HomeMy WebLinkAboutWRAB Complete Packet 2016-1-25WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD MEETING
MEETING DATE: Monday, 25 January 2016
MEETING TIME: 7:00 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Municipal Services Center, 5050 E. Pearl St., Boulder, CO 80301
Agenda Highlights:
1. Call to Order (7:00 p.m.)
2. Approval of Dec. 14, 2015 Meeting Minutes (7:01 p.m.)
3. *Public Comment (7:05 p.m.)
4. Information Item – 2015 Year in Review (7:15 p.m.)
5. Information Item – Betasso Design Update (7:55 p.m.)
6. Matters from Board (8:25 p.m.)
WRAB Operating Agreements/Roles
7. Matters from Staff (8:50 p.m.)
8. Discussion of Future Schedule (9:05 p.m.)
9. Adjournment (9:15 p.m.)
* Public Comment Item
Agenda item times are approximate.
Information:
Please contact the WRAB Secretary email group at:
WRABSecretary@bouldercolorado.gov
Packets are available on-line at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov – A to Z, Water
Resources Advisory Board (WRAB), Next Water Resources Advisory Board Meeting
WRAB Minutes
14 December 2015
Page No. 1
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES
Name of Board / Commission: Water Resources Advisory Board
Date of Meeting: 14 December 2015
Contact Information of Person Preparing Minutes: Rene Lopez 303-413-7149
Board Members Present: Vicki Scharnhorst, Dan Johnson, Mark Squillace, Lesley Smith, Mike
Barnes
Board Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities
Douglas Sullivan, Acting Principal Engineer for Water, Wastewater and Stormwater
Bret Linenfelser, Water Quality and Environmental Services Manager
Chris Douville, Wastewater Treatment Manager
Russ Sands, Watershed Sustainability and Outreach Supervisor
Candice Owen, Stormwater Quality Engineer
Lauren Shuler, Infrastructure Resilience Outreach Coordinator
Rene Lopez, Board Secretary
Consultants Present: None
Meeting Type: Regular
Agenda Item 1 – Call to Order [6:59 p.m.]
Agenda Item 2 – Approval of the 16 November 2015 Meeting Minutes [7:01 p.m.]
Motion to approve minutes from 16 November 2015 as amended.
Moved by: Squillace Seconded by: Barnes
Vote: 5:0
Agenda Item 3 – Public Participation and Comment [7:01 p.m.]
Public Comment: None
Agenda Item 4 – Public Hearing and Consideration of a Motion Regarding [7:16 p.m.]
WRAB response to City Council Retreat Questions
Public Comment: None
Motion to approve as amended.
Moved by: Barnes Seconded by: Smith
Vote: 5:0
Agenda Item 5 – Update on Stormwater Collection System Permit and [7:17 p.m.]
Regulation Changes
Russ Sands and Candice Owen presented this item.
Executive Summary from the Packet Materials:
The purpose of this memorandum is to update WRAB on the status of key permit compliance items
associated with the treated effluent from the 75th Street Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF). The
Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) permit rene wal is the first high priority item, and important
regulatory issues are also covered herein.
The outcome of the WWTF permit renewal has significant and direct impacts on how the WWTF is
operated, maintained, and sets necessary funding schedules associate d with the Capital Improvements
Projects (CIP) program, which in turn affects the Wastewater Utility Fund and rates of wastewater
services within the community.
City staff remain proactive with respect to upcoming regulatory concerns that could impact the city’s
wastewater treatment program. Some of the regulatory issues are aspects of the current permit and have
evolved over time (i.e. copper, arsenic, temperature). Examples of new issues that are expected to be
implemented in the WWTF permit renewal are nitrate and nutrients. Current status of each regulatory
item
WRAB Discussion Included:
Comments regarding residential education for keeping nutrients out of the system
WRAB Minutes
14 December 2015
Page No. 2
Comments regarding e.coli and storm drain upgrades
Questions regarding outfalls on Boulder creek
Agenda Item 6 – Update on Wastewater Treatment Facility Permit Renewal [7:58 p.m.]
and Regulatory Activities
Chris Douville and Bret Linenfelser presented this item.
Executive Summary from the Packet Materials:
The purpose of this Information Item is to provide the Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB) a
summary of various sustainability and outreach initiatives that are being developed and implemented by
the Watershed Sustainability and Outreach (WSO) Program that was created in 2014 as part of the
Public Works, Utilities, Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES) Group. This item does not
require WRAB action and is intended to provide WRAB with a background on the WSO Pr ogram and
related initiatives the WSO Program has helped lead.
WRAB Discussion Included:
o Comments regarding impacts to the stream from climate change; specifically temperature
standards
Agenda Item 7 – Information Item: Update on Wastewater Treatment Facility [8:46 p.m.]
Renewable Energy
Chris Douville and Douglas Sullivan presented this item
Executive Summary from the Packet Materials:
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update to WRAB on renewable energy systems at the
75th Street Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF). Current status and future opportunities are
covered. The annual operating costs for the WWTF are significantly affected by electricity demands and
use. Annually, over $500,000 of grid electricity is purchased from Xcel (representing over 10% of the
total annual O&M budget).
Next year, the Cogeneration (Cogen) System will be 30 years old. Overall the system has performed
well and has provided alternative electric power generation as well as beneficial heat recovery since its
inception. As all systems have a limited life cycle, the Cogen system is nearing the end of its useful life.
The electrical and control systems for Cogen are of particular concern, and at some point will cause
Cogen to become unreliable and unsafe. A key upcoming decision will be whether to re -invest in Cogen
and continue to produce electricity, or whether to pursue a different pathway which utilizes the biogas as
a fuel commodity.
The Solar Photovoltaic (PV) System reached the 5-year operational milestone in July 2015. Because of
the third party ownership by SunEdison and associated O&M responsibility, the city has benefitted from
purchasing affordable, clean, alternative source power with minimal burden or complications. In 2014,
Utilities staff investigated the possibility of installing an additional Solar PV array adjacent to the
SunEdison system, but ultimately declined due to several factors including cost and Utilities work plan
priorities.
WRAB Discussion Included:
o Discussions regarding a greenhouse gas impact on the environment
o Comments on CNG vehicle viability
Agenda Item 8 – Matters from Board: [9:44 p.m.]
o Scharnhorst
Operational agreement
Agenda Item 9 - Matters from Staff: [9:47 p.m.]
o Schuler
Reducing inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer
Agenda Item 9 – Future Schedule [9:50 p.m.]
The March 2016 meeting is over spring break – the board should look at scheduling the meeting one
week prior or later to better accommodate schedules.
The next WRAB meeting has been moved back to January 25th rather than Jan. 18th due to the holiday.
Adjournment [10:04p.m.]
WRAB Minutes
14 December 2015
Page No. 3
There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, by motion regularly adopted, t he
meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m.
Motion to adjourn by: Smith Seconded by: Squillace
Motion Passes 5:0
Date, Time, and Location of Next Meeting:
The next WRAB meeting will be Monday, January 25th 2016 at 7:00 p.m., at the City's Municipal
Services Center, 5050 East Pearl St., Boulder, CO 80301
APPROVED BY: ATTESTED BY:
_______________________________ __________________________________
Board Chair Board Secretary
_____________________________ ___________________________________
Date Date
An audio recording of the full meeting for which these minutes are a summary, is available on the Water
Resources Advisory Board web page.
https://bouldercolorado.gov/boards-commissions/water-resources-advisory-board-next-meeting-agenda-and-packet
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 1
C I T Y O F B O U L D E R
WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
INFORMATION ITEM
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2016
AGENDA TITLE: Information Item – 2015 Year in Review
PRESENTER/S:
Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities
Douglas Sullivan, Acting Principal Engineer for Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater
Annie Noble, Acting Principal Engineer for Flood and Greenways
Joe Taddeucci, Water Resources Manager
Bret Linenfelser, Water Quality Environmental Services Manager
Ken Baird, Utilities Financial Manager
Tom Settle, Water Treatment Manager
Chris Douville, Wastewater Treatment Manager
Joe Cowan, Utilities Maintenance Manager
Eric M. Ameigh, Public Works Project Coordinator
I. PURPOSE
A significant portion of the work performed by the Utilities Division relates to the day-to-day
operations and maintenance of existing infrastructure. While the WRAB’s official role in these
activities is minimal, recommendations on capital improvements, master plans, and policy issues
have a significant impact on operations. This memorandum contains an overview of 2015
operations to provide the WRAB with additional context for upcoming agenda items where the
board will be asked to make recommendations, as well as highlights of the 2015 capital
improvements program.
II. OVERALL MISSION
The mission of the Utilities Division of the Public Works Department is to provide quality water
services, as desired by the community, in a manner which protects human and environmental
health and emphasizes sound management of fiscal and natural resources. This includes the
following services:
• Potable Water Treatment and Distribution
• Water Resources and Hydroelectric Management
• Wastewater Collection and Treatment
• Stormwater Collection and Conveyance
• Water Quality Protection and Enhancement
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 2
• Infrastructure Planning, Construction and Maintenance
• Administration and Emergency Planning/Response
III. OVERVIEW: UTILITIES FINANCES
Water Use Based on Billed Consumption
Billed water consumption in 2015 was the second lowest in over 20 years. Over that time period,
only 2014 saw lower consumption. Compared to 2014, consumption increased by two percent.
