36963_item 2 Central Lab Study Dec 08

8/13/2019 36963_item 2 Central Lab Study Dec 08

1/38

1

City of BoisePublic Works Department

West Boise Wastewater Treatment Facility

Central Laboratory Expansion Study

December 2008


2/38

2

Table of Contents -

1. Executive Summary2. Existing Laboratory Functions

a. General Informationb. Workload Changes from 1998 to 2008c. Current Building Conditions

3. Projected Future Laboratory Workloada. New Testing Requirementsb. Additional Workload and Staffingc. Future Facility Requirements

4. Summary of Optionsa. Building Additionb. Outsourcing of Lab Servicesc. Life Cycle Cost Analysis

5. RecommendationsAppendix

a. Survey of Municipal Lab Services memo dated 08/24/2008b. Benchmark Study Data Tablec. Laboratory Work Load Projectionsd. Comparison of Lab Analytical Pricese. LCCA data tables

i.

Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Alternatives Capital Costsii. Economic Analysis Inputsiii. Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Outside Contracting of

metals testing (current and future)iv. Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Construct and Operate

Lab Additionv. Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Alternatives Summary

f. Value of City WQ Lab to Pretreatmentg. Boise Central Lab Planning Report


3/38

3

Executive Summary

This study reviews the current level of testing performed at the West Boise WWTFCentral Laboratory building and projects potential future testing and building needs. Thisinformation was collected in order to perform a Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA)

present worth comparison of adding a metals lab suite to the building or contracting allmetals testing through an outside lab. Using the information provided by the centrallaboratory staff, a present value LCCA has been generated for the metals suite addition,new testing instrumentation and additional staff. This was then compared to the presentvalue of paying an outside laboratory for performing all the metals lab testing. Allanalysis is compared for a 10 year building addition design life.

The present value cost comparison clearly shows that from a purely economic standpoint,the better value for the City is to construct an addition to the existing building. Theupfront cost of the construction is far less than the cost to pay for outside lab services.The City staff can perform all required lab testing with at a much lower cost than an

outside lab. There is also the added benefit of the lab being on site allowing for quickturn around of time critical tests.

Based on the information presented in this study, it is recommended to proceed with theconstruction of an addition onto the existing lab building. Not only does the presentvalue analysis show this to be the better economic choice, there is also the added benefitof lower liability issues relating to permit violations created by having laboratory servicesprovided on site.


4/38

4

Existing Laboratory Functions

General Information

The Water Quality Laboratory provides analytical and technical support services for the

Public Works Department. Most of the workload falls into the following categories:regulatory, process control, storm water, TMS site management, wastewater billing, andengineering support.

A service unique to an on-site laboratory is the rapid turning of process data and real timemonitoring of compliance parameters. Samples delivered daily at 0730 have resultsreported back to operations within 3 hours. Results are compared to permit limits as theyare generated and operators are notified of anomalous results immediately. Re-samplingand accelerated testing is initiated to maintain permit compliance. This focus oncompliance and rapid feed-back to Operations will be critical as plant processes becomemore sophisticated. Advanced treatment processes are data driven and subject to upsets.

The real time reporting of results will become more critical.

Currently the laboratory performs 100% of the process and regulatory testing with theexception of whole effluent toxicity assays and organic analyses. The low frequency ofthese tests does not make them cost effective for the laboratory to perform in-house.

In addition to providing analytical services, the laboratory maintains a data base whichpopulates satellite data bases in three other divisions of the department. The laboratoryalso compiles and drafts the monthly, quarterly and annual regulatory reports as well asmonthly industrial/agency wastewater loading reports used in revenue recovery. In recentyears, the laboratory has covered extensive stress and pilot testing for engineering

projects. This support will continue throughout construction and process start-up. Thelaboratory manages its own records and archival system to meet the stringent, 5 yearrequirements of the permits.

The laboratory supports other City needs: Airport storm water, Parks ponds, fire stationsumps, firing range potable water, and Safety Services for training and moldexaminations.

The laboratory provides legally defensible services of very high quality for a cost wellbelow commercial labs. The average test cost for FY07 was $5.16 per analysis, which isremarkable since 51% of the workload was for heavy metals.

Laboratory O&M and personnel cost was: 1,320,028.78Depreciation (cost of equipment and bldg):214,775.39Total costs for FY 2007: $1,534,804.17For the same period of time, the Water Quality laboratory performed 297,348analyses. Dividing the cost by the number of tests yields an average expense of$5.16/test.


5/38

5

Contract lab prices average $10 to $75 per sample depending on method anddetection level needed. Boise area contract labs cannot reach the low metal detectionlevels required in our current permits. With contracting metal analyses, additional costswill be incurred for shipping and data delays must be expected.

Workload Changes from 1998 to 2008

The laboratory is contained in a dedicated 9000 sq/ft building constructed in 1998. Fromthe time the current building was constructed, the laboratorys workload has grown from98,352 analyses in FY 1998 to 277,187 analyses in FY08. During the same period, thestaffing increased from 9.8 to 16.75 FTE. Thus a workload increase of 182% wasaccomplished with a staff increase of 71%

In 1998 the laboratory had the capability to perform 56 different tests. In 2008, this totalis 342 different tests with an additional 5 under development.

