facilities to support those modifications. Consistent and full compliance with nitrification requirements under winter operating conditions requires additional aeration tanks, secondary clarifiers, plant air system improvements, and upgrade of facility electrical and Instrumentation and Control systems. Design, permitting, construction, and startup of these projects is expected to take 2 to 3 years. TABLE 5-4 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated Wastewater Treatment System Costs Recommended Improvements Estimated Costs JBM WPCP Total Facility Odor Control Wetlands Study & Scope of Mitigation Spirit Creek WPCP Spirit Creek WPCP (ByPass PS & FM) Total WPCP Improvements Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. $26,100,000 9,800,000 10,000,000 51,000 Process Modification and Facilities Expansions Additional aeration facilities $9,800,000 $55,751,000 The James B. Messerly WPCP Master Plan (CH2MHILL, November 2003) evaluated the current status of both the JBM WPCP and the Spirit Creek WPCP. The Spirit Creek WPCP will be maintained at its permitted capacity of 2.2 mgd with no further improvements. To accommodate flows in excess of the capacity and future growth in the service area, a bypass pumping station and force main (FM) will be constructed near Spirit Creek WPCP to direct excess flows to the James B. Messerly WPCP for treatment. The James B. Messerly WPCP will have sufficient capacity to treat excess flows from the Spirit Creek service area through the year 2025. This pump station will also allow service to the Augusta Corporate Park area that includes a future industrial development site. The Spirit Creek WPCP is not permitted to handle industrial waste. 5.3.4 Wastewater Conveyance Table 5-5 through 5.5.5 are summaries of wastewater conveyance system improvements to be funded by the Series 2004 Bonds. The construction projects are highlighted on Figure 5-4. Previously completed projects, part of the overall Master Plan 2000, are also shown to demonstrate the Departments planned progress toward the goal of total area service. 5-9 5-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 D Wastewater Service Area* _ Line ExtensiooslUpgrades (2004) - Line ExtensionslUpgrades (2000, 2002) _ Conveyance Projects (2004) l: ~ Conveyance Projects (2000. 2002) - Sewer Line . Capital Improvements (2004) Main Interceptor Upgrade Phase 1 Wimberly Park Pocket . ,Augusta Serlice Area does not imiude Butler Creek Intercepta' Fort ~on, Upgrade West Hepzibah or Blythe l.. b.... 2 4 6 8""les CH2MHILL l\boomerlhlprojecls3Iauguslalrnxd\er04fig54.mxd..KH 9115104 TABLE 5-5 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs Recommended Improvements Estimated Costs Plann ing/Operations/Monitoring Interceptor Upgrades Infiltration/lnflow Reduction $900,000 36,625,000 3,920,000 5,630,000 9,009,000 $ 56,084,000 Unsewered Pockets Expansions/Extensions Total Conveyance System Improvements Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.4.1 Planning/Operations/Monitoring The 2004 Program includes initial Planning/Operations/Monitoring projects that will identify previously undetected problems and develop baseline information for the Department's system-wide hydraulic capacity management plan. Projects to be funded by the 2004 Series Bonds include: It . . . It It . . . . . It . . . . . . It It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 5-5.1 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Planning/Operations/Monitoring Flow Monitoring & Modeling $900,000 Total Planning/Operations/Monitoring $900,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.4.2 Interceptor Upgrades The Butler Creek, Industrial and Main Interceptors will be upgraded with new lines to replace or supplement current pipes. The required areas have been defined by engineering designs completed under the 2002 Series Bonds. TABLE 5-5.2 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Interceptor Upgrades Butler Creek Interceptor Sewer Industrial Interceptor FM Main Interceptor Sewer Total Interceptor Upgrades $13,625,000 2,000,000 21,000,000 $ 36,625,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.4.3 Infiltrationllnflow Reduction Collection systems in the following basins will have infiltration/inflow (1/1) reduction projects funded. These projects will effectively provide more capacity for wastewater flow and reduce sewer line maintenance requirements. The allocation among basins is estimated to be as follows: TABLE 5-5.3 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: 1/1 Reduction Rae's Creek $ 980,000 980,000 980,000 980,000 $3,920,000 Butler Creek Rocky Creek Spirit Creek Total 1/1 Reduction Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.4.4 Sewer Service to "Pockets" of Unsewered Areas Throughout the collection system there are various" pockets" of unsewered areas. These are locations ranging in size from one block long to entire subdivisions that were bypassed when sewers were first built in a neighborhood and are now adjacent to or surrounded by 5-11 $-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 areas with sewer service. Previously completed projects have enhanced environmental protection through reduced reliance on septic systems, and provided additional customer connections to the system. The remaining projects that will provide sewer service to the following pockets have been identified for funding through with Series 2004 Series Bond proceeds. TABLE 5-5.4 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Unsewered Pockets Fairington Sewer (Spirit Creek Basin Pocket) $2,200,000 Berckman Road (Rae's Creek Pocket) Meadowbrook Drive (Butler Creek Pocket) Total Pockets 1,100,000 2,330,000 $5,630,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.4.5 Expansions and Extensions "Expansion" is defined as providing sewer service to basins not currently having access to sewer systems. An "extension" is defined as lengthening a line beyond its current point of terminus to unsewered areas. These projects will enhance environmental protection through reduced reliance on septic systems and will provide additional customer connections to the system. The proposed areas for sewer expansion and extensions are listed below: TABLE 5-5.5 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Estimated Wastewater Conveyance System Costs: Expansions/Extensions Belair Road - South (Butler Creek) $1,000,000 Dean's Bridge (Butler Creek) 1,100,000 Belair Road - North (Rae's Creek) 1,500,000 Floyd Dr. (Rae's Creek) 53,000 Aumond/Huxley (Rae's Creek) 420,000 Wimberly Park (Rocky Creek) 350,000 Bertram Rd. (Rock Creek) 295,000 BelmontlFairview Dr. (Rocky Creek) 490,000 McDuffie Rd. (Rocky Creek) 3,300,000 Walton Acres (Spirit Creek) 501,000 Total Expansion/Extension Projects $9,009,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. 5.3.5 System-wide Improvements System-wide improvements are summarized in Table 5-6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 TABLE 5-6 2004 Series Bonds Projects-Summary of Estimated System-wide Costs Recommended Improvements Estimated Costs System-wide Projects New Utility Admin.lMaintenance Facility Program Management Augusta Canal Improvements Legal, Advertising, Other Professional Total $11,510,000 8,250,000 2,000,000 250,000 $22,010,000 Projected costs inflated using an annual interest rate of 3 percent. A new Utility Administration/Maintenance Building, currently under design, will be constructed with Series 2004 Bond funds. Off-site work such as access roads and water and sewer service connections are being completed with funding from the 2002 Series Bonds. This building will relieve space constraints for administrative and engineering operations. It is being designed to address the Department's needs for the next 10 years considering both space requirements and implementation of new management and communication technologies. The Augusta Canal serves as a primary source of raw water supply for the Highland Avenue WTP. The structure is over 100 years old and in need of major levee repair and some equipment upgrade to assure continued support of the Department's water supply system. To continue effective implementation of the CIP, various professional services will be required to assist the Department, including Program and Construction Management (Program Management) and legal support related to land and rights-of-way acquisition. 