An abnormal consumption pattern followed abnormal weather. The city experienced the wettest
April-July period in the last 20 years. As a result, billed consumption through August was even
lower than the first eight months of the exceptional 2014 year. That was followed by the driest
August-September period in nearly 100 years which resulted in the highest October use since the
years before the 2002 drought. Figure 1 below compares the monthly usage pattern of the
previous four years.
Figure 1: Billed Monthly Water Usage History
Revenues
Under normal circumstances, two years of relatively low use would generally have a significant
negative impact on the Water Fund’s finances. However, the past two years featured record
revenues from Plant Investment Fees (PIF) related to new development. If not for abnormal PIF
revenues during the last two years, a draw on the fund balance of over $3 million likely would
have been required–the equivalent of a 13 percent one-time water rate increase. Data from recent
years have highlighted the vulnerability of the primary revenue stream (customer billings) to
fluctuations in the weather. When comparing monthly revenues during summer months in recent
years, the average difference between high and low revenues is $900,000. Figure 2 below shows
the range of revenue received by month in the previous four years. As staff seeks to understand
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 3
the effects of climate change and weather variability on the water utility, close attention will be
paid to the resilience of key revenue streams. In the upcoming rate study, staff intends to
quantify revenue variability, better understand the existing risks, and explore potential options
for managing revenue variability and its effects.
Figure 2: Revenue Variance by Month
In the Wastewater Fund, consumption and expected revenues were both two percent lower than
2014. This continues a consistent downward trend in wastewater use that will be a focus of the
rate study. The Stormwater/Flood Management Fund ended the year with revenues slightly
below projections although, like the other utility funds, PIF revenues were higher than expected.
Bond Financing
Two separate bonds were issued in 2015. In July, the Flood/Stormwater Fund received $23
million in bond revenue primarily to fund the Wonderland Creek flood mitigation project. In
October, the Wastewater Fund received $10 million in bond financing.
The wastewater bond was originally intended to fund a large diameter (42-inch) wastewater
interceptor rehabilitation project to address pipe corrosion. However, after heavy rain events in
2013 and 2015 exposed the pipe, staff determined that the vulnerability related to the
interceptor’s alignment parallel to Boulder Creek would now also need to be addressed. The
existing alignment presents a high risk of the pipe potentially being washed out in the future. The
need for additional time to study the complex problem of simultaneously dealing with the
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 4
corrosion and the alignment resulted in the project being delayed beyond 2015. The 2015
wastewater bond funding was therefore reallocated to fund other Wastewater Utility projects,
including $5.5 million to the Wastewater Treatment Facility Nitrogen Upgrades Project and $4.5
million to the annual sanitary sewer rehabilitation program. The cash funds that would have paid
for these other projects will instead now be used to fund the interceptor project in the future.
Additional information about the wastewater collection system projects can be found in the
Wastewater Operations section of this memorandum.
For both bonds, Standard and Poor’s (S&P) gave a rating of AAA and Moody’s rating was Aa1.
According to a recent S&P report, only around 6 percent of their rated water and sewer issues
receive the AAA rating. The high rating is due to strengths such as “a prolonged trend of strong
financial operations,” a “manageable capital program with additional debt needs,” and a “robust
and diverse local economy.”
Upcoming Key Issues: Utility Rate Structure Analysis
The Rate Structure Analysis, generally referred to as the rate study, is an important
project which began in 2015. It is intended to identify opportunities for improvements
and modifications that will ensure the water, wastewater, and stormwater/flood
management rate structures are in alignment with current conditions and support city
goals. During the spring, staff conducted an outreach effort to solicit broader feedback
across all customer classes. The initial public engagement process took place in April and
May 2015 and consisted of three open houses and an online survey. More than 26,000
postcards were mailed to utilities customers to notify them about the engagement
opportunities. At the June 2015 WRAB meeting, staff presented the results of the public
engagement process, as well as options for the study’s guiding principles and its areas of
study. WRAB’s discussion and input was critical to setting the project on a solid
foundation.
The project will focus on three distinct but related areas of work. They are:
1. Cost of service analysis and revenue stability.
2. Effectiveness of water budgets in meeting conservation, equity, and revenue goals.
3. Stormwater/flood management fee calculation methodology.
Given the experience in 2014 and 2015 with abnormally low billed water consumption
and abnormally high PIF revenue, staff will use this project as an opportunity to examine
how all three utilities, but especially the water utility, can remain financially resilient.
Current trends provide reason to question whether the existing water rate structure is
sufficient to ensure long term financial sustainability for the utility.
WRAB will have an active role in the project over the course of 2016 and likely 2017 as
well. Staff is projecting that any changes to the rate structures will be implemented in the
2018 budget although there is a possibility that minor or very straightforward changes
could be implemented in the 2017 budget.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 5
IV. OVERVIEW: WATER RESOURCES
Precipitation and Streamflow
The city relies on snowmelt runoff to fill and store water in its upper Boulder Creek basin
reservoirs each year. In 2015, snowpack was average throughout the winter until early May,
which is when the snow usually begins to melt and streamflows start to rise. Due to the unusually
wet and cold May, snowpack peaked three weeks later than average. Figure 3 shows the
snowpack trend for the University Camp SNOTEL site in the Silver Lake Watershed for the
2015 water year 1.
Figure 3: Snow water equivalent and precipitation accumulation at the University Camp SNOTEL site
Despite a delayed start, a combination of rain and warmer temperatures in late May and June led
to runoff occurring quickly once the snow began melting. The rapid snowmelt runoff in the late
spring, combined with the dry summer and fall weather conditions, caused stream flows to fall
below average starting in mid-July. Figure 4 includes 2015 and historical average stream flow
conditions upstream of Barker Reservoir.
1 Water professionals often use the “water year” calendar to track water resources. A water year is twelve months
period, typically beginning October 1 or November 1, and is designated by the calendar year in which it ends. For
example, water year 2015 began October 1, 2014 and ended September 30, 2015. Water years follow a hydro-
meteorologic cycle and start in the fall when snowpack may begin to accumulate.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 6
Figure 4: 2015 Middle Boulder Creek Streamflows at Nederland
City mountain storage reservoirs filled and spilled in 2015, although the dry conditions in the
second half of the year required the city to draw on reservoir storage earlier than normal. To
preserve storage, the city shifted water sources to rely more heavily on Northern supplies starting
in September. Figure 5 shows a summary of historical water supply composition. Figure 6 shows
historical reservoir storage levels by water year.
Figure 5: Historical Source Water Supply Composition
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 7
Figure 6: Combined Reservoir Storage (Percent Full) – Silver Lake Watershed and Barker Reservoir
The abundant snowpack and runoff in 2015 allowed the city to lease 3,200 acre-feet of water to
agricultural users through its annual leasing program. The wet spring resulted in low initial
demand, but leasing requests increased later in the season due to drier conditions.
Hydropower
With the integration of hydroelectric facilities in the municipal water supply system,
hydroelectric operations depend on municipal water demand as well as water supply and
distribution operations. The city produced $1,947,000 in hydropower revenue for 2015 compared
to projected revenue of $2,218,000. Actual revenue fell short of projected hydroelectric revenue
in 2015 as a result of supply and distribution system maintenance projects that required the
respective hydro facilities to be offline. In some cases, the outages were unexpected or longer in
duration than anticipated due to external factors such as weather.
Total generation for 2015 was about 37,107,600 kilowatt hours (kWh) or enough to meet the
average annual needs of approximately 4,600 households. Hydroelectric power generation during
2015 displaced the need to burn approximately 18,600 tons of coal at a traditional, coal-fired
power plant.
Irrigation Ditches
The Water Utility is a shareholder in several irrigation ditch companies. In addition to conveying
ditch water, many ditches in town intercept stormwater from areas above the ditches due to their
orientation to the slope of the land. The 2013 flood and subsequent intense rain events have had a
significant impact on most of the contributing natural drainages and city stormwater facilities,
resulting in increased stormwater contribution to ditches. In response to increased Water
Resources staff time spent on issues related to irrigation ditches and stormwater interaction, and
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 8
to be more proactive with irrigation ditch education and outreach, a dedicated position for
irrigation ditches was added to the Water Resources group in 2015.
Capital Improvements
In 2015, notable capital improvement and maintenance projects in the source water system
included the following:
• Construction of the Barker caretaker house overlooking Barker Dam. Construction is in
progress and anticipated to be completed in February 2016.
• Rehabilitation of Kossler Reservoir, including raising the dam crest and adjoining dykes
to meet dam safety freeboard requirements; removing the deteriorating concrete
southeast dam face and replacing with riprap; and modifying the spillway to
accommodate the probable maximum flood.
• Drilling new anchors to secure the ice hood and hydraulic cylinder top mounts on Barker
Dam Gate #2 and making preparations for removal and replacement of the existing
manual and electrical gear with new electrical actuators and instrumentation for the gate
valve outlets adjacent to the spillway.
• Inspection, cleaning and grouting repair of concrete pipe on the Barker Gravity Pipeline
between Magnolia Road and Kossler Reservoir.
• Completion of the seventh Lakewood Pipeline internal inspection. The condition of the
pipe continues to match the findings of the previous inspections and does not indicate
that the cement mortar lining or corrosion on the underlying steel require immediate
attention. Staff will formulate a future monitoring and potential maintenance plan for the
pipeline.