5.4 Anticipated Future Work The system will require continued investment to meet projected demands throughout the service area, address regulatory requirements, and meet Department's commitment to deliver quality services. This future work will continue to strengthen and expand the water distribution and sewer collection network to support expanded service areas and replace older portions of the system as needed. The Hicks WTP and the James B. Messerly WPCP expansions will be completed as planned when system demands are projected to need the additional capacity. The Department's future CIP planning will more closely define the projects, related costs and timing in context of financial capacity in the later years of our current forecast period. 5-13 . I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 Financial Performance This section presents an overview and evaluation of the historical and projected financial performance of the System for the study period 2004 through 2013. 6.1 Historical Performance Table 6-1 presents the financial performance of the Department for the past 5 years, 1999- 2003. System revenues increased from $33.5 to $45.1 million during this period, an increase of 34.8 percent. Operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses increased 20.3 percent, from $28.0 million to $33.7 million. This increase is attributable to increased depreciation from capital projects and increased personnel costs as the utility attempts to separate Water and Sewer maintenance activities and moves towards preventative maintenance operation. After deducting depreciation and other expenses, net revenues available to pay debt service totaled between $16.2 and $23.8 million. Over the 5-year period, the Department received sales tax proceeds of approximately $7.7 million. During that same period, the Department made transfers to Augusta's General Fund totaling $2.5 million. These transfers were eliminated in 2001 as a result of restrictions imposed by the Series 2000 bond resolution. The Department's minimum debt service coverage requirement for the issuance of additional debt is for each year of the forecast period 1.25 times maximum annual debt service on all senior lien bonds. The Department has an annual rate covenant of 1.10 times debt service payments. Between 1999 and 2002, debt service coverage ranged from 2.22 to 4.02. These ratios are based on the inclusion of PILOT and PILOFF in net revenues available for debt service. Following issuance of the Series 2002 Bonds, debt service coverage remained substantially in excess of the minimum requirement, at 2.25 times scheduled debt service for 2003. 6.2 Water and Sewer Rates The Department's water rate structure consists of a monthly customer charge and a two- tiered volumetric rate. For residential customers with metered consumption exceeding 3,000 gallons per month, the monthly customer charge is $8.97. The volumetric rate is $1.23 per kgal for the first 3,000 gallons and $1.38 for each additional kgal. For customers using less than 3,000 gallons per month, a $12.95 customer charge applies with no volumetric charges. For non-residential customers, the monthly customer charge is $9.73 for 5/8 inch and % inch meters. For meters larger than % inch the monthly customer charge increases in relation to the equivalent meter ratio. The volumetric rate for non-residential customers is $1.58 per kgal for the first 3,000 gallons and $1.74 for each additional kgal. The Department's sewer rate structure is based on monthly water consumption and consists of a monthly customer charge and a uniform volumetric rate. For residential customers with a winter average metered water consumption exceeding 3,000 gallons per month during the 6-1 ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 previous November, December and January, the monthly customer charge is $16.32. The volumetric rate is $1.50 per kgal. For customers using less than 3,000 gallons of water per month, a $11.63 customer charge is applied with no volumetric charge. For non-residential customers, the monthly customer charge is $17.18 for customers with either 5/8-inch or %-inch water meters. For non-residential customers with water meters larger than % inch, the monthly customer charge increases in relation to the equivalent meter ratio. The volumetric rate for these non-residential customers is $1.90 per kgal. Plus: Bond Interest & Fiscal Charges Depreciation & Amortization Net Operating Transfer Out Payment in Lieu of Taxes Pmt. in Lieu of Franchise Fees Less: Construction Fund Interest Income Intergovernmental Revenues Net Revenues Available for DS Debt Service on Revenue Bonds Debt Service Coverage Ratio Data Source: Audited Financial Statements 1999-2003 a Debt service in 2001 excludes $4,873,722 paid from the Capitalized Interest fund. Inclusion of this amount would decrease the coverage ratio to 1.65x b Debt service in 2002 excludes $2,423,104 paid from the Capitalized Interest fund. Inclusion of this amount would decrease the coverage ratio to 1.63x C Debt service in 2003excludes $3,631,719 paid from the Capitalized Interest fund. Inclusion of this amount would decrease the coverage ratio to 1.54x Note: Although PilOT and PilaFF costs are payable from system revenues as operating expenses, the Bond Resolution provides that such PilOT and PllOFF costs are payable only from the revenues of the System remaining after the payment of other operating expenses and after the payment of debt service on the bonds, subordinate debt service and hedge payments. Accordingly, under the Bond Resolution, PilOT and PllOFF costs are added back to net income for the purposes of determining net income available for debt service. In the previous bond report PilOT and PilaFF were not included in the calculation of net revenues available for debt service. Under the previous approach, historic debt service coverage ratios for 1999 through 2003 would have been 3.07, 3.66, 3.17, 2.02 and 2.06 respectively. 5,086,775 9,059,606 2,500,000 697,325 885,823 5,886,522 7,104,868 9,484,376 10,062,681 12,584,510 10,742,163 16,008,308 10,454,080 697,325 1,000,000 (2,455,166) (3,009,471) $19,003,280 $4,727,115 4.02 800,000 1,065,996 (6,370,931 ) 800,000 800,000 1,144,720 1,224,850 (7,593,894) (6,456,567) (4,734,350) $16,217,323 $4,763,210 3.40 $18,582,168 $22,070,912 $23,865,896 $5,274,379 9,948,035 10,586,963 3.52 2.22 2.25 6-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Water and sewer service customer charges by meter size and volumetric rates for both residential and non-residential customers are shown in Table 6-2. TABLE 6.2 Water and Sewer Rates (Effective 4/1/2004) Water Customer Rate Charge (per kgal) RESIDENTIAL RATES $12.95 NA $8.97 $1.23, $1.38* NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES 5/8" & %" NA $9.73 $1.58,1.74* $17.18 $1.90 1" NA $13.79 Same $24.56 Same 1-1/4" & 1-1/2" NA $22.85 Same $41.04 Same 2" NA $32.82 Same $59.29 Same 3" NA $54.92 Same $99.80 Same 4" NA $79.56 Same $144.59 Same 6" NA $134.17 Same $244.37 Same 8" NA $194.61 Same $354.78 Same 10" NA $259.93 Same $474.24 Same 12" NA $337.30 Same $600.61 Same The first charge is applied to each of the first 3 kgals of metered consumption; the second charge is applied to each additional kgal. Sou rce - http://www.augustaga.gov/departments/utilities/water_rates.htm Meter Size Kgals Metered Sewer Customer Charge Rate (per kgal) All Meters All Meters Less than 3 Greater than 3 $11.63 $16.32 NA $1.50 The AUD monthly bill for a typical residential customer using 9000 gallons is $20.94 for water service, and $29.82 for sewer service. A comparison of this bill to typical residential monthly water and sewer bills in effect in 2003 for customers of various systems throughout Georgia is presented in Table 6-3. This table indicates that Augusta's water and sewer rates, even after the 2004 rate increase, are relatively low compared to those of other Georgia communities. TABLE 6.3 Comparison of Typical Monthly Residential Customer Bills Monthly Billing Local Jurisdiction Water* Sewer* Total Paulding County $38.75 $38.75 $77.50 Forsyth County $33.24 $43.56 $76.80 Douglas County $33.24 $43.22 $76.46 Rockdale County $33.65 $41.75 $75.40 Fayette County $35.60 $39.42 $75.02 Cherokee County $31.50 $43.20 $74.70 Fulton County $25.50 $45.75 $71.25 Henry County $34.98 $34.98 $69.96 Gwinnett County $34.93 $33.12 $68.05 City of Roswell $22.20 $45.75 $67.95 Clayton County $29.16 $34.24 $63.40 City of Gainesville $20.94 $41.88 $62.82 ~~ ~~ ~.~ ~n City of Lawrenceville $17.28 $33.06 $50.34 Dawson County (Etowah Water) $43.75 $0.00 $43.75 City of Cumming (inside City limits) $19.56 $19.92 $39.48 *Based on average consumption of 9,000 gallons per month. Data source: State of Georgia Water and Sewerage Systems Rate Comparisons 200212003 Banc of America Annual rate increases of 11 percent were implemented in 2001 through 2004, and 11 percent per annum increases are scheduled in 2005 through 2007. These increases will be followed 6-3 6-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 by 3 percent per annum increases in 2008 through 2013. Water and sewer rate increases are assumed to apply uniformly across utilities and customer classes. That is, planned rate increases will be applied to all water and sewer customer charges, volumetric rates, and industrial surcharge rates for both the water and wastewater systems. The projected water and sewer rate adjustments will increase the typical residential customer's monthly water bill in 2013 to $34.28 ($26.27 in 2004 dollars) and monthly sewer bill to $48.70 (or $37.32 in 2004 dollars)10. While the future combined bill of $82.98 represents a total increase of 63.50 percent in combined monthly bills over the 10-year forecast period, the combined monthly bill in current dollars ($63.59) is below the median of the range of typical monthly bills presented in Table 6-3, without accounting for prospective increases in these communities' water and sewer rates. Water and sewer tap fees are $350 per service for residential connections11. The water and sewer tap fees assessed to new customers connecting to the system are conservatively assumed to remain constant throughout the forecast period. 6.3 Financial Policies The Department uses a system of fund accounting to track water and sewer system revenues and expenditures. Funds include the Revenue Fund, the Utility General Fund, and the Bond Funds associated with specific bond series. With the exception of sales tax proceeds, all revenues are deposited into the Revenue Fund. Revenue Fund expenditures include all O&M expenses other than PILOT and PILOFF costs, operating capital expendi- tures, transfers to the Utility General Fund for capital projects and certain other costs of the System, including PILOT and PILOFF costs, debt service, and transfers to the Bond Fund for capital projects funded through debt proceeds. Bond proceeds are deposited into the Capitalized Interest and Construction Fund. In accordance with the Bond Resolution, the Department is required to maintain a minimum balance in the Utility General Fund of the lower of $2,500,000 or 5 percent of the preceding fiscal year's operating revenues. The Utility General Fund's cash and investment balance as of January 1, 2004, was $26,092,976. Throughout the forecast period, Utility General Fund cash balances are projected to range from a low of $2.6 million to $35.3 million. In the past, the Department made transfers from the Utility General Fund to Augusta's General Fund. In 1999 this transfer was $2.5 million. Conversely, in 1999 and 2000, the Department received sales tax revenues totaling approximately $7.74 million. To ensure financial integrity and self-sufficiency, the Master Bond Resolution provides that the Department will no longer receive sales tax revenues nor make transfers to Augusta's General Fund. 10 A 3.0 percent discount rate was used to calculate the residential bills in terms of 2004 dollars 11 Tap fees vary depending on water meter and tap sizes. Cost does not include additional fees assessed for road crossing or sidewalk replacement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 6.4 Projected Operating Results Table 6-4 presents projected operating results for the System, including projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and debt service coverage through 2013. 6.4.1 Revenues Projections of new customers, water consumption and wastewater flows by customer class, and proposed rate increases are used to forecast water and sewer sales revenues over the planning period. As of December 31, 2003, the System provided service to 59,077 active water accounts and 44,884 active sewer accounts.12 Growth of residential water customer accounts is based on projected population growth and is consistent with historical customer growth patterns. Annual water system growth is expected to range between 0.68 and 1.35 percent-an increase of between 600 and 800 new water accounts per annum. Total water accounts are projected to increase 11.0 percent over the 10-year study period. Sewer customer growth projections are established from a detailed analysis of the proposed extension of sewer service to isolated pockets of water customers within the Department's service area and population growth. Annual sewer customer growth is expected to fluctuate between 5.06 and 1.08 percent during the study period. The wider range of annual growth is due to the variable effects on active customer accounts of collection line extensions into unsewered pockets within the service area. New sewer accounts are projected to increase between 600 and 2,620 annually; the total number of sewer accounts is projected to increase 24.7 percent over the forecast period. Revenue projections are based on the conservative assumption that revenue collection from one-half of the new customers in a given year is delayed until the following year. In addition, commercial and industrial water and sewer customer accounts are projected to remain constant over the forecast period. Weighted average monthly consumption estimates by customer class were developed from customer billing information and are consistent with historical revenues. However, to account for reduced consumption in response to proposed rate increases, consumption estimates across all customer classes are forecast using a price elasticity of demand factor of 0.1513. Annual water sales revenues are forecast to increase from $23.3 to $38.0 million and sewer sales and industrial surcharge revenues from $24.4 to $42.3 million. Water and sewer tap fees are projected based on new accounts resulting from system expansion. These fees are expected to generate $6.4 million between 2004 and 2013. Cut-on fees, set to recover administrative costs associated with new accounts, and other miscellaneous revenues are assumed to remain unchanged over the study period. These fees and revenue items are expected to average $1.25 million per annum between 2004 and 2013. 12 AUD's recently implemented billing system, acquired by the utility in 2003, has substantiated that the previous billing system was prone to data reporting that over estimated active water and sewer customer account data. All revenue forecasting reported herein is based on revised, more conservative, customer account data reflected in AUD's new billing system. 13 Price elasticity of demand is equal to the percentage change in quantity demanded divided by the percentage change in price. An elasticity factor of 0.15 indicates that, for every 10% increase in price, demand (consumption) will decrease by 1.5%. 6-5 1-1-.... o::zo owo SJ~~ a::a::~ ",<0:: ~fb~ l:tl~cri ZWCl ~E5 w:::::!m I-w :::>:::> ~~ "'> :::>w (90:: :::>0:: <w ~ w tn ~ Cl Z < 0:: w ~ en ..... (l) == (l) en "'1" "'ffi w ..... ....1$ III CO ~3: ~~ o~ NC"l co CO CO 0> 0> '<I" C'io g C;; roN C"l '<I" fh 0010 OOCO 00'<1" oll'iai NION '<I"NO ~C\J~ CO fh ~~ O~ NC"l C"l CO CO I'- I'- CO C'i~ '<I" N CO 0> <<io C"l '<I" fh OO~ OOtO OOtO oll'i< to 0010 o ai 0 Il'i Il'i CO CO N 10 '<I" to 10 '<I"Nen L6 a) ~ CD~ C"l C"l I'- fh fh o~ ....0 O~ NC"l o 0> ooen 0> to 0010 "I N 0010 ~ ~ 01l'iC'i LO 0> NION LO "I '<1""110 ~- cO ~'V~ C"l C"l I'- fh fh ~~ O~ NC"l 'r""" (0 00<0 CW") T""" OOv I'- 10 00"1 N 0 0 Il'i ro to '<I" "1101'- V 0 oc:t C'\I__ en"": T""~ N C"l C"l I'- fh fh ~~ O~ NC"l 10 to I'- C"l .... to. ~. N '<I" CO NIl'i C"l C"l fh 00.... 00.... 100C"l OIl'iN C"l1O .... '<I"NO> ~o) to Y7 ,....?fl, 00 o . N:: "I CO 000 I'- 10 00C"l '<I" C"lOOCO en cO ~ lli en ~ a; ~~ffi o ri 'f"""-cri C"l C"l <.D fh Y7 cg?fl. 00 o . N:: "I C"l 0010 "I I'- ooen "C"""" 1.0.. 0 0 (0 N -- ",- LO ..0 d!; N ~~~ ,...: c5 ~~O- "I C"l <.D fh Y7 anrf!. 00 o . N:: C"l 0 00C"l '<I" I'- 10 0 <.D "I 0> I'-oen o 0 __-L()-.......- I'- I'- 10 10 '<I" T""" ....... ONN ..0 cD __- __- .q- "I "I 10 fh Y7 .$ "'5'llt?ft. "'g~ ~N;: I'- 0> 0 0 <.D N 0) 1O<t-CX) "I C"l 1'-'<1"1'- '<1". ai N C'i ai C"l C"l <.D0C"l C"l '<I" CONCO ri ~ ~ai "I "I '<I" Y7 Y7 c: +:l ~ (l) o en CO (.) ~ o 1..1... E (l) en CIl :J c: CIl (ij ii; 'C: 0:: iii CD:J CIl :J'O ~ lllf3 ai-= 0.. "'=> >'0 Ol mz~ffi ~~ g~"'lll"'=:ai ~wfJ(ij ~CIl ii; 1il0::(/)~ lo(/).O:: ~ O::"....Q).c'-'-C 'OZ.l!l=:O.l!lCllg? a>i= CO Q) 3 ca= Q) :;<l:~(/)(/)~oo:: '0 0:: '" ~~ :g ~o t5 NMCX)CX)T"" C"lC"lC"lIO<.D 0)0).......__1'- NriT""-ri~ o '<I" 10 en en C"l0<.D101O c:i __- __- ~ -.:i '<I" N<.D Y7 Y7 lO'<I"oenco --__("')L()__ '<I" 10 <.DO to __- ri ri ..q- NO, CO"l""'"O____ 1'-0tO'<I" CO cOT""-T""-~N- C"l N<.D Y7 Y7 '<I" C"lN CO to O>CONOO '<I"enen<.DO ~C'i<O~<O __COLOMa> C"lenIONO ~ ..:~~ Y7 Y7 '<I"~IO'<I"'<I" COT""t---(O('t') 0>C"l101'-<.D as L6 __- M a) OL()__tOM 0> en 10 0 '<I" ..0 ~~ai C"l "110 Y7 Y7 N<.DCOO> '<I" COI'-'<I"COO> 1'-'<1"10'<1""1 C")-.......