• As part of the State Engineer’s dam safety program, the Silver Lake Reservoir outlet
works and dam, Goose Lake outlet works and dam, and Boulder Reservoir outlet works
and dam were all inspected and found to be in good condition. Barker Dam and Kossler
Dam were also inspected and received good overall condition ratings.
• Staff continued to work on evaluating options for power purchase agreements for the
city’s eight hydroelectric facilities.
Upcoming Key Issues
Water Resources will be focusing on a number of activities in 2016 as follows:
• Updating the climate change assessment capability of the city’s water supply model and
evaluating the effects of potential future climate scenarios on the city’s water supply and
water conservation program.
• Continued evaluation of the Carter Lake Pipeline through the 2017 budget process.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 9
• Continued work on irrigation ditch matters such as education and outreach, ditch and
stormwater issues, and support of major maintenance projects for Anderson and Farmers
Ditch.
• On-going Barker Gravity Pipeline maintenance, including performing a test section of
alternative rehabilitation methods (lining).
• Completion of the Albion Dam outlet works inspection (postponed in 2015 due to high
reservoir levels) and installation of a permanent repair.
• Replacement of Barker Dam spillway gate actuators to allow electrical operation from the
valve house. Alternatives to modify other watershed dam outlet systems will be
investigated, starting with Silver Lake and Island Lake Dams.
• Kossler Reservoir inlet weir and outfall concrete repair and additional rip rap to stop
further significant deterioration in advance of future rehabilitation/replacement project.
• Continued evaluation of the city’s existing power purchase agreements (PPAs).
V. OVERVIEW: WATER TREATMENT & DISTRIBUTION
Operations
The city’s Betasso and Boulder Reservoir water treatment plants (WTP), produced 5.785 billion
gallons in 2015, which was 1.2 percent greater than 2014 but 1.6 percent below the 5-year
average. Above normal precipitation through June lowered the demand for water early in the
year, but very dry weather through the summer and fall increased demand to near-record levels
in September and October. Figure 7 below illustrates the swings in demand for drinking water
during 2015. Betasso WTP produced 75 percent and Boulder Reservoir WTP produced 25
percent of the total water volume. The drinking water system met all regulatory compliance
requirements during 2015.
Figure 7: 2015 Monthly Water Production – Deviation from 5 Year Average
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 10
Boulder Reservoir WTP production was limited early in the year by Boulder Feeder Canal
operations and an abundance of “free river” water in the Boulder Creek Watershed which was
available to the Betasso facility. By late summer, and into the fall, Boulder Reservoir WTP
operated at much higher production rates due to the drier weather pattern and a steady shift in
water source storage.
In preparation for the upcoming Betasso CIP, new approaches to the disposal of water treatment
residuals were tested at the facility. The implementation of continuous processing allowed all
components of the residuals storage systems to be cleaned out during 2015. It was the first time
in many years.
In support of Utilities field operations, plant maintenance staff implemented new scheduled
procedures for checking all distribution system facilities on a routine basis for preventative and
predictive maintenance. The program was successful in identifying several early-stage problems
that prevented system breakdowns.
Both water treatment facilities have had solar panel installations for the past four years. The
power generation from these systems in 2015 was 225,000 kWh, which represents approximately
10 percent of the total power used in the two facilities and $29,300 in cost savings.
In the second quarter, Water Treatment reached full staffing levels for the first time in two years.
Utilities maintenance staff responded to 69 water main breaks in 2015 compared to 64 in 2014
and 74 in 2013. The city’s break history remains similar to industry averages. Coordination
between capital and operations/maintenance staff to effectively target main replacement will
remain a priority in 2016.
During 2015, the water distribution maintenance workgroup implemented structured programs to
address hydrant maintenance, valve operation, and leak detection. The group set a goal of a three
year maintenance cycle for valves and hydrants and was successful in completing work on one
third of the system in 2015. The leak detection program covered five miles of pipe and identified
nine leaks, primarily associated with fire hydrants.
Capital Improvements
In 2015, notable capital improvement projects in the water treatment and distribution system
included the following:
• 2,000 feet of aging 26” steel transmission main was replaced between Sunshine
Hydroelectric Facility and the intersection of 4th & Mapleton with new 30” ductile iron
pipe.
• Over 18,000 feet of water main, 12” in diameter or smaller, was replaced.
• Thirty percent design was initiated for replacement and rehabilitation of 13,000 feet of
18” steel transmission pipe installed in the 1940s.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 11
• A wireless and fiber upgrade is underway at storage tanks, pump stations and
hydroelectric facilities to relegate the aging radio communication equipment to a backup
role.
• Sixty percent design for the upcoming Betasso CIP was completed. Final design will be
completed in early 2016 and the project will be bid in the summer of 2016.
• Betasso WTP filter backwash supply pumps and filter surface wash pumps were
replaced. Both sets of pumps were original installations and had exceeded their useful
lives.
Upcoming Key Issues
• The water transmission inspection and rehabilitation budget over the next six years has
been established based on known problems and proposed inspection of other large
diameter mains throughout the city. The additional condition assessments will allow the
city to budget for replacement and rehabilitation of these mains in the future.
VI. OVERVIEW: WASTEWATER TREATMENT & COLLECTIONS
Operations
The Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) operated with no effluent permit violations in
2015, treating an average of approximately 15.6 million gallons per day (MGD) of wastewater.
Flows in 2015 were near those experienced in 2013 and 2014. Similar to the precipitation of
2013 and lingering impacts in 2014, this past year was heavily influenced by significant
precipitation in May 2015 and early summer moisture, which created elevated levels of
infiltration and inflow. Flows to the WWTF peaked during rainy May at 39.9 MGD. Wastewater
treatment performance and effluent quality were excellent in 2015, where concentrations of
permitted parameters were the lowest on record.
2015 marked the fifth full year of using electric power generated from solar photovoltaic at the
WWTF, with the overall system producing over 8 million kWh to date. Between the solar power
and the power generated by the cogeneration system, approximately one third of the electrical
power needs for the WWTF were generated by renewable technology in 2015. Utilities
Maintenance crews performed the construction activities to install two new potable water meter
vaults at the WWTF, to obtain complete metering of potable water use at the 75th St. campus. By
using city employees instead of a traditional general contractor, significant cost savings were
achieved.
In 2014, a condition assessment of the sanitary sewer system, which included a six mile section
of sanitary sewer pipe located immediately upstream of the WWTF, revealed corrosion issues in
the large diameter concrete interceptor sewer. Based on that discovery, a contractor was hired in
2015 to inspect the approximately 100,000 remaining feet of mid-sized concrete sewers in the
upstream trunk sewer system. The goal of the 2015 condition assessment was to
comprehensively understand the extent of the corrosion in all the concrete pipe sections before
prioritizing the rehabilitation program, for which bond financing was secured in October. The
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 12
2015 condition assessment showed that corrosion issues are also prevalent in the upstream
system but not as severe as in the interceptor sewer.
In addition to its corrosion problems, the large diameter interceptor sewer was also found to have
alignment issues following the September 2013 flood and the May 2015 rainfall event. Both
events exposed sections of the interceptor when flow from Boulder Creek left its banks and
eroded new channels across the interceptor alignment. For this reason, city staff began
investigating the possibility of an interceptor realignment project. The proposed project would
move the pipeline away from Boulder Creek, which would address both the internal corrosion
issue and the alignment vulnerability issue simultaneously.
In the downtown Boulder area, an inspection of approximately 100,000 feet of clay sewer pipe
revealed widespread structural issues such as broken and fractured pipes and differential settling
leading to offset joints. Utilities maintenance staff focused their inspection efforts on the
Gunbarrel area in order to attempt to locate the source of significant inflow that has been
observed during wet weather events. This inspection effort has yielded one possible area of
inflow and has also shown that the sewers in the Gunbarrel area are generally in good condition
with few structural defects.
The city contracted to install a network of permanent flow monitoring stations in the collection
system. The network includes ten flow monitors placed at the downstream end of individual
sewer basins. The flow monitors have already successfully recorded several high-flow events
due to wet weather, including one in May 2015 which resulted in flows of 50 MGD at the
WWTF. The data for this May 2015 event was in fact used to calibrate the wet weather response
of the sewer system in the city’s updated hydraulic model.
Water Quality and Regulatory Issues
The WWTF effluent discharge permit renewal was submitted in October 2015 in accordance
with the 5-year renewal process. The current permit expires on May 1, 2016. Discussions with
the State of Colorado indicate that the Boulder WWTF permit will likely be renewed at the end
of 2016. Key issues were discussed with WRAB at the December 2015 meeting, and include
revised limits for ammonia and nitrate, inclusion of Regulation 85 nitrogen and phosphorus into
the permit, and the request for continuation of two flow tiers.
Infrastructure Evaluation
The additional revenue from the increase in Stormwater/Flood Management rates allowed the
city to hire a new Infrastructure Resilience and Outreach Coordinator in the Water Quality and
Environmental Services group to help develop programs that, among other things, reduce inflow
and infiltration of groundwater into the city’s sanitary sewer.
In addition, recognizing residential contributions to inflow and infiltration, ongoing concerns
about sanitary sewer back-ups, and the need to help homeowners with flood preparedness, staff
applied for a $215,000 grant to help conduct on-site Home Recovery and Resilience Assessments.