-.......-C'\l- __- 10 N <.Den '<I" LOen'<l"COCO -q" ~O,.....- C"l NIO Y7 Y7 VT""VT"""Q COLOO__('I') CO'<l"CO<.D1'- aio~roC'i '<I"ONIOC"l "I en '<I" '<I" 0 rn- __- CJ)-1.C"i C"l ~ 10 Y7 Y7 1OC"l1OC"l1'- CO__O'r"""T'"" NNC"lCO<.D 1l'i-iC'i-i~ enI'-COC"lCO O>COC"l<.DCO ~- T""-~"~- Y7 Y7 ('l')__L()(""),... f'..v__CX)__ ....1'-0'<1"'<1" roroC'i~~ CO'<l"'<I"C"l~ I'-COC"l1'-1'- ci ~t6a:i C"l ....'<1" Y7 Y7 O>OCO'<l" 0 00--0)............. <.DOCONCO C'i-iC'i-i1l'i ONO.,..-'V C"lCOC"lCON ai ~N V" "I ....'<1" Y7 Y7 COOOC"lN NONC"lCO 100en<.D0 <<ioll'iC'i<o MO<O____ '<I" CON 0> '<I" V" __..0......: "I ~C"l Y7 Y7 ~~~5~ VJXQ):+:lO C:0lu..0l1- ~t 3l'~ III ~~i:'-~ g>.~ g ~ ~ ._...J Ol X ~ .5 U: w (f)~c:o ~ ~O ~ ijl ~ Z CD >.~ Q; W.<::: Ol c: 0.. ~6e....- 0 Wed E! ClQi e... ~2 ~~ We... e... o '<I" "I I'- ~ C"l '<I" ~ ;;; C"l '<I" o -i C"l to < C'i co o Il'i .... Y7 "I 10 en <0 C"l C"l -i ;;; 00 10 ro I'- CO ~ ;;; C"l N <0 o co -i ;;; '<I" co "I ro co 1'-, .... ;;; C"l 0> o N o o o .... Y7 '<I" o I'- C'i "I '<I" N .... Y7 Gl E o u .E CI ~ E Gl C. o ~~]i 882 .s.=.s --'0 (/) llllll5 W Q;Q)1Il ::J EE Z '0'0 W C:C: > :J:J W u..u.. 0:: Cl c: (!) ~~ z 010 t= Ci>2 i:2ii)8"~ WW 0 e...(/) () 9m ze... 0>< z!:!:!. ~~~:g ~ v_ It) T"" __ v.. ~ <oai ~ ~ ~-~- ~ "I "I -i N~ ~ NLO,.....O ~ ~.g.M ~ ~ gl'-roo <0 ~ ~f2. ~ "IN Il'i N~ e m~c;;~ CD' O')~N~LO ("') 00 lO<.Dro< 0 EA- ,....~ tq. 0 C"lN ~ N~ ~ ~~,....-.::t I'-COI'-CO . . en C"l 1'-10 . . 00.....(0('1') '<I" 0>0> fh CO. ~ NN NN Y7 lOLOt.n-.::t M ~~~U;~ ~ N~""'~~ ~~ :;;'<I"~,~. ~ ('t)..... ......~ N~ e ~~g~ ~ (O~,.... ...... ~gC'iN :;;I'-.~~ .....N'ci NN Y7 MenNO J:::~ro~~ ~ ~ ~ 1O"1l'i ~.....~~ ~ (\")u-i~ ....;;; COLO('l")N U; 8tn'<l"C"l en .. ..,......,.... -: ~gai~ ~ O,....("')LC) ~ .....- ~ ....._ 0)_ ,......- Y7 CO~ Y7 ~~ci!;~ ci!; CO.. ~ "=t LO ""'0. ~~aiC'i ~ ~~:;;: C; NNai C'i .... Y7 Y7 ~~~~~~ ....... ,...._O)..........l() q (0("1')('1')..... C") lOen'<l"lO N '<I"100<.D 0 C\I- --- ~ ,....- C\I- NN '<I" Y7 Y7 ~ffi~g~re ~0.~<.D.01'-. re :! ~ 8 ,....- ~ CO'<l"O<.D en N~__-~ c5 NN '<I" Y7 Y7 c;;~~~::t!;f 10, to, en, en. N o. ~~~~<O~ .....NO>lt').....O') M""'- .. ai "IN C"l Y7 Y7 S N N ai 10 o ro e ~~::~C")~ Ln_,...... ('1')_ U1 C;; CO_ ~~t2~NN.~ '<I"oenlO en M~ .. as NN C"l Y7 Y7 N C"l '<I" <0 10 o ct5 e r::~~~~~ C'.!.. V_ V_LO_CX)--_ ~~~toll'i~ cocoO>vT"'"T"'" NO . ro NN C"l Y7 Y7 ~~;n~~~ 10. <.D. '<1". co. LO '<1". ~~g~~.~ ~. '<1". en '<1". '<I" C"l. MO'> ,.... ,...... N~ C"l Y7 Y7 00 10 <0 CO 10 Il'i e g~~:gv~ --_ CX>_ N_ ("1').. <0 N.. ~~;:!~oo.~ co, <.D. CO C"l.1'- '<1". N........ ..... .. LO N..... .....('t) Y7 Y7 (0 I'- ~ ~ C"l e ~~:;;:~Ol~ 0, '<1". 1'-. o. 00 "I. IOI'-COC"lN'<I" ~i2ci!;~N~ ';2-~- ~~g Y7 Y7 ~~~~~~ 1'-.~o.~i.O C"l. ~~~8si~ __COCO M""" (J) ~~- .....-;:~ Y7 ci!;~g~NlOffi '<I"<.Doen 0 a>Mcia6~N ~c;;.g ~.~~. ~~ .....N~ Y7 Y7 Q) ~ '" ~ .~ ~ -=~ ~ 1;)1; () ~~ ~ ~ 6 iI: -g'; ed ~ii ct? 1::= g ~ g ~ .!!! 'E u.. O2 <( o-t-u....Gl ~'OOO",::I ar5::::!::::!55i occe...e...()~ iIi iliO:: e....:! lllli ...JZ .... 10 C"l I'- I'- 0 00 ","0 CD<.D ~ct:i "I fh CD 10 (2;t; .....- 0 '<1"0 CD <.D .....- a5 "I fh CO 10 I'- I'- '<1"0 ,....- ci '<1"0 <.D <.D .....- ct5 "I fh CO 10 I'- I'- I'- 0 <<io I'- 0 o <.D ~ct5 "I fh M CO O><.D NO <<io 1'-'<1" '<1"1'- o~ "I fh E CD CD Q) 0 .~ ~.~ CD c: (/) (/) 0 ECC CD '<I" wCl g (.) Cl N >.5 III II:: iii 'C: W'x Q) (/) W (/) t- al W o LO CO o <.D I'- 0 C'io C"l'<l" 0>1'- ai~ ;;; OCO C"l<.D 0> 0 ~ci '<1"'<1" I'- I'- ro~ .... fh C"l CO 0> <.D NO 1'-.0 .... '<I" LO I'- o~ .... fh C"l C"l "I < CO o C"l .... '<1". .... fh ~ '2: CD (/) <.D o CO o '<I" "I o C"l fh X en CO':! "i' '" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N 1'-. ::;: "I o C"l Eh X 10 CO':! C"l 10 10. ::;: "I o C"l Y7 X N CO':! C"l 10 CO <0 I'- <.D ai "I fh X .... CO':! o <.D C"l < 0>, 00 '<I" <0 "I Y7 X '<I" CO':! o to C"l ~ 10 "I ro .... Y7 X I'- C!! C"l C"l "I <0 C"l .... o ;;; X <.D 10 N I'- 0> CO o C"l ~ ~ .... Y7 X C"l ~ E Q) o ~ '0 .- Q) ~ '0 Q) Q)(/) "e :0 e... Q) Cl Cii (5 I- .!:! 1il 0:: Gl E Gl > o (.) Gl U .~ Gl (/) .. ,g Gl o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........,. ~z8 ow'" ~~~ ",<C~ Cr:fb~ ttl~u) ZWCl ~E~ W::::!CD ....W =>=> ~iTI "'[jj i5~ =>~ <Cw ~ 3: w ~ Cl Z <C ~ w .... ~ c: - ~ Q) o 1ii ~ ~ o u.. E $ U) en Q) == Q) en "'f"'C coC: WCO a::~ ~~ M .... CI N N o N .... .... CI N CI .... CI N en CI CI N co CI CI N I"- CI CI N U) CI CI N an CI CI N ~ -s;g U)CI ~N 00 N:;; Otll WN~ U .= Q) > 01 tIl ~.= ~ wt:> (/):JO 1-8U IDO(/) WQ)O O.~<l: ...Ji:::2 <l: Q) :J(/) z- zoO <l:~ :2x :JtIl :2:2 ~ :2 ....-x C'?O'> COC'? ~..~ <t N o C'? <h I o..c: ~:5g> oue NQ)..c: ....- "C,g}-.::r ffiljig a:)"EN ~.. ~ ~ I"-Q)Q) ....-Q)>- N 0,- ....: tIl rl <h Q) III I Ole+:: ~~.E o..c:o NtIlO ex) .9 0.. ~c:g o~~ ~~.!!l ~ ':~ 1~Q) <ttllE o I?- >- ~JB~ Ui 5 ~ ~ 8.E o ~ ~ ~ 00. Olg31 C - Q) .~ ui:5 g.~o .Ei::- Q)Q)s ..c: (/) 0 -mE .5 :a. co IIltll"'C "OUQ) coCo Eg~ ~~~ O=Q) N"C.r::. CD~I- :5:2ai ~ :>..~ 0.0 i:: ~~~ 3lE15 oCQ) eCii"'C 0.>01 o C EC!):o:> O"'C .!!l ~~~ ~~.9 0.(5 III Q)C/)C .oCQ) 08 E - >- -g 5 ~ uoQ) ~; ~ ~:o:5 ~~ cncoc.. eCLQ. ,SClJtU cE.9 .- :J "0 .E {l .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0.0_ co:+::; ~ oa.Q) l/) 0 E ~ g. ~ -5~~ ~~C!) ~-g~ .~~ -; CD Q) III l/) 0 :J -l/)rl -g<i:2 "0. g~~ ~;.~ J:j ~_ ~ ti r-- :J 0 as tR-~N ....-x C'?1l) coC'? ~~ <t N o C'? <h ....-x C'?N coC'? ~...: N o C'? <h ....- x C'?O'> CON ~--= <t N o C'? <h ....-x C'?CO CON ~-= <t N o C'? <h 0'> o o N ..c: 01 :J e :5 <0 o o N ai N r-- cD <0 ....- ....: <h ~.l!! -c: g ~ ,e>- ~~ 5& Q)"'C :OQ) tIl..c: iU'-g ~tIl Co ~ ~.~ ~ 8 3l.~ ~:c~ 0~15 a:.2l~ tIl .... -g.5 ~ co 'E Q) 1-0:0 O.g~ ...JlIltll a: Ii 10 ..c:"'CQ) o c: E iil.8 8 16 ~.5 =-"Q) III c: c: ~00l .S> Q) .= e.~ .5 a.i::E 5~~ "+::i_a> :J.o"'C ~~o Q) .... III ~0Q) -o-~ 55i1?- ID[5. Q) tIl Q) = 0.5 ur Q) '- ~:5E c: .... Q) Q) Q) E st1ij 8 Q) "'C .= OIC:_ c: tIl Q) :+:l c: tIl III 0 Q;~- a.c:..... ~ ~~ tIlX.c 1IlQ)"'C ~ g>~ ffi:;~ [)a;~ .... a. tIl EO,l!l Q) .... III ~:S 8 1Il0u.. g'O~ ~c:~ Q)Q)Q.. :OE"'C tIl >- c: >-tIltll ~ 0.1- ~~g ~:o: 1i)~ ~ gcaB tt .~-5 0.= ~ ...JtIl~ a:~"'C "'C....c: ffiEdl 1-.2lQ) o ~:5 ::::!(/)~ Q..Q)"'C ..c:..c:C: 01- :J 50~ =C/)~ <i:~:o CD c '-8 o~ z~~ .... <h Il) o o N Ui C :J o E tIl 01 C .~ ..Q :E CD :5 .= l/) "0 c: o ID <t o o N III CD .C CD (/) CD :5 '0 III "'C CD CD o e a. E ,g "'C .iij a. Q) .0 .9 "'C CD "0 Q) a. x CD en ~ CD :5 "0 .~ :s .0. rl l/) CD "0 :J 13 x CD ~ .~ Q) (/) 15 CD o l/) "0 c: o ID C!; o N 1Ilcx:i CDO .co CD - (/)g co .c <h 6-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Interest revenues are earned at an annual interest rate of 3.20 percent on 2004 series bond proceeds in the construction fund and capitalized interest funds, 2.84 percent on Series 2002 funds within the Construction Fund, and 1.26 percent on balances in the Operating Fund. In 2013, total revenues of $82.0 million are projected, and are to be comprised of water sales (46.4 percent), sewer sales (51.6 percent), other revenues (1.5 percent), and water and sewer tap fees (less than 1 percent). Total annual revenues are expected to grow 64.6 percent from $49.8 million in 2004 to $82.0 million in 2013, primarily as a consequence of projected rate increases and customer account growth. 6.4.2 Expenses Total system O&M expenses for 2003 were $33.7 million and are projected to be $37.4 million in 2004. System operating expenses include incremental costs related to the installation of new capital facilities. Expenses are stated in 10 categories: Administration (includes payments to the General Fund in lieu of Franchise Fees and Taxes), Customer Service, Construction and Maintenance, Raw Water, Surface Water Treatment, Groundwater, Messerly Wastewater Treatment Plant, New Programs and Positions, New WTP, and Depreciation. The escalation rate for these categories is computed as the annual rate of inflation (3 percent) plus half the rate of annual residential customer account growth; for water-related categories, 3.61 percent, for sewer-related categories, 4.24 percent14. Additional O&M expenses attributed to the capital improvement program are included in the fiscal year 2004 budget for each category and include additional staffing expenses and recurring costs related to process changes, system expansions, system administrative reorganization, and other aspects of AUD's Benchmark 2010 program. One of the cost centers, New Programs and Positions, is projected to total $15.8 million over the 10-year period and is comprised exclusively of incremental operating and staffing costs required for new facilities and staffing additions related to reorganization. Between fiscal years 2004 and 2005, there will be cost increases in several of the operating divisions that are in excess of the long-term escalation rates denoted above. In the case of the Water and Sewer Administration Divisions, costs are projected to increase by $1 million or 24 percent. This is due to $300,000 for F.E.R.C.licensing costs, $150,000 to pay an increased General Fund risk management transfer allocation, a one-time $300,000 General Fund vehicle maintenance additional charge from a prior period, and $250,000 in increased personnel expenses. In the case of the Water and Sewer Customer Service Divisions, costs are projected to increase by $880,000 or 32 percent between fiscal years 2004 and 2005. This $880,000 is due to concurrent one-time increases of $125,000 for budgeted personnel costs, $500,000 for Automatic Meter Reading maintenance contract fees, and $175,000 for the new utility billing system maintenance fees. Following 2005, the Customer Service costs are projected to continue increasing at long-term escalation rates. 14 For categories such as Administration and Customer Service, 3.92 percent is used-an average of the two escalation rates. Exceptions are: depreciation is escalated based on the installation of new capital; payments in lieu of franchise fees are escalated at 3.0 percent per annum; and payments in lieu of taxes are escalated at a 3% annual rate of increase. This rate is annually subject to adjustment by the City of Augusta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Water and Sewer Construction & Maintenance Division costs are projected to increase by $930,000 or 18 percent between 2004 and 2005. Personnel expenses are to be incurred within this division as the utility transitions to separate Water & Sewer maintenance crews and from a staffing capability supporting only reactive maintenance to staffing levels that enable preventive maintenance activities. Between 2005 and 2006, an additional $463,000 in Maintenance Division costs related primarily to maintenance staffing increases is projected. Following 2006, the Construction & Maintenance Division costs are projected to continue increasing at long-term escalation rates. Total Surface Water Treatment Division expenses are projected to experience substantial changes with planned shifts between the use of groundwater and surface water sources. For example, a one-time, $1.2 million increase equivalent to 38 percent of the 2004 surface water budget is projected for 2005. This $1.2 million is comprised of $200,000 for additional personnel, $200,000 for increased electrical costs and $800,000 in increased chemical costs related to the operation of the new water treatment plant and raw water pumping station. As 2005 will be the first full year that the new surface water treatment plant is on line, costs for the surface water division are projected to increase consistent with long-term escalation rate estimates thereafter. In the case of the Groundwater Division, Raw Water Division, and the Messerly Wastewater Treatment Plant Division, no extraordinary cost increases are expected between 2004 and 2006. Dedicated positions currently denoted as New Personnel and Programs will be incorporated into the AUD budget as AUD implements a staffing reorganization. This reorganization is designed to accomplish 1) restructuring of the maintenance division to provide for tracking of engineering, collection and distribution activities, 2) establishing an effective metering program, and 3) creating an internal Information Technologies (IT) group. These positions will be staffed during the period from 2004 through 2006. Additional expenses in fiscal year 2005 will be approximately $680,000 and an additional $450,000 in 2006. These new staff positions will include dedicated IT staff, a new Assistant Director, a new Training Coordinator, and staff increases necessary to support additional meter maintenance within the Maintenance Division. In total the projected increase in Total Water and Sewer Operating Division Expenses is 19.9 percent between 2004 and 2005. Between 2005 and 2006 the increase is expected to be approximately 5.00 percent. From 2006 through the end of the planning period, combined division costs are projected to increase at a long-term escalation rate of 3.92 percent. Total operating expenses are expected to grow 72.6 percent from $37.4 to $64.6 million over the study period. Of the $27.2 million differential, $15.9 million (58.4 percent) is attributed to increases in O&M costs. The $11.3 million (41.6 percent) balance is attributed to $10.7 million (39.3 percent) of increased depreciation expenses accrued as new projects are placed into service, $244,000 in increased PILOT costs (.90 percent), and $386,000 in increased PILOFF costs (1.42 percent). 6.4.3 Debt Service Projected debt service includes debt service for both existing and proposed revenue bond issues. Currently, the Department is repaying four revenue bond issues: Series 1996A Bonds, Series 1997 Bonds, Series 2000 Bonds, and Series 2002 Bonds. The combined annual 6-9 6-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 principal and interest payment for these revenue bonds ranges between $10.1 and $21.64 million over the forecast period. The 1997 Bonds will be repaid in 2021, the 1996A Bonds in 2028, the 2000 Bonds in 2030, and the 2002 Bonds in 2032. The Department also pays principal and interest on two loans, Series 1997 and Series 1999, issued by the Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority (GEFA). The GEFA Series 1997 loan will be repaid in 2016 and the Series 1999 loan in 2019. These GEFA loans are not included in the parity coverage requirements according to the Master Bond Resolution and are therefore not included in debt service coverage calculations. The proposed Series 2004 bond amount will fund the capital program, maintain appropriate Operating Fund reserves, meet debt service coverage criteria, and minimize rate impacts. Of the $160 million par amount, capitalized interest on the Series 2004 Bonds is $10.61 million. Deposits into the Series 2004 project fund will be $146 million and the remaining $3.6 mil- lion of the par amount will be used for issuance cost, bond insurance, and surety costs. Annual debt service costs are budgeted at $14.1 million in 2004. Future bonded debt service costs are projected to increase to $30.24 million in 2013 under the proposed bond issuance schedule. 6.4.4 Debt Service Coverage Debt service coverage is evaluated in terms of the System as a whole (combined water and sewer). The debt service coverage ratio is calculated as the net revenues available for debt service divided by total annual debt service. Net revenues available for debt service are the sum of net income adding back bond interest expense and fiscal charges, depreciation (a non-cash expense) and amortization, PILOT and PILOFF. Although PILOT and PILOFF costs are payable from system revenues as operating expenses, the Bond Resolution pro- vides that such PILOT and PILOFF costs are payable only from the revenues of the System remaining after the payment of other operating expenses and after the payment of debt service on the bonds, subordinate debt service and hedge payments. Accordingly, under the Bond Resolution, PILOT and PILOFF costs are added back to net income for the purposes of determining net income available for debt service. The system has an annual rate covenant of 1.10 times debt service payments. System debt service coverage is estimated to be 1.83 in 2004 and projected to range from 1.31 to 2.56 over the study period as shown in Table 6-4. As indicated in Table 6-4, during the period from 2009 through 2013 which follows the construction period, the System will generate net revenues available for debt service that will be in excess of the 1.25 times maximum annual debt service requirement found within Bond Resolution requirements necessary for future borrowing. System debt service coverage ratios for this period based upon the maximum annual debt service of $30,244,831 occurring in 2030 are projected to range from 1.26 to 1.39. 6.4.5 Operating Fund Balances Revenue Fund cash flows are presented in Table 6-5. In addition to operating expenses and debt service payments, uses of cash include current revenue financing of planned capital improvements, GEF A loan payments, Utility General Fund project funding, and the Department's budgeted requirements for operating capital. Operating capital expenditures, excluded from the debt service coverage calculation, is expected to total $3.3 million in 2004 and escalate to $3.5 million in 2005 and then at 3.86 percent per annum throughout the . It ~ 0000000> '<t ("\I.....OO.....U')tOO'> '<t 10 Ol g:~gg~ (') (')I--O'<t(')I--......CD (') 00 . (') 0> O>CDONI--ONO> 00 '<t 0> l") '<t- MOO.ocO .0 N.o.ocOOOr-:~ 0; 0 00 .... CD v.....NLOOlN o 0>......1O'<tOCDO> CD N M 0 CD O(')'<tNN(') (') CD 1--00 CD CD 1--1-- (') CD '<t . N N a:i C\I~ ER- ~ ER- N o N <I) <I) ~ as N- ..t N N ~ <I) (')'<t <I) 00 '<t<l) N<I)<I)<I) 00 <I) ~!zg <I) <I) <I) <I) <I) <I) . OWo ;b c..::;:'" 10 (')OOOON(') lO'<tOOCDIOCIOCD'<t '<t 0' WI-'" 0> OOI--OOClO '<t __~EA-..q-",,"f"'-.......... 