The assessments, which will take place in 2016 if the city is awarded the grant, aim to help
homeowners mitigate flood concerns and better understand their impacts to the sanitary and
storm sewer systems.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 13
Capital Improvements
In 2015, notable capital improvement projects in the wastewater collection and treatment system
included the following:
• Construction on the Nitrogen Upgrades Project, expected to cost $4.5 million, began in
August 2015. The Nitrogen Upgrades Project will improve the WWTF’s capability to
achieve permit compliance for ammonia, nitrate, and total inorganic nitrogen (Regulation
85). The project will result in enhanced denitrification utilizing two external carbon
sources to enhance microbiological activity (acetic acid and weak wort from Avery
Brewing).
• Modifications to the IBM Lift Station, expected to cost $1.5 million, began in September
2015. Upgrades to the lift station are needed to address several key issues, including State
of Colorado mandated overflow protection, mitigation of rags and other debris, improved
reliability of the pumps, and various aging infrastructure concerns. Initial construction
progress and quality of work has been good.
• 2015 was the first year of the city’s greatly expanded cured-in-place pipe lining program.
The city lined 75,000 feet of sewer in 2015, which is a significant increase over the
approximately 20,000 feet that were lined in previous years. Due to the larger scope of
work compared to previous years and a competitive bidding environment, the city was
also able to procure these lining services at approximately 60 percent of the previous cost
per linear foot. The 2015 lining contract resulted in rehabilitation of all of the sewers in
the Frasier and Keewaydin Meadows neighborhoods, and approximately half of the
sewers in the Martin Acres neighborhood.
Upcoming Key Issues
• The WWTF Nitrogen Upgrades Project construction will be a major focus in 2016, with
an emphasis on successful startup of the new carbon feed and enhanced denitrification
system.
• The IBM Lift Station Improvements Project construction is scheduled for completion in
late 2016. A critical aspect of this project is a bypass pumping system, requiring close
coordination to successfully install the new pumps and accomplish station upgrades while
simultaneously pumping the incoming wastewater.
• Continued dialog and identification of the path forward for the aging cogeneration
system. As discussed at the December 2015 WRAB meeting, there are both challenges
and opportunities with the system, and a future path may or may not involve producing
electricity.
• A full-system condition assessment contract will be awarded in 2016 which will result in
a single contractor providing sewer cleaning and inspection services for 1.5 million feet
of sanitary sewer over a two year period. This project will provide the city with a
snapshot of the condition of the entire sewer system. This information will be used to
direct future rehabilitation efforts.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 14
• The annual sanitary sewer rehabilitation efforts will continue in 2016 with a focus on
rehabilitation of corroded concrete trunk sewers and structurally deficient smaller sewers
in the downtown Boulder area. The 2016 rehabilitation project will represent the largest
investment the city has made in sewer rehabilitation to date with an anticipated project
cost of $3.5 to $4.0 million.
• In 2015, city staff initiated conversations with various property owners including Boulder
County and the Regional Transportation District (RTD) regarding the proposed large
diameter pipeline realignment project. In 2016, city staff will hire a design engineer to
begin the alternatives evaluation and preliminary design associated with the large
diameter pipeline realignment effort.
• The flow monitoring network will be expanded from 10 to 17 monitoring stations in
order to monitor additional areas of interest such as possible sources of inflow and
infiltration and areas identified as near or over capacity by the hydraulic model.
VII. OVERVIEW: STORMWATER & FLOOD MANAGEMENT
Operations
The city’s stormwater and flood management utility prepares the city for significant rainfall
events through stormwater collection and conveyance, floodplain mapping, floodplain
regulations, public education, flood insurance, flood preparedness, flood mitigation master
planning, stormwater quality programs, maintenance and capital improvement projects that
mitigate flood risk. The regional Urban Drainage and Flood Control District provides support to
the city with routine maintenance, master planning, capital and maintenance projects and flood
emergency preparedness.
Storm sewer and flood control maintenance operations include cleaning, inspection, and repair of
storm sewers, vegetation control in and around waterways, mowing of native grass channels and
embankments, as well as cleaning and inspection of trash racks for culverts under roadways and
maintained per ditch company agreements. This work includes both planned activities and
responses to community requests.
Floodplain Mapping Updates
Floodplain mapping provides the basis for flood management by identifying the areas subject to
the greatest risk of flooding. During 2015, staff worked on the following mapping updates:
• Bear Canyon Creek (from Colorado Avenue to Boulder Creek): The revised mapping was
submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for adoption in
December 2014. Staff has been responding to comments and questions from FEMA and
expects FEMA will adopt the study by summer of 2016.
• Boulder Slough (Broadway to 30th St.) and Boulder Creek Physical Map Revision: The
city submitted new floodplain mapping to FEMA for Boulder Creek in 2012 and for
Boulder Slough in February 2015. FEMA is incorporating the Boulder Slough mapping
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 15
changes into the Boulder Creek Mapping update. FEMA held an open house this fall and
the 90 day public comment period began in November. The mapping is expected to go
into effect in December 2016.
• Upper Goose and Two Mile Creek: City Council approved the revised mapping in July
and the mapping was submitted to FEMA in October for review and approval. Staff
expects FEMA adoption of the study by summer of 2016.
• Skunk, King’s Gulch and Bluebell Creek: The updated mapping was last presented to
WRAB in May. Based on consultant peer review comments, it was determined to
develop a two dimensional hydraulic model to better define split flow paths. The revised
mapping will be presented to WRAB in 2016.
Flood Mitigation Plans
Flood mitigation plans identify and evaluate the feasibility of completing capital improvement
projects to reduce the risk of flooding. The following three mitigation planning efforts were
added to the work program as a result of the September 2013 flood:
• Gregory Creek: The flood mitigation plan was presented and recommended for approval
by WRAB in April 2015 and accepted by Council in December. Staff will move forward
with design work for improvements to the most downstream portion of the creek in 2016
and look for opportunities to fund, through the 2017 budget process, additional projects
identified in the plan.
• Bear Canyon Creek: The modeling for this drainageway was developed by combining
several separate hydraulic models that resulted from Letters of Map Revisions following
improvement projects over the years. It was determined that further model refinement
was necessary and that the new modeling effort should use the city’s current approach
that uses a two-dimensional model (Flow-2D) to define major flow paths and spill flows.
The consultant is currently working on revising the model, which will then be used to
identify flood mitigation opportunities. This information will be presented to WRAB in
2016.
• Boulder Creek: A watershed-wide plan was initiated at the end of 2014 with the Urban
Drainage and Flood Control District taking the lead on the study and city staff conducting
the public engagement process. WRAB reviewed the plan in November 2015 and
recommended council acceptance. The plan will be taken to council for review and
consideration in early 2016.
• South Boulder Creek: City Council accepted the South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation
Plan in August 2015. The plan includes designing and constructing flood mitigation
measures in phases. The initial phase includes construction of a regional stormwater
detention facility located on the south side of US 36 on Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) land and University of Colorado (CU) land. The city is in the
process of selecting an engineering firm to begin preliminary design of the US 36
regional stormwater detention facility. Annexation and the development of the CU South
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 16
Campus site, including the detention facility, are being considered through the Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan Update process.
Capital Improvements
Major drainageway improvements are programmed into the six-year Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) after a flood mitigation plan has been approved. Typically, a Community and
Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) is completed prior to construction of a project in
order to evaluate alternatives and minimize impacts on the environment and community. During
2015, the following major drainageway projects included:
• Fourmile Canyon Creek: A flood mitigation plan for Fourmile Canyon and Wonderland
Creeks was completed in 2011. Flood and Greenways improvements along Fourmile
Canyon Creek between 19th and 22nd Street are currently under design and will be bid in
the spring of 2016. A CEAP to evaluate upstream improvements west of 19th Street along
Fourmile Canyon Creek is currently underway. Staff held an open house in November
2015 to solicit input from the public on multi-use path options. Various flood mitigation
options were also presented.
• Wonderland Creek: The Wonderland Creek project went to bid in October 2015 and
construction is anticipated to begin this winter. The project will include extending the
multi-use path along Wonderland Creek, providing three new pedestrian and bicycle
underpasses, and constructing flood mitigation along the project reach. The project
extends from Foothills Parkway to Winding Trail and is anticipated to be completed in
early 2018.
• Storm water utility capital improvements in 2015 focused primarily on contracting
inspection services in order to conduct widespread condition assessments of the storm
sewer system. Utilities staff cleaned and inspected the storm sewers serving University
Hill and downtown Boulder. The inspections revealed widespread structural failure of the
storm sewers in the University Hill area and significant debris buildup in the storm
sewers serving downtown. This inspection data will be used to advise the 2016 storm
sewer rehabilitation program.
Upcoming Key Issues
• Updated flood mapping for Skunk, King’s Gulch, and Bluebell Creeks is expected to be
presented to WRAB in the third quarter of 2016.
• The Bear Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan is anticipated to be presented as an
information item during the second quarter, with a final plan expected to be completed by
the third quarter.
• A CEAP for the area along Fourmile Canyon Creek upstream of 19th Street is planned to
be completed and provided to WRAB this spring as an information item.