10 CIO . a:::a:::!:!:! '<t_ I--CIOOO'<t ...... VT"'" NCOCCO..... N ~:: ",<a: N ...... Mr...:O.oO r-: ~.....: cD~ocO~ '<t- '<t r-: Q::ffj~ .... N ~NNIOO> (') 00...... lO'<tOClO......O> CD W Cl - 0 I-- I-- I'--CD CIOCDCDCDCDI-- CD_ 10 . ~ffl~ N c06a~~ 0; ex:)N <I) - - - - 0; <I) N .....CONv N ~ ~E~ <I) (')'<t <I) I'-- (') <I) N <I) <I) <I) I-- <I) <I) <I) <I) <I) <I) <I) . W:::::!CD I-UJ ::J::J 10 10(')000>1-- '<tIOOOClOIOI--O CIO 10 0 ~ffi 0 (')0000>(') O>OO'<tI--I--CDO> '<t 0> CD_ O>CDOOO> 10_ '<to>ON'<tOC')O CD_ '<to ...... . "'> 00;0.0.0 r-:OOcO~oaSr-: ...... ::JUJ .... ...... ...... ...... N 0 t!)a: ....1-- OOClONIOOIO ......'<t01O'<t00C')0 ::Ja: 0 '<t ~~-a~~ N C')IOOClOCDCDCD'<tO 1'--_ 10 I-- . <UJ N '$ r-: ~~;,;<I)N-~~'$ 0; N ~ C')C') <I) I-- I-- <I) ~ <I) <I) <I) EI) <I) <I) . ~ 0 0c>>001O'<t '<tCDOOClOIOIO......C>> 10 ii) C') C>>CDOOO CD OOClOO'<tI--I--C>>C') CIO 0 ~ C>> NNCO..... CD O>CIOONI--OC')CD C>> ~ N . Cl 0 .0 <<i..tO.oM cO ex:)cOOcOcOONo; 0 (') Z .... C') 10 C>>N ION '<t OCDOIOI--OC')CD...... r:: ..t < 0 C') ION'<tNC') CIO O>'<tOClOOCDIONI-- '<t CD a: N cO v" as EA- ~ EA- ..t ..0 N ~Y}.....- cD NO, """- cO '<t- <X!- . UJ ~ EI) C') C') <I) I'-- C') <I) <I) N <I) <I) <I) I-- <I) ~ EI) <I) EI) EI) <I) <I) . CD .....coao..... CIO N'<tOOC')CIOCDN '<t 0 CD CIO ('1").....00("1') I-- OONO'<tO>CDC')c>> C') C') '<t 1'--10001-- 0> 1'--00NNOCD'<t 10 0> 10 . 01 as NOO.or-: .0 M.oOcOcOOaSaS as .0 10 0 10 CD '<tN IOCIO CD 1OC>>0101--'<t100 CIO C') N 0 N ~~a~-a CD IOC')OClO'<tI--'<t...... 10 C') N N as N <<iNN<I)Or-:N..t ..t cO O!- . ...... C') C') <I) I'-- ('l") EA- ..... N EA- EA- EA- CIO EI) ...... <I) EI) EI) <I) EI) <I) <I) EI) ...... ~ . 0 IOCDOOIO I-- '<tIOOOIOCIOIOIO Oi CD ii) '<t I'--C')OON C') CDIOO'<tOCDNC') CIO I-- .....(01000 C') OONONI--OO'<t 10 '<t 10 CO 0 ..0 .....- 0 ari ~ M o;.oOcOMOI---M .0 as N . 0 I'-- ONC')ION C') '<tNOIOC')'<tClOIO '<t 10 N 0 0 '<tClO'<tNI-- CD NC')OClOO>I--C')c>> '<t N a; N .0 NO, ll"i EA- ~ ER- 0 MNI--.EI)o;r-:NM 1--- ex:) cO . C') C') C') <I) I-- ('l') Y7 ..... ..... EA- EA- EA- CIO ...... EI) EI) <I) EI) EI) <I) <I) <I) <I) ~ . 0> NCIOOON N IOCIOOOOClOOO ...... 0 Ol CIO 1'--100 0 C>> N CO.....EA-"'I:;f'M(OO('l") I-- '<t 0> '<tC')OOCD 10 NIO NC>>OION I-- I-- '<t ,.... 0; aia5~..oai M IO-r-: co~or-:..t N 0 N . 0 '<t O'l.....NLOC"'> C') 0>10 LO V v..... 0 ...... I-- 0; 0 C') I'--C>>I--NI-- '<t O>N CIOI--I--C')CIO I-- 0 I-- N .0 c:i M EA- .....- EA- r-: .....-N' <I) . . . - r-: .0 N CIOI--NC') ~ I C') C') C') <I) CD (') EI) ..... EA- ER- tA- CD C') <I) EI) <I) <I) EI) <I) <I) EI) I 10 NC')OOC') CIO (')IOOOC')CIOOCD C') C>> '<t 0 N 1--0 01-- CD 1'--1O<I)'<t C>>CO 010 CIO CIO CIO 1--. ...-lOOO,.... '<t ......1-- NNOOCO ...... C>> N CD C; N .....- .......- L()- cD N ex:)~ cO 1---0 00 ..t 0; ex:) I '<t......0>1O'<t 10 OOC>> LO.....VLOCO 0 '<t '<t 0 0 CON.....NCO C') 1'--...... CIOIOI--NCO 0 C') C') 0 N r---: c:i ~ .....- fA. ~ ON <I) . . - . as .0 (')- N Ol--NC') I C') N C') <I) <I) CD C') <I) ..... EA- EA- tR- IO C') <I) <I) EI) <I) <I) EI) <I) <I) <I) I 10 (')OOOCD C>> o>CIOOOC')OOO C>> 10 0 CIO '<t 1--10 OC') C>> OOO<l)'<tC')<I)......O I-- 0 N 0 NC>>I--OO C>> CDC>> NN CIOIO C') 1'--. CD I II) ..t OO.....-L6N- 0; Mr-: COCO .oN N ...... r-: 0 0 1'--1--10100 '<t ON IOC') ON 10 0 0> N or-.......ONO N C') ...... CIO...... 10 10 '<t 0 1'--_ 0 0 LO cD ~ .....- ~ .0 o;N <I) . r-:M M N- N 0 ...... I '" C') N N <I) <I) <I) 10 N <I) ;;; <I) <I) 10 C') <I) ~ <I) EI) <I) EI) EI) <I) <I) I u:: .s:: CD I'--C>>OON CIO OOOOClOI--OI--O> 0> 10 0 '" I-- Na>U').......... 0> NN<I)'<tC>><I)C')1O CIO CIO EI) ro C>> NC')I'--'<tClO 10 100> CIOCIO C>>C') '<t 0 I <...) -.r N <<io;NMaS ex:) cO.o COO ..tN r-: < (')C')CDOClO N (')CD C')C') CDCIO ...... 0 0 0 0 C')'<tClON'<t C') '<to 1--...... ION N N en N cO ('f)~V7~tA- 0 <<iN <I) - .....-ri cO 0 I '<t Q) N NN <I) 10 N <I) ;;; <I) <I) '<t C') '" <I) EI) <I) <I) EI) <I) <I) :::l I "0 ...J ...J c:: Ul ~ < ro Q) l- I en ~Q) 0 0 Q) co ::;, l- I- ~ .r;C: ::l U Q) Ul I 0 .... > ~(/) ::;, Q) en CJ)a:: 0) .~ Q) "0 roO) U Cl o Ul Q) c: c: .... co I 'C: 0) III '0 c...Q) U) rJ)1i)LL c: c: Q)C:...J Q) ~ Q)::;'a. 0) III Q) ,~ ,~ -g Ul ::;, -c III 'E c: III I ~ 5i.E1- 'iij LL u: ,~~ c: III ~ 0 ::2LL ~Q)Q)- U U. ~-gQ; Ul Q) OQ)~Q)CI)xl9 Q) Q) ::;, -g:::! ~ c: CJ) 15 w ,- e. . "0 a::CO== ::;, c: c:: ~ Ul Q) c: Q) lIlc...~~15Q)-g8 Q) ::l U) Q) CJ) Q) > U)-c Q) >,Q)O III U) U. c: O)--c>Q) III . III (ij~C:Q)a:: Sc:a::lIlO-c_c: Q) ~ ~ ro (/) III a:: - ;;mt:Q.g>~~.. U .. Q; CD Q; '- ~ c: U Q) co l!!!:;Q)<(:;:>OQ)l!! III -= . It) c:: Cl CI)....3:-~Cii ~:::! ~ tb .~ e ffi Q) ro a; ch Q) c: ~~~~OE co w (9 'c: Oc...U(!)Wc...a::O z . ....I c: 0:: c: al _ .(;) ::I :a <"'" Q) 0 c: . ....:::l co l/) w . . 6-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 remainder of the forecast period. Expenditures for renewal and extension projects are anticipated to be $1.6 million in 2004. In 2005, a one-time reconciliation of operating division carryovers accounts for projected expenditures of $7.5 million. In 2006, these costs are projected to drop back to a level of $2.3 million from which they are projected to escalate on a per annum basis at 3.00 percent. These Renewal and Replacement funds are used for minor or miscellaneous capital improvements. Scheduled rate increases provide for compliance with the Master Bond Resolution requirement to maintain Utility General Fund balances equal to the lesser of $2.5 million or 5 percent of the preceding fiscal year's operating revenues. Utility General Fund balances range from $2.6 million to $35.3 million over the forecast period. 6.5 Capital Financing The capital improvement program will require approximately $189.6 million ($174.4 million in 2004 dollars) in total funding over the 10-year period, as discussed in Section 5 and shown in Table 6-6. Three sources of funds will be used to fund the capital program: bond proceeds (77.0 percent), current revenues (16.7 percent), and interest in the Construction Fund (6.2 percent). Approximately $146 million in bond proceeds will be placed into the 2004 Project Fund. Current revenue transfers totaling $31.7 million will be made from the Operating Fund over the forecast period. These transfers are expected in amounts of $17 million in 2008, $12 million in 2009, $1 million in 2009 and 2010, and $715,000 in 2013. Interest in the Construction Fund is projected to total $11.8 million over the 10-year period. Planned water and sewer rate increases are projected to generate nearly $179.8 million in additional revenues over the forecast period; tap fees are projected to generate $6.4 million. Use of these funds provides an appropriate matching of revenues to capital expenses (including debt service payments) to accommodate system growth, effect major system improvements, and extend sewer service to unsewered areas. In the event that actual growth in the Department's water and sewer systems is less than projected, project deferrals may be employed without degradation of services to ensure adequate matching of system revenues and projected capital expenditures. 6.6 Conclusions CH2M HILL's projection of the financial performance of the System for the 10-year period 2004 through 2013 is summarized as follows: · Total revenues are projected to increase 64.6 percent over the 10-year period. Total Uses of Funds, including incremental operating expenditures attributed to planned capital expenditures and associated debt service, are projected to increase by 78.2 percent over the forecast period. · Projects identified in the Department's 10-year CIP reflect priority needs of the system and, after adjusting for inflation, are expected to total $189.6 million. These expenditures will be funded through the debt issue in 2004 ($146.1 million in project funds), current revenues ($31.7 million), and interest on the Construction Fund ($11.8 million). It . . . . . It It I It It It It . . . It It It It It It It It . It . It . . . . It It It . . . . It . . . ENGINEER'S REPORT AUGUSTA UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS. SERIES 2004 . Financing of the planned 10-year capital program will be enabled by planned system- wide water and sewer rate increases of 11 percent per annum from 2004 through 2007, and 3 percent increases from 2008 through 2013. The typical residential bill for both water and sewer service is projected to increase 63.5 percent over the forecast period as a result of these rate increases. However, projected residential bills are expected to remain comparable to, and competitive with, those of other Georgia communities. . Given scheduled water and sewer rate increases throughout the forecast period, net revenues of the System will be sufficient to meet projected debt service obligations on existing debt and the Series 2004 Bonds. 