• Staff will also provide an update on the status of the preliminary design of the first phase
of the South Boulder Creek flood mitigation improvements.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 17
VIII. OVERVIEW: WATER QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Flood Education and Outreach
Staff developed and implemented a flood safety campaign which included distributing 3,500
door hangers, two utility bill inserts, outreach booths, Daily Camera advertisements and a flood
safety and home preparedness seminar. Additionally, staff installed three large-scale stickers
(one spanning a pedestrian bridge) in the downtown area which were viewed by approximately
2,000 pedestrians per day. These outreach efforts support the Community Rating System (CRS),
helping to reduce flood insurance costs for Boulder residents.
Utility Regulatory Support
The city’s Stormwater Program focuses on managing groundwater discharges and the city’s
state-issued Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Staff worked to prepare for
increasingly stringent permit requirements while negotiating with the regional Keep It Clean
Partnership (KICP) to reduce stormwater outreach efforts the city is contracted to perform.
These changes stem from new the MS4 permit focusing much more heavily on in-field
construction oversight and less on outreach. These efforts have allowed staff to continue regional
KICP collaboration and enhance permit compliance.
In 2015, staff were actively involved in developing and refining regulatory requirements at the
State level to support the Water, Wastewater and Stormwater/Flood Utilities. Primary areas of
focus for the Wastewater and Stormwater/Flood Utilities included the June 2015 South Platte
Basin water quality standards hearing and preparation for the June 2016 state-wide water quality
standards hearing. Primary issues of concern for both hearings include:
• Water temperature standards for Boulder Creek to protect aquatic life.
• Nutrient (phosphorus and nitrogen) and periphyton (algae) standards for Boulder Creek
to protect aquatic life and recreational uses.
• Arsenic standards to protect human health and evaluation of existing treatment
technologies.
Water Conservation, Resilience, and Regional Collaboration
Staff continued to work on key water conservation efforts while developing partnerships to meet
larger city goals. The Water Efficiency Plan, which staff presented to WRAB in September
2015, is part of a larger state-required reporting update that staff will finalize in 2016 with
WRAB input. As a part of that effort, and working toward greater city integration, Utilities staff
coordinated climate modeling updates to support other city efforts such as the Climate
Commitment Framework. Other outreach efforts in 2015 included the 2015 Watershed Summit,
the EPA required drinking water Consumer Confidence Report, and the Community Guide to
Flood Safety. The latter is part of a larger initiative to keep the community engaged with flood
preparedness.
Upcoming Key Issues
• In 2016, staff will develop a temperature standards compliance proposal for the June
2016 Basic Standards Hearing.
AGENDA ITEM #IV PAGE 18
• Staff will provide a final update on required Stormwater Quality Program changes needed
to meet final MS4 stormwater permit requirements.
• Staff will complete the Water Efficiency Plan as well as Phase II of the Fire Mitigation
and Response Plan. Both will be presented to WRAB for feedback in 2016.
IX. NEXT STEPS
Staff will present the 2015 Year in Review, with an emphasis on the year’s highlights, at the Jan.
25 WRAB meeting. Staff will answer questions from the board about operational and capital
issues from 2015 as well as any questions about upcoming issues in 2016.
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 1
C I T Y OF B O U L D E R
WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
INFORMATION ITEM
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2016
AGENDA TITLE: Informational Item – Betasso Water Treatment Facility Design
Improvements Update
PRESENTERS:
Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities
Douglas Sullivan, Acting Principal Engineer for Water, Wastewater and Stormwater
Tom Settle, Water Treatment Manager
Steve Buckbee, Engineering Project Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This agenda item is intended to provide an update on the upcoming Betasso Water Treatment
Facility improvements project. City staff and its engineering consultant, HDR Engineers, are in
the process of completing design improvements for a major facility upgrade. The Betasso facility
was originally constructed in 1964 and has a number of aging treatment process facilities. The
Betasso facility requires significant treatment process upgrades to ensure that it can continue to
meet current and future drinking water regulations.
The current design project has progressed past the 60 percent design milestone. Final design
drawings and bid documents are scheduled for an April 2016 completion. City staff will bid the
project’s construction phase at that time. The design engineer’s 60 percent construction cost
estimate is approximately $28 million. An estimated $3 million will be required in addition to the
bid amount to fund the project’s construction phase services component. This project will involve
relatively complex construction phasing to ensure that the treatment processes continue to operate
and effectively meet the city’s daily water demand and associated treatment regulations throughout
the project’s construction. The project’s construction phase is estimated at a 27-month duration.
The City of Boulder will fund this project through a Water Utility bond in the second quarter of
2016. The current bond amount is estimated at $35 million. The bond’s final amount will be set in
the second quarter of 2016 after city staff has received the project’s 90 percent design construction
cost estimate. At that time, City staff will decide if any other Water Utility projects will be
included in the bond.
The December 15, 2014 WRAB meeting was conducted at Betasso, which included a tour, and a
presentation on the upcoming improvements project. The Betasso project was also identified in
the 2016 CIP overview which was presented to the WRAB at the April 27, 2015 meeting. The
purpose of this information item is to provide the WRAB a project design update.
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
The City’s treated water system is served by two water treatment facilities – the Betasso Water
Treatment Facility and the Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Facility. The Betasso facility and
is located several miles up Boulder Canyon west of the City limits. The Boulder Reservoir facility
is located in northeast Boulder on 63rd Street immediately north of the Diagonal Highway. This
WRAB Information Item focuses on the Betasso facility improvements project. The Betasso
facility receives raw water from the City’s two primary watersheds – North Boulder Creek and
Middle Boulder Creek. These watersheds utilize a network of raw water reservoirs, raw water
pipelines, and raw water hydroelectric facilities to convey water to the Betasso facility.
Over the past five years, the City’s annual water system demand has averaged approximately six
billion gallons. The Betasso facility operates year-round while the Boulder Reservoir facility
typically operates seven months a year – between April and October, depending on the City’s
water demands. Approximately 2/3 of the annual water supply is provided by the Betasso facility
and the remaining 1/3 of the water supply is provided by the Boulder Reservoir facility.
The two facilities supplement each other to provide greater redundancy during the higher demand
periods. The Boulder Reservoir facility was upgraded years ago with increased capacity to provide
greater resiliency to allow the Betasso facility to be taken off-line for maintenance during winter
months if necessary. The City’s water demand varies significantly from month to month with a
baseline water use during the winter months and a much higher water use to address irrigation
needs during the summer months. Water production at the two facilities varies from year to year
and during the year based on water resource needs, operational requirements and improvement
projects.
The Betasso facility has a rated capacity of 40 million gallons per day (mgd). However, the
facility’s reliable treatment capacity is closer to 32 mgd. There are significant operational issues
associated with the pre-treatment and residuals handling processes that limit the capacity of
downstream treatment processes. The primary purpose of this project is to upgrade the pre-
treatment processes, replace equipment at the end of its useful service life, and add a new residuals
handling building to ensure the facility has a firm capacity of 40 mgd.
Treatment Process
The Betasso Water Treatment Facility was originally constructed in 1964. A significant facility
expansion was completed in 1976 to increase the rated capacity. There have been numerous
modifications to the facility throughout the years. The treatment process includes the following
key components: chemical addition, rapid mix, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and
disinfection. Powdered activated carbon can be added upstream for taste and odor control.
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 3
Figure 1 provides a flow diagram of the Betasso Water Treatment Facility.
Figure 1 - Betasso Water Treatment Facility – Flow Diagram
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 4
ANALYSIS
City staff selected HDR Engineers as the design consultant in 2014 for the Betasso improvements
project. To date HDR has completed a plant-wide assessment, an alternatives analysis, and a long-
term capital improvements plan. HDR is currently working on the project design and is
developing updated cost estimates at major project milestones. The 60 percent construction cost
estimate is approximately $28 million. Attachment A provides the HDR 60% Design Review
package highlights (pages 1-6) which includes the current cost estimate and associated schedule.
The current project scope and associated cost estimate are significantly greater than the original
project estimated in 2011. There are several reasons for the scope and cost increase. The primary
reason for the increase is that last year’s 20-year Water Utility CIP identified two Betasso projects
instead of one. The first project was scheduled in 2016 and the second project was scheduled in
2026. In 2015, these two projects were combined into a single project which now represents the
current design approach. Other factors impacting the cost increase include a scope increase which
was based on greater facility needs following the completion of the facility assessment.
The City’s approach will utilize a base bid with a few bid alternatives to provide the city flexibility
in awarding the contract. Based on the bid price and the city’s budget, the bid alternatives could
be removed from the bid in the event the bids are higher than expected. Recent Front Range
construction bids along with recent City of Boulder construction bids have come in significantly
higher than their corresponding engineer’s estimated construction cost.
Preliminary design for the Betasso facility improvements project began in September 2014. Major
issues identified in the facility assessment and alternatives phases include the following:
• Pretreatment is inadequate to sustain effective treatment at flows in excess of 32 mgd
• During periods of high concentrations of color and total organic carbon in the source water,
the filters have limited run time due to turbidity breakthrough
• Residuals thickening, dewatering, and drying processes are insufficient to treat the volume
of solids generated
• Replacement of many assets at the end or beyond useful life
• A new backup generator and increased fuel storage
Based on the facility assessment findings, the current project goals include the following:
• Provide a sustainable capacity of 40 mgd at all times of the year
• Only haul solid (dry) residuals from the facility
• Replace all equipment at the end of its useful life
• Provide robust pre-treatment
• Retain operational simplicity and gravity flow when possible
• Provide a long term strategic plan for replacing and maintaining assets
• Reuse, repair and repurpose facility infrastructure when possible
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 5
Seven major CIP improvements were selected for inclusion in the 2016 design project to address
the project goals. These improvements are listed below. Attachment B provides the HDR CIP
memo highlights (pages 1-8) which includes a description of the seven major process
improvements.