6-13 . 1-1-"- ;:!: 41 O::ZO OWO <h ft~;;:: 0 LO 0 0 LO L() 0 . O::O::~ 0 "'" ~ 0 CO CO "'" m N 0 LO LO N.. ",<1:0:: ..0 0 ..0 ~ ..0 Q:fb~ ~ M '" LO r:: r:: ~ Wo . ... ~ I'- . ~ffl~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~Ei5 N w=al . I-w =>=> ~ffi (0 M 0 0 L() L() 0 . "'!Ii N ~ ~ 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 m $0:: N 00 0 r-: r-: ..0 =>0:: ... 0 CO ~ ~ '" . <l:w 0 "'" '" ~ i N ~ ~ . I- '" 0 <I: LO "'" 0 '<t '<t (0 :;: LO I'- ~ 0 "'" '<t N . LO CO 0 N N m 0 c,j ai ci cO cO 00 z ... <I: N N 0 E;; ~ 0 0:: ... (0 N.. C!- O. "'" . w 0 ~ ~ E;; E;; ~ l- N ~ ~ . LO N 0 0 '" '" LO m LO ~ 0 M ~ LO . N 0 0 '" LO ..t ..t ci N. N N 0 m m 0 N N N . ... I'- ~ C!- ~ O. (0 0 ~ E;; ~ E;; ~ N ~ . N "'" 0 0 (0 (0 LO . "'" 0 ~ 0 L() L() m LO ~ 0 CO CO N en N ..t ci ..0 ..0 ..t . ~ '" 0 E;; 0 m 0 N "'". 0 I'- 0 ~ ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ E;; . ~ ~ CO 0 0 0 L() L() N . "'" I'- ~ 0 (0 (0 "'" '" '" 0 L() L() LO . 1'-. ai ci '<to ..t N co "'" L() 0 N N ~ 0 I'- m 0 a "'" N 0 cO "'" r-: r-: ~ . N N "'" E;; E;; ~ ~ . N m 0 0 "'" '<t CO N CO ~ ~ <0 ~ "'" . "!. CO (0 '" ..t ci ci r-: ..... ::; m 0 0 "'" 0 N.. ~ 1'-. 1'-. I'- . 0 cO ~ E;; (0. N 00 LO ~ N ~ ~ ~ . 0; CO 0 0 m m N . CO ~ ~ ~ 00 N '" L() CO (0. r-: 00 N N ~ (0 L() '" N N "'" . 0 m ~ ~ N.. 0 r-: 00 "'" "'" ~ 0 N ~ '" ~ ~ CO . ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 N 0 0 L() L() ~ . N M ~ ~ I'- I'- m ~ L() L() '" . It) ai N ci 0 r-: 0 '" CO CO LO 0 "'" L() ~ ~ 0 . 0 00 ..0 ..t a r-: N "'" '" ~ ~ E;; ~ E;; . 0 0 (0 0 N CO 00 ~ ~ I'- ~ L() N N . C'!. ~ ~ ~ ~ r-: ai ai 'Ot I'- '" 0 0 0 0 '" '<t "'" . 0 cO N 00 00 N '<t ~ '<t "'" E;; E;; E;; . "'" (0 0 CO "'" . (0 I'- 0 N 0 "'" m. 0 I'- I'- ..J "'" r:: ..0 1'-- ..t c( <0 ~ N ~ . I- 0 1'-. ~ (0 0 ai cO M ~ ai I- 00 "'" ~ CO ~ E;; ~ ~ E;; . ~ . '" Qi"O e:"O "0 . e:: U e: Q)ti .- e: _ e: 0 e: ::l "O::l Q) ::l "en "'LL rn ::l Q) "0 e: "~ Q)LL ULL "0 roe: _rn Q) Q) 0 e: e: e: e: . Q) alO S~ ~ > .... eu.Q rn .!!!o CD 0 ~g Q)a. "0 "5. :::J O::"Orn wti e: "',., 2 . we:: e:ue: rn .... LL ...J.- e: rn "OJ)1 Q) e: ::l Q)- .E 1i) m-g .- e: ~Q) t: '" 0 .... rn ro 0>0 e: '" Q) e: "Oe: c( :::> ~u o )( 0> ::l.~ E -0 (5 e: 0 . ....I..L. I-W al<( uu..<( .su I- wu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A Population Growth within Census Tracts . . . . . APPENDIX A . . Population Growth Within Census Tracts . Actual and Projected Population by Census Tract(a) . Richmond County, 1990 through 2025 . 2000 2010 2020 2025 Tract Persons Change Persons Change Persons Change Persons Change . 1 4,237 -9% 3,843 -9% 3,485 -9% 3,160 -9% . 2 3,204 -2% 3,149 -2% 3,095 -2% 3,042 -2% 3 1,739 -11% 1,541 -11% 1,365 -11% 1,209 -11% . 4 920 17% 1,029 12% 1,149 12% 1,273 11% 6 3,051 13% 3,337 9% 3,654 9% 3,977 9% . 7 1,264 -31% 870 -31% 598 -31% 412 -31% 8 685 -33% 459 -33% 308 -33% 206 -33% . 9 2,664 -22% 2,091 -22% 1,641 -22% 1,288 -22% . 10 3,412 3% 3,492 2% 3,581 3% 3,672 3% 11 1,829 4% 1,889 3% 1,956 4% 2,025 3% . 12 4,826 0% 4,840 0% 4,856 0% 4,872 0% 13 1,512 -14% 1,308 -14% 1,131 -14% 979 -14% . 14 2,953 7% 3,111 5% 3,285 6% 3,463 5% 15 1,636 -32% 1,110 -32% 753 -32% 511 -32% . 16 8,316 -6% 7,791 -6% 7,300 -6% 6,839 -6% 101.01 4,062 2% 4,116 1% 4,176 1% 4,237 1% . 101.02 6,884 10% 7,369 7% 7,905 7% 8,454 7% . 101.04 3,845 11% 4,146 8% 4,480 8% 4,820 8% 101.05 5,333 -6% 5,030 -6% 4,745 -6% 4,475 -6% . 102.01 5,275 -2% 5,195 -2% 5,117 -2% 5,039 -2% 102.03 4,432 10% 4,765 8% 5,132 8% 5,508 7% . 102.04 7,930 77% 10.674 35% 13,706 28% 16,808 23% 103 5,337 -10% 4,829 -10% 4,369 -10% 3,952 -10% . 104 4,259 -15% 3,637 -15% 3,106 -15% 2,653 -15% 105.04 6,836 -9% 6,197 -9% 5,618 -9% 5,092 -9% . 105.05 8,255 2% 8,358 1% 8,471 1% 8,587 1% 105.06 4,661 -12% 4,113 -12% 3,629 -12% 3,203 -12% . 105.07 6,059 -10% 5,479 -10% 4,954 -10% 4,479 -10% . 105.08 3,331 -13% 2,886 -13% 2,501 -13% 2,167 -13% 105.09 4,455 -3% 4,313 -3% 4,175 -3% 4,042 -3% . 105.1 5,103 -6% 4,773 -6% 4,464 -6% 4,175 -6% 105.11 3,855 2% 3,902 1% 3,954 1% 4,007 1% . 106 5,840 -10% 5,237 -10% 4,697 -10% 4,212 -10% 107.03 9,602 17% 10,709 12% 11,933 11% 13,184 10% . 107.04 9,845 44% 12,220 24% 14,844 21% 17,529 18% 107.05 9,881 34% 11,884 20% 14,097 19% 16,361 16% . 107.06 5,225 47% 6,559 26% 8,033 22% 9,541 19% . 108 7,754 -15% 7,754 0% 7,754 0% 7,754 0% 109.01 8,166 48% 10,280 26% 12,616 23% 15,006 19% . 109.02 11,302 44% 14,069 24% 17,127 22% 20,255 18% Total 199,775 5% 208,356 4% 219,759 5.50% 232,469 6% . (a) The projections presented here were developed to provide a rough estimate of the potential population growth in the Spirit . Creek and Messerly WWTP service areas. The tract level projections are not intended to provide guidance for future water and wastewater infrastructure needs within a small area. The change in population per tract is based on expected countywide shifts . and trends in population growth and density. Population changes within anyone Census tract may vary significantly from the projections presented here because reasons ranging from availability of land to quality of elementary schools to location of office space. . . . . . A.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B Future Water Treatment Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix B Future Water Treatment Regulations Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rules (L T2ESWTR) The LT2ESWTR was proposed in June 2003 to provide additional pathogen protection from microbial contaminants such as Cryptosporidium. It currently is under final review and is expected to be promulgated in the summer of 2005. The rule incorporates system-specific treatment requirements based on a Microbial Framework approach. This approach generally involves assignment of systems into one of several categories (or bins) based on results of source water Cryptosporidium monitoring. Additional treatment requirements depend on the bin to which the system is assigned. Systems will then choose technologies to comply with additional treatment requirements from a toolbox of options. To determine the bin classification for systems greater than or equal to 10,000 customers, source water Cryptosporidium monitoring must be conducted using EPA Method 1622/23 and with the analysis to be conducted on no less than 10-L (in quantity) samples. Cryptosporidium, E. coli, and turbidity source water sampling must be carried out on a predetermined schedule for 24 months with two choices: . Bin classification based on the highest 12-month running annual averages of monthly samples, or . Optional bin classification based on 2-year mean if the facility conducts twice-per-month monitoring for 24 months. Systems with at least 2 years of historical Cryptosporidium data that are equivalent in sample number, frequency, and data quality (volume analyzed, percent recovery) to data that would be collected under the L T2ESWTR may use those data to determine bin classification by submitting the data to the State/Primacy Agency. Systems that provide 2.5 logs of treat- ment for Cryptosporidium in addition to conventional treatment are exempt from monitoring for purposes of selecting bin placement. "Conventional treatment" is defined as coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, and granular media filtration. Action bins (for conventional treatment plants) have been structured considering the total Cryptosporidium oocyst count, uncorrected for recovery, as measured using EP A Method 1623 and 10-L samples. Systems have 3 years following initial bin classification to meet the treatment requirements associated with the bin (see Table B-1). The State/Primacy Agency may grant systems an additional 2-year extension to comply when capital investments are necessary . Systems using ozone, chlorine dioxide, ultraviolet (UV) treatment, or membranes in addition to conventional treatment may receive credit for those technologies towards bin requirements. The additional treatment requirements in Table B-1 are based in part on the 8-1 B-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B FUTURE WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS assumption that conventional treatment plants in compliance with the IESWTR achieve an average of 3 log removal of Cryptosporidium. The