• Pretreatment Improvements
• Pretreatment Building Addition
• Filter Improvements
• Filter Valve Replacement
• Residuals Handling Improvements
• Power Reconfiguration and Backup Power Improvements
• Outdoor Tank Improvements
Figure 2 provides a site map of the Betasso Water Treatment Facility with the design
recommendations identified.
Figure 2 – Betasso Water Treatment Facility
Site Map w/Design Recommendations
AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 6
Project Schedule:
• Contractor Prequalification – 1st quarter 2016
• County Special Use Permit Approval – 2nd quarter 2016
• Project Bid – 2nd quarter 2016
• Bond Issuance – June 2016
• Contractor Mobilization – 3rd quarter 2016
• Project Closeout – 4th quarter 2018
NEXT STEPS
WRAB Mid-Project Construction Tour – 3rd quarter 2017
ATTACHMENTS
A – HDR 60% Design Review package (pages 1-6) – Jan 12, 2016
B – HDR CIP Memo (pages 1-8) – September 30, 2015
1
1. Scope of Work:
This Basis of Estimate (BOE) summarizes the opinion of probable construction costs (OPCC) for the 2016 Betasso
Water Treatment Facility Capital Improvements Project (the Project) based on the 60-percent design progress package
submitted to the City. The Project’s scope has evolved to reflect an estimated $27.4 million construction project
incorporating major improvements addressing several key treatment and equipment issues. The major improvements
cover a range of facility performance and operational concerns including:
· Pretreatment Basin Improvements
· Filter Improvements
· Filter Valve Replacement Improvements
· Residuals Handling Improvements
· Dewatering Building
· Power Reconfiguration Improvements
· Outdoor Tanks Improvements
The Project facilities to be designed include the following:
· Pretreatment Improvements including two (2) new rapid mix chambers; four (4) new flocculation/sedimentation
treatment trains using horizontal paddles, plate settlers and vacuum sludge collection equipment to be located
in existing Basins No. 2 and 3, with a new Pretreatment Building covering the treatment trains.
· Filter Improvements consisting of removing existing filter media; repairing filter box wall and floor surfaces;
replacing surface wash piping and arms; adding weir plates to backwash troughs; and, installing new filter
media.
· Filter Valve Replacement consisting of new filter influent valves, backwash supply valves, backwash drain
valves, and surface wash supply valves; new pneumatic valve actuators; new electric actuators on each filter’s
effluent and filter-to-waste valves, the filter influent header isolation valve and the master backwash valve; and
installing new air compressors and compressed air piping.
· Residuals Handling Improvements providing mechanical dewatering using a belt filter press; residuals
equalization tank(s); ancillary equipment; located in a new Dewatering Building.
· Power Reconfiguration improvements consisting of new primary service switchgear equipment; new motor control
centers (MCC); and, a new standby power generator designed to provide emergency service for operating the
entire plant.
· Outdoor Tank improvements consisting of the recoating of Clearwell 1 & 2, the Backwash Water Supply tank,
Lime Silo exteriors, and structural repairs to Clearwell 1.
· Balance of C3 Projects consisting of miscellaneous civil, architectural, structural, process, mechanical,
electrical, and instrumentation improvements.
2. Method of Accomplishment:
The General Contractor will self perform the earthwork, concrete and all site demolition. All other work including
plumbing, process mechanical piping, installation of the process mechanical equipment, HVAC, and electrical and
instrumentation will be subcontracted. The GC will staff the project with a full time Construction Manager, Project
Superintendent, Project Engineer, Site Safety Manager, and a part time Quality Control Manager. A full time Project
Manager will manage the project from the contractor’s home office with support as necessary. The GC’s site staff will
coordinate with the appropriate plant personnel for all onsite construction traffic and construction activities. The
General Contractor will monitor both its own forces and all subcontractor craft employees at all times. All work within
the existing facility will be done in a manner as to minimize the impact to plant operations. Anticipated major
subcontractor packages may include the following:
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
2
o Site Development: To include, site grading, site paving, site utilities.
o Building Erection: To include supply and erection of precast concrete.
o Roofing: To include insulation, roof membrane, sheet metal trim and parapet caps.
o HVAC: To include exhaust fans, ductwork, and controls.
o Plumbing: To include above and below grade supply & DWV piping, equipment and fixtures.
o Mechanical: To include setting of equipment and associated piping, supports and hangers.
o Electrical: To include primary electrical service, power distribution, lighting, fire alarm and lightning
protection.
3. Estimate Methodology/Type:
This OPCC is based on the 60% design review package “2016 Betasso WTF Capital Improvements Project” dated
November 20, 2015 issued by HDR. Detailed quantity takeoffs were developed based on the available documents
and the assumptions/exclusions stated above using Bluebeam and estimating software. Costs from similar projects
were utilized in conjunction with local subcontractor and vendor budgetary pricing. RS Means and historical data
were also used where applicable. Standard productivity rates from similar projects were used for all activities related
to the building, site work.
4. Cost Estimate:
The estimate summary below outlines the direct, indirect field costs and other estimate factors used to develop the
overall cost estimate for the project. This estimate utilized the following data for the Direct Cost and Indirect cost
percentages based on current market conditions, historical data and project estimating experience. Escalation costs
are calculated using Bureau of Labor Statistics (2015).
Description % of Total Amount Totals
Labor 1,182,241$
Material 8,576,603$
Equipment 311,363$
Subcontract 8,759,321$
Subtotal Const Direct Costs 18,829,528$
Contractor's Mob & Demob 4.0%753,181$
Contractor's Field Overhead 7.0%1,318,067$
Contractor's General Condition 3.5%659,033$
Sales Tax Estimate (Exempt)0.0%-$
Subtotal Field Const Indirect Costs 2,730,281$
Contractor's Fee 8.00%1,724,785$
Construction Contingency 10.00%2,328,459$
Escalation Project (2018)5.41%1,386,691$
Contractor's Bonds & Insurance 1.50%404,996$
Subtotal Other Const Indirect Costs 5,844,931$
Total 27,404,740$
Estimate Totals
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
3
5. Cost Basis:
· Allowances –
o Filtrate Discharge Piping - $25,000
o Sludge Transfer Piping - $25,000
o Chlorine Scrubber (Demo) - $60,000
o Overhaul IT closet - $30,000
o Pretreatment Chemical Feed Improvements - $60,000
o Compressed Air System - $71,716
o HVAC - $140,184
· Estimate includes all new motor control centers, disconnects, variable frequency drives (VFD’s), low voltage
panels and transformers.
· Balance of electrical estimate includes takeoff estimates for grounding, lighting fixtures and switches. The
balance is of the estimate is based on a cost per square foot basis.
· Instrumentation estimate is based on takeoffs of devices with ancillary support work quantified and an
average cost per device used to cover the conduit, cable and connections required for a complete and
operating system.
6. Escalation:
Escalation estimate based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics
7. Assumptions/Exclusions:
The estimate assumes the following:
· Multiple mobilization / demobilization activities or the general contractor.
· Assumes location provides for sufficient lay-down and staging area.
· All procurements by the general contractor and its subcontractor’s.
· All media removal and replacement can be accomplished through existing doorways adjacent to the filter.
· Estimate includes vendor provided budgets for process equipment costs.
· Shutdowns will be limited to occasional 5-day duration during low demand periods (typically Oct 15 to Mar
15). One-day shutdowns may be allowed during specific periods coordinated with the City. Shutdowns
will not be allowed from May 15 through August 15.
· Silt fencing assumed to be 3,000 LF. Budget for development of a SWPPP included in the Indirect Cost
factor for GC mobilization.
· Asphalt paving pricing based on quantity of 15,000 SF assuming 6” gravel base, 3” base course, and 1”
surface course.
· Enclosed walkway slab assumed to be a slab on grade w/o deep foundations.
· Precast concrete budget pricing as provided by Stresscon.
Base Project Cost Year Escalation
25,613,001.00$ 10%2016 1.45%
25,613,001.00$ 50%2017 4.47%
25,613,001.00$ 40%2018 7.58%
25,613,001.00$
25,613,001.00$
100%5.414%1,386,702.21$
Single Weighted Avg Escalation
Data
37,209.56$
572,739.90$
% Complete by End of Year
776,752.75$
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
4
· Interior masonry walls at the Dewatering Building are standard 8” CMU and are painted.
· Floor grating priced as 1 ¾” x 3/16” aluminum
· Elevated walkway handrail priced as 1 ½” diameter aluminum two (2) rail system 3’-6” high with posts at
5’ O.C.
· Recessed wheel guides at the Dewatering Building priced as C8x11.5 “C” channel members.
· Building flashings priced as aluminum.
· Roofing assumed to be fully adhered TPO.
· Doors and frames priced as standard gauge hollow metal.
· Door hardware is priced as basic code compliant hardware sets for each opening.
· Insulated rolling overhead doors are priced as standard metal, manual operation doors w/ electric door
openers.
· Preparation and coating of piping in existing pipe gallery is an allowance
· Clearwell’s 1 & 2, Washwater Tank, and lime silo restoration costs are included.
· Enclosed walkway is priced as a pre-engineered metal building style enclosure. Metal wall panels and
metal roof and windows.
· The electrical and instrumentation estimates are based upon the scope illustrated in the drawings and
coordinated with respective discipline engineers.
· Training and testing will be coordinated by the GC with the City in advance of startup and commissioning
phase activities.
The estimate excludes the following:
· All permits, regulatory fees, environmental fees or requirements and acquisition of such.
· Any work related to hazardous materials or waste.
· Any rock excavation or excavation of unforeseen underground obstacles.
· Dewatering for underground work.
· Force Majeure, or schedule delay based on weather related events.
· Bypass pumping
· Security systems.
· Painting, tagging, labeling of any exposed conduit.
· Site security measures.
· Any overtime or holiday work.
· The estimate does not include costs associated with an extended work week.
· The estimate does not include any extended warranty costs.
· Lead paint and asbestos abatement
8. Project Schedule:
The estimated costs are based on a 27 month construction schedule with notice to proceed approximately received
in September of 2016 and final completion approximately November 2018.
Construction Phase Start Date Finish Date
Contract Award Jul 2016 Aug 2016
Notice to Proceed -- Sep 2016
Mobilization Sep 2016 Sep 2016
Construction Oct 2016 Aug 2018
Substantial Completion Aug 2018 Oct 2018
Project Closeout Oct 2018 Nov 2018
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
5
9. Level of Confidence:
Many factors determine the level of confidence for an estimate based on preliminary design documents. Those
factors can include but are not limited to the following: local subcontractor and vendor budgetary pricing, the level of
design defined for developing the OPCC and the undefined scope of work. The logistics for accessing, maneuvering
within and storing equipment/materials at the proposed construction site as it relates to the surrounding area is also
taken into consideration. Major equipment pricing is based on budgetary quotes provided by various equipment
manufactures. The project site is located in a remote area with limited access to construction vehicles and oversize
transport deliveries. Based on the information above and AACE guidelines, this OPCC was developed as a Class II
Plus estimate with a 10% construction contingency. The margin of error for this estimate is L: -15% H: +25%.
10. Reconciliation:
30% vs. 60% Update
Description
30% Design
August 11
2015
60% Update
January 12
2016
Difference Percentage
Plus or Minus Comments
Labor $ 1,399,876 $ 1,182,241 $ (217,635) -16% Decrease in Electrical labor allowance
vs actual
Material $ 7,871,923 $ 8,576,603 $ 704,680 9% Prior Electrical was an allowance vs
actual pricing
Equipment $ 307,389 $ 311,363 $ 3,974 1%
Subcontract $ 6,894,460 $ 8,759,321 $ 1,864,861 27% More defined scope/quantities for
demolition, precast erection and
sequencing of basin construction
Totals 16,473,648$ 18,829,528$ 2,355,880$ 14%
30% vs. 60% Update
Description
30% Design
August 11
2015
60% Update
January 12
2016
Difference Percentage
Plus or Minus Comments
Contractor Mobilization $ 658,946 $ 753,181 $ 94,235 14% Increase in Directs raises Indirects
Contractor Field Overhead $ 1,153,155 $ 1,318,067 $ 164,912 14% Increase in Directs raises Indirects
Contractor Field General Conditions $ 576,578 $ 659,033 $ 82,455 14% Increase in Directs raises Indirects
Tax $ - $ - $ - Exempt
Contractor Fee $ 1,508,986 $ 1,724,785 $ 215,799 14% Increase in Directs raises Indirects
Construction Contingency $ 4,074,263 $ 2,328,459 $ (1,745,804) -43% Lowered from 20% to 15%
Escalation $ 1,557,183 $ 1,386,691 $ (170,492) -11% Update figures raised to 5.414%
Contractor Bonds & Insurance $ 390,041 $ 404,996 $ 14,955 4%
Totals 9,919,152$ 8,575,212$ (1,343,940)$ -14%
30% vs. 60% Update
Description
30% Design
August 11
2015
60% Update
January 12
2016
Difference Percentage
Plus or Minus Comments
Direct Costs $ 16,473,648 $ 18,829,528 $ 2,355,880 14% More well-defined scope
Indirect Costs $ 9,919,152 $ 8,575,212 $ (1,343,940) -14% Lower contingency and updated
escalation rate
Totals $ 26,392,800 $ 27,404,740 1,011,940$ 4%
Direct Costs
Indirect Costs
Total Costs
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
6
11. Reconciliation Summary:
The increase in the direct costs can be attributed to the following:
· The costs for the additional electrical equipment, materials and added scope changes increased adding up to an
additional amount of $629,299 for the electrical and an additional $75,000 for the instrumentation
o 600kW emergency generator to be reduced in size
o Added Heat trace panel and wiring in the Dewatering Building
o Add 5 sections of MCC’s in Dewatering Building
o Added two 10HP VFD’s to the Dewatering Building
o Added new work in the filter area not previously defined
o Switchgear 1 revised with numerous additions and deletions
o Switchgear 2 is new with numerous additions and costs shifted from Switchgear 1
o Pretreatment Basins
o Multi-Source ATO System
o Multi-Source ground fault system
· The vendor pricing received from engineering for the cost of materials and equipment for major components.
o MRI Inclined Plate Settlers - $1,900,000
o MRI Sludge Collectors - $360,000
o MRI Filter Weir Plates - $95,325
o Horizontal Paddlewheel Flocculator - $375,000
o Screw Conveyors - $175,000
o Pretreatment Vertical Rapid Mixers - $286,000
o Vertical Dewatering EQ Tank Mixers - $48,800
Attachment A: DR 60% Design Summary
Draft CIP Memo
Betasso Water Treatment Facility
September 30, 2015 1
1 Introduction
The Betasso Water Treatment Facility (BWTF) is the primary treatment facility in the City
of Boulder’s (City) potable water system. The BWTF was constructed in 1964 as a
conventional surface water treatment plant that receives its raw water supply by gravity
from Barker Reservoir and Silver Lake. Treated water is delivered from the BWTF to the
distribution system via two gravity transmission lines. Although the BWTF is designed for
50 million gallons per day (mgd), it can only reliably produce about 28 mgd on a consistent
basis.
The BWTF site is located west of the City at approximately 6,400 feet of elevation, with
limited unused land area due to the topography of the site. Figure 1 illustrates the overall
layout of the BWTF with the major elements of the facility highlighted to indicate their
primary function. Figure 2 and Figure 3 provide a general process flow diagram for the
BWTF representing the primary treatment system and the residuals handling system,
respectively.
The City’s most recent master planning effort for the BWTF was completed in 2011
(Treated Water Master Plan, MWH). Since that time, the City has completed several other
studies for the BWTF including the 2014 Residuals Study (Brown and Caldwell) and the
2014 Filter Study (Arcadis). In September 2014, the City’s Utilities Division launched the
Betasso Water Treatment Facility Capital Improvements Project (project) with HDR. The
primary objectives of the project include:
Provide a 20-year Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for the BWTF
Identify improvements for implementation in 2016-2018 and complete preliminary
design of the improvements
Prioritize BWTF asset replacement
Identify the improvements required to achieve a 40 million gallon per day (mgd)
capacity at the BWTF
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 2
The project is divided into the major tasks outlined below.
Summary of Project Tasks
Task 100 Project Coordination
Task 200 Data Collection & Review
Task 300 Facility Assessment
Task 400 Alternatives Analysis
Task 500 Capital Improvement & Implementation Plan
Task 600 Preliminary Design of Phase 1 Improvements
This CIP Memo represents the culmination of Task 500 Capital Improvement &
Implementation Plan. Prior to this memo, the terminology “Phase 1” was used to refer to
the large CIP project that the City will implement in 2016-2018. Additional phases have
not been identified. Therefore, the term “Phase 1” has been replaced in this memo by
“2016 Capital Improvements Project” or “2016 Project”.
The objectives of Task 500 were to establish the scope of improvements for the 2016
Project, develop conceptual designs for the 2016 Project improvements, and develop a
20-year CIP for the BWTF. This memo addresses the following topics:
Background information used to develop the recommended improvements
Descriptions and conceptual designs for the Major CIP improvements
recommended for the BWTF
Miscellaneous plant improvements recommended for the BWTF
A proposed scope of work and engineering opinions of probable construction costs
for the 2016 Project
Descriptions and planning budgets for long-term CIP projects, maintenance
projects, and future studies
Implementation schedules for the 2016 Project and the 20-year BWTF CIP
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 3
2 Background
The Facility Assessment was completed in January 2015 and consisted of a series of site
visits, staff interviews, and a multi-discipline condition assessment of the BWTF. The
assessments identified 183 items related to various operational, maintenance and
performance issues at the BWTF (Appendix D, Facility Assessment Memo, January 6,
2015). The issues were categorized into CIP (“C”) or maintenance projects (“M”) and were
assigned a criticality rating on a scale of 0 to 6. Issues with a criticality rating of 3 or less
require attention in the next 5 years, while issues with a criticality rating of 4 through 6
require attention in the next 5 to 20 years.