total Cryptosporidium removal requirements for the action bins with 1 log, 2 log, and 2.5 log additional treatment correspond to total Cryptosporidium removals of 4,5, and 5.5 log, respectively. Meeting the log treatment requirements identified for each "action bin" in Table B-1 may necessitate one or more actions from an array of management strategies which include watershed control, reducing influent Cryptosporidium concentrations, improved system performance, and additional treatment barriers. Based on available information, the Federal Advisory Committee (F AC) recommended that the LT2ESWTR use a "toolbox" approach, and that the specific tools (when properly designed and implemented) receive log credit (or range of credit) as shown in Table B-2. EP A must use the best information available in developing the final rule and will request comment on the proposed log credits shown in Table B-2. EPA will also provide guidance for determining if toolbox options are properly designed and implemented. TABLE B-1 Bin Requirements as Set Forth in September 2000 Agreement in Principle Average Cryptosporidium Concentration Bin Number Additional treatment requirements for systems with conventional treatment that are in full compliance with IESWTR Cryptosporidium < 0.075/L No action 2 0.075/L ~ Cryptosporidium 1-log treatment (systems may use any technology or combination of < 1.0/L technologies from toolbox as long as total credit is at least 1-log) 3 1.0/L ~ Cryptosporidium 2.0-log treatment (systems must achieve at least 1-log of the required < 3.0/L 2-log treatment using ozone, chlorine dioxide, UV, membranes, bag/cartridge filters, or in-bank filtration) 4 Cryptosporidium > 3.0/L 2.5 log treatment (systems must achieve at least 1-log of the required 2.5-log treatment using ozone, chlorine dioxide, UV, membranes, bag/cartridge filters, or in-bank filtration) In the next few years, the anticipated Stage 2 D/DBP Rule and the anticipated LT2ESWTR are expected to require increased levels of Giardia and Cryptosporidium removal/ inactivation, while at the same time effectively limiting the maximum free chlorine contact time (CT) for the disinfection process. As a result, many utilities may need to consider an alternative primary disinfectant, such as ozone or ultraviolet (UV), in order to balance the requirements of the two upcoming regulations. The Department has incorporated the design and construction of UV facilities at the Highland A venue and the Hicks WTPs in anticipation of the requirements of this rule. The UV facilities will be sized based on available research data and the proposed L T2ESWTR that have been released by the EP A for public comment. In addition, a filtered water tur- bidity goal of 0.1 NTU is also being established for both water plants to ensure compliance with possible future reduction and potential inactivation credits of Cryptosporidium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B FUTURE WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS TABLE B.2 Microbial Toolbox Components to be Used in Addition to Existing Treatment (from Stage 2 M-DBP, FAC Agreement in Principle, September Signature Copy) APPROACH Watershed Control WATERSHED CONTROL PROGRAM (1) Reduction in oocyst concentration (3) Reduction in viable oocyst concentration (3) Alternative Source INTAKE RELOCATION (3) Change to Alternative Source of Supply (3) Management of Intake to Reduce Capture of Oocysts in Source Water (3) Managing Timing of Withdrawal (3) Managing Level of Withdrawal in Water Column (3) Pretreatment OFF-STREAM RAW WATER STORAGE WI DETENTION - X DAYS (1) Off-Stream Raw Water Storage wI Detention - Y weeks (1) Pre-Settling Basin wlCoagulant Lime Softening (1) In-Bank Filtration (1) ImDroved Treatment LOWER FINISHED WATER TURBIDITY (0.15 NTU 95 PERCENTILE IN COMBINED FILTERED EFFLUENT) Slow Sand Filters (1) Roughing Filter (1) Membranes (MF, UF, NF, RO) (1) Bag Filters (1) Cartridge Filters (1) ImDroved Disinfection CHLORINE DIOXIDE (2) OZONE (2) UV (2) Potential Loa Credit 0.5 l 1 I 2 X As measured As measured As measured As measured As measured As measured As measured 1. X X ~ .... X X X X X X X X ~ ..... X .... X .... X X X Peer Review I Other Demonstration I Validation or System Performance Peer Review Proaram (ex. Partnershio Phase IV) I X I Performance studies demonstrating reliable specific log removals for technologies not listed above. This provision does not supercede other As demonstrated inactivation reauirements. Kev to table svmbols: (X) indicates potential log credit based on proper design and implementation in accordance with EPA guidance. Arrow indicates estimation of potential log credit based on site-specific or technology-specific demonstration of performance. Table footnotes: (1) Criteria to be specified in guidance to determine allowed credit, (2) Inactivation dependent on dose and source water characteristics, (3) Additional monitoring for Cryptosporidium after this action would determine new bin classification and whether additional treatment is required. B-3 Parameter Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX 8 FUTURE WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS Considerable debate resulted from the proposed Stage 2 D /DBP Rule when total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and halo acetic acid (HAA)15 limits of 40 and 30 flg/L, respectively were proposed - there being acute concern that those levels would be too stringent. As a result, EPA and various stakeholders formed the FAC to address concerns of interested parties. The result is the September 12 Signature Copy of the Stage 2 M-DBP Agreement in Principle (Agreement). Table B-3 summarizes the proposed Stage 2 D/DBP Rule limits that resulted from the Agreement. TABLE B.3 Summary of Stage 2 D/DBP Rule Limits D/DBP Rule - Stage 2 Action Conduct Cryptosporidium and Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) monitoring and submit results to State/Primacy Agency IDSE: monitor bimonthly (on regular schedule of approximately every 60 days) for one year at 8 distribution sites per plant (at sites that are in addition to Stage 1/DBP compliance monitoring sites). For plants with chlorine distribution systems, sites will include: . One near distribution system entry point . Two at average residence time, . Five at points representative of highest THM and HM5 concentrations . THM/HMs of 80/60 119/L running annual average (RAA) · THM/HMs of 120/100 119/L location running annual average (LRAA) . Based on Stage 1 monitoring sites THM/HMs of 80/60 119/L LRAA based on all new sampling sites based on IDSE Monitor quarterly (on a regular schedule approximately every 90 days) at 4 sites: · One representative average from among current Stage 1 locations . One representative of highest HM5 identified under IDSE . Two at highest TTHM identified during IDSE At least one quarterly sample must be taken during the peak historical month for DBP levels. . 0.010 mg/L for purposes of Stage 2. Under review to 0.005 mg/L as part of 6-year review Monitoring IDSE Monitoring Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 2 Monitoring Bromate MCL . 2 years and 2-Y2 years, respectively after promulgation 3 years after promulgation 6 years after promulgation 6 years after promulgation a Plus 2 years for systems requiring capital improvements This rule could impact the AUD based on hydraulic situations present in the distribution system that cause some water to be in contact with free chlorine residual for long periods of time. These long contact times can result in TTHM and HAA levels exceeding the 80/60 (TTHM/HAA) quarterly running average at some individual sampling points. As a result, 15 TTHM and HAAs are formed when naturally occurring organics in the source water react with free chlorine that is added to provide primary disinfection and a disinfection residual in the distribution system. 8-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B FUTURE WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS AUD has planned for and is implementing advanced treatment processes in the N. Max Hicks Tobacco Road Water Treatment Plant (under construction) to remove naturally occurring organics and thereby reduce the amount of DBPs formed after chlorine is added. The Department is also providing flexibility in the Highland Avenue WTP upgrade (see Section 5.0) to provide enhanced coagulation for organic removal if needed to minimize TTHM/HAA formation. In addition, AUD is implementing distribution infrastructure improvements to loop dead ends, provide blow-offs on other dead ends to reduce the detention times (especially in warm water months) and thus reduce the formation of TTHM and HAA. 8-5