Following the Facility Assessment, several key issues were evaluated during the
Alternatives Analysis including pretreatment improvements, residuals handling, standby
power and valve actuators (Alternatives Analysis Memo, March 13, 2015). This analysis
resulted in the following recommendations:
Pretreatment – Plate settlers are the preferred pretreatment technology for
installation in the existing floc/sed basins.
Residuals Handling – A belt filter press is the preferred option for dewatering
residuals, with a new Dewatering Building.
Standby Power – A new diesel generator is the preferred standby power option to
be integrated into the power reconfiguration strategy for the BWTF and to provide
standby power to the entire facility.
Valve Replacement – Pneumatic actuators for open/close service and electric
actuators for modulating service are the preferred types for the filter valve
actuators that will be replaced in the Pipe Gallery.
Development of the CIP and Implementation Plan was initiated to summarize formal
recommendations for CIP projects, maintenance projects and those issues requiring
further evaluation. To begin, all of the CIP issues identified with a criticality rating of 3 or
less were consolidated into a short-term CIP projects list. (See Appendix A.) These issues
were then reviewed in conjunction with the recommended alternatives identified during the
Facility Assessment and used to prepare a draft list of Major CIP improvements for the
BWTF. The following section addresses the recommended Major CIP improvements.
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 4
3 Major CIP Improvements
A workshop was conducted with City staff on March 31, 2015 to review the draft list of
Major CIP improvements. (A copy of the workshop notes is provided in Appendix B.)
Based on the results of the discussions during the workshop, the following seven Major
CIP improvements were selected for further consideration for the 2016 Project:
Pretreatment Improvements
Pretreatment Building Addition
Filter Improvements
Filter Valve Replacement
Residuals Handling Improvements
Power Reconfiguration Improvements
Outdoor Tank Improvements
Figure 4 provides a site plan of the BWTF showing the location of the improvements listed
above. Figure 5 and Figure 6 illustrate the process flow diagrams with the improvements
incorporated into the main treatment process and the residuals handling system,
respectively. The following project descriptions highlight the concepts used to develop
each Major CIP improvement.
3.1 Pretreatment Improvements
The pretreatment system at the BWTF consists of rapid mix, flocculation, and
sedimentation. The entire pretreatment process will be upgraded to enhance the BWTF’s
treatment capacity and performance. This will be accomplished by converting existing
Basins No. 2 and 3 into four (4) new pretreatment trains, with Basins No. 1 and 4 removed
from service. New concrete structures will be constructed inside the existing basins, with
the basin roof/topsoil and intermediate floor slab removed. The four new pretreatment
trains will provide a total treatment capacity of 40 mgd and a total hydraulic capacity of 50
mgd. Figure 7 through Figure 11 illustrate the conceptual design. The key elements of the
pretreatment improvements are:
Raw water flow control/metering using magnetic flow meters and flow control
valves
Two (2) concrete dual-chamber rapid mix basins for each set of new pretreatment
trains, complete with two (2) vertical mixers each, flow splitting weirs, and influent
piping connections to the existing raw water piping
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 5
Chemical feed piping for aluminum sulfate, polyaluminum chloride, coagulant
polymer, powder activated carbon, and lime
Three-stage baffled flocculation using horizontal paddle flocculators
Stainless steel plate settler modules with integral settled water launders
Effluent channel and piping connecting to existing filter influent piping in the Pipe
Gallery
Low profile hoseless vacuum sludge collector systems with transfer piping
Basin drain piping and valves
3.2 Pretreatment Building Addition
A new Pretreatment Building will be constructed over existing Basins No. 2 and 3 to
enclose the four (4) new pretreatment trains. The building enclosure will prevent the
formation of ice on the surface of the water in the vicinity of the plate settlers and it will
also provide safe access to the pretreatment process. The building will include the
following features:
Textured precast concrete panels
Concrete double-tee roof
Exterior windows
Internal lighting
Internal concrete walkways
Access doors to the existing Filter Building
Enclosed walkway access to the DAF Building
3.3 Filter Improvements
During the Facility Assessment, the existing clay tile underdrain in Filter No. 6 was
determined to be in good condition. Consequently, the filter improvements that are
planned for the 2016 Project are based on the premise that the existing clay tile
underdrains will remain in place in all eight filters. Key elements of the filter improvements
are as follows:
Removal of the filter media and support gravel
Cleaning and grout repair of the underdrains
High-pressure washing of the concrete surfaces in the filter box above the
underdrains, including the backwash troughs
Applying waterproof coatings to submerged concrete surfaces
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 6
Replacing surface wash arms and supply piping
Installing leveling weir plates on the concrete backwash troughs
Installing 12 inches of new support gravel, 14 inches of new silica sand, and 18
inches of new anthracite
The City will complete the rehabilitation of Filter No. 6 prior to the 2016 Project to maintain
filter capacity entering the high demand season. Consequently, the filter improvements to
be included in the 2016 Project will be performed in seven (7) of the eight (8) existing
filters. Figure 12 and Figure 13 provide a typical filter plan view and section illustrating the
filter improvements, respectively.
In the event that the underdrains in Filters No. 1-4 need to be replaced in the 2016 Project,
these four filters will undergo a complete renovation including the key elements listed
above plus the following:
Removing the existing clay tile underdrains
Removing the existing concrete backwash troughs
Installing new gravel-less air scour underdrain laterals and air supply piping from
the Pipe Gallery
Installing new fiberglass backwash troughs at a higher elevation than the original
troughs
3.4 Filter Valve Replacement
The BWTF filter valves consist of a combination of open/close pneumatic butterfly valves
and modulating electric butterfly valves. During the Facility Assessment, the electric
valves were determined to be in good condition while the pneumatic valves were
determined to be in poor condition. With regards to actuators, both the pneumatic and
electric actuator types were determined to be in poor condition. Consequently, the filter
valve replacement for the 2016 Project will replace the following for each of the eight
filters:
6-inch surface wash – pneumatic valve and actuator
30-inch filter influent – pneumatic valve and actuator
30-inch backwash supply – pneumatic valve and actuator
36-inch backwash waste – pneumatic valve and actuator
12-inch filter to waste – electric actuator only
14-inch filter effluent – electric actuator only
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 7
The new butterfly valves will either be flanged or wafer style. The existing piston-type
pneumatic actuators will be replaced with vane-type pneumatic actuators. In addition to
the valve/actuator replacements listed above, the entire compressed air system will be
replaced with two (2) new air compressors, receiving tanks, air dryers, and compressed air
piping. Figure 13 illustrates the valve and actuator replacements on a typical filter section
view.
3.5 Residuals Handling Improvements
The residuals handling strategy at the BWTF has evolved over the course of the project
from the initial objective of thickening residuals (sludge) to an emphasis on dewatering
residuals for hauling and disposal. The major CIP improvements include a new
Dewatering Building with a gravity belt thickener (GBT) / belt filter press (BFP). The
building will be located between the existing residuals drying beds and the residuals drying
pad. Figure 14 through Figure 16 illustrate the general site plan and equipment
arrangement for the facility. Other key elements of the improvements include:
Partially-buried concrete residuals equalization tanks with vertical mixers located
adjacent to the Dewatering Building
A combined GBT/BFP dewatering unit with ancillary equipment including feed
pumps and polymer feed system
Screw conveyors for transferring dewatered sludge to containers or an exterior
dewatering pad
An interior bay for two (2) roll-off containers or trailers
Transfer piping to the existing drying beds and lagoons to provide a backup
discharge location for sludge
Associated transfer, drain and washdown service piping
Access roads for truck loading/unloading of the roll-off bins from the facility
entrance road
3.6 Power Reconfiguration Improvements
The primary objective of the power reconfiguration improvements is to replace and
relocate equipment past the end of its useful life and to increase the reliability of the
facility’s electrical distribution system. The power reconfiguration improvements will consist
of the following key elements:
Remove electrical equipment that is at the end of its service life
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary
September 30, 2015 8
Modify, expand, or mirror the existing DAF switchgear to serve as the primary plant
electrical distribution point, with radial feeder circuits to motor control centers
(MCCs) distributed throughout the facility
Modify feeder circuits to some MCCs to reduce “daisy-chain” power feeds and
improve reliability and maintainability
Provide a new diesel generator with capacity to power the entire facility
Provide for a future means to deliver power from the hydropower plant into the
BWTF electrical distribution system
Figure 17 illustrates the recommended power reconfiguration improvements.
3.7 Outdoor Tank Improvements
The BWTF site has a number of large outdoor above-grade steel tanks. Three of the tanks
are in need of repairs including the two clearwells and the Wash Water Tank. The key
elements of the outdoor tank improvements consist of the following:
Sand blast and paint exterior of Clearwell No. 1
Sand blast and paint interior and exterior of Clearwell No. 2
Sand blast and paint exterior of Wash Water Tank
Replace up to 20 percent of the steel roof rafters in Clearwell No. 2
The improvements listed above are noted on Figure 4.
4 Miscellaneous Plant Improvements
The majority of the CIP issues with a criticality rating of 3 or less are addressed by the
seven Major CIP improvements outlined in the previous section. The remaining CIP issues
with a criticality rating of 3 or less are referred to as “miscellaneous plant improvements”
and are summarized in Table 1. Detailed descriptions and cost estimates associated with
each of these improvements are included in Appendix B.
Attachment B: HDR CIP Summary