In addition to increased workloads, a concurrent shift from simpler to more complextesting occurred. As an example, our previous NPDES permit had quarterly testing formetals and nutrients. These analyses are now required weekly resulting in an increasefrom at least 4 times to 52 times per year.

In 2006, a site-specific management strategy was adopted for the TMS biosolidsapplication site. To address the lack of regulatory over-sight and absence of standardizedmethods used on agricultural samples, the laboratory was charged with adding soils andcrop tissue testing to the analytical repertoire. These analyses utilize many of the sameinstrumentation used elsewhere in the lab however many of the preparatory proceduresare unique. An example is that soil testing and extractions must occur at 25o C rather

than the typical 20o

C. This requires one room of the lab to be at a different ambienttemperature than is used for other tests.

Current Building Conditions

A report prepared in November of 2006 explains that a need exists for improvements tothe existing lab building in order to facilitate current testing levels, prepare of forincreased testing levels and to ensure employee safety. These improvements includedventilation system upgrades as well as additional floor space via an expansion of thebuilding. Ventilation has become a safety concern at the lab and needs to be addressed.This report recommended making ventilation improvements as soon as possible in order

to address the employee safety issue and also to proceed with two 1500 square footadditions to the building. These additions were to be phased with one scheduled to becompleted by 2009 and the second by 2014. As of today, none of the recommendedchanges have been implemented.


6/38

6

Projected Future Laboratory Workload

New Testing Requirements

Trace metal analyses require a specially designed and ventilated suite to support the

rigorous acid washing and testing requirements. In order to achieve low detection levels,minimizing contamination is critical. This minimization is achieved through meticulouslab techniques and engineering controls.

In 1996 when the current lab was designed, low level metal analytical detection levelswere expected in the parts per billion (ppb) and a few parts per trillion (ppt) ranges.Since that time, improvements in instrumentation has driven this expectation to the partper trillion range. This trend will continue over the upcoming decades and will result inlowering reporting levels required by our permits.

Not all work will require the extreme low detection levels, however. Analytical work for

the application site, water reuse, and collection system monitoring will remain in the ppmor ppb range.

A laboratory adequate for future analytical work must address the diverging levels ofdetection. The best strategy is dedication of laboratory spaces for ultra-low level work.

The proposed lab expansion will allow for the segregation and dedication of metalsprocedures dependent on analyte concentration. The expansion will address the currentHVAC deficiencies allowing the City to protect the valuable investment ininstrumentation necessary for NPDES and CFR 40 part 503 regulation requirements. Thenew NPDES permits are expected in early 2009. With every new permit, the laboratory

must adapt to new testing requirements and lower detection levels. To achieve theselowering detection levels the facility will have to have the proper engineering controls inplace.

Additional Work Load and Staffing

Working efficiently and utilizing automation is a high priority in the laboratory. Thisstrategy has allowed the staff to handle dramatically increasing sample loads with aproportionally lower addition to staffing levels (IE handling a 180% increase in workwith 71% increase in staff.) In 1998, an FTE completed 10,036 tests/yr; in 2008 an FTEcompleted 16,548 tests/yr; and in 2013 it is estimated to be 20,637 tests/yr per FTE. It is

projected that 3 FTEs will be added to handle the increase in workload ( a 17% increasein staffing for 47% increase in workload.)

Secondly, there is an economy of scale that can benefit a laboratory. Quality controlrequirements are fixed per batch of analyses. The larger the batch, less overhead cost persample may be realized. Accepting work from non-City entities has resulted in revenueswhich help lower the per analysis cost for City samples. In FY08 the laboratory generated$36,500 in revenue from non-City entities.


7/38

7

Future workload changes are calculated in the attached table. It is virtually guaranteedthat new permits, plant upgrades, and added treatment processes will increase thelaboratorys workload. Additional impacts will result from economic growth and servicearea increases. Sample loads from accepting contract work are not included in the

projections.

By 2013, the laboratory is projected to have a workload of 407,573 tests, a 47% increasefrom current levels. Based on two years history (07/08), at least 53% of these will bemetals tests. In 2013, there may be 216,014 metal tests needed.

Summary of Options

Building Addition

The current and future needs of the central laboratory can be satisfied by the constructionof a 3732 square foot addition to the existing building. This addition would be used tohouse the entire metals testing suite. The existing metals suite would be converted to wetchemistry lab space, solving the current floor area and ventilation problems in this suite.The construction of this addition would not only provide the space needed for the next 10or more years, it would also solve the existing ventilation problems for both metals andwet chemistry suites that have arisen due to the last 10 years of expansion.

Preliminary design has been done for this addition. This work was required in order togenerate an accurate construction cost estimate. Due to the nature of the lab itself, thecost for the addition is quite a bit more than standard construction. The design teams cost

estimate came in at $3.45 million, which equates to $924 per square foot. Several factorsneed to be taken into account when looking at this construction cost. A laboratory suchas the one at West Boise requires specialized HVAC equipment that must operate athospital grade conditions. This is needed to assure that no outside contaminates taint thesamples being tested. Due to the fact that this is a clean room environment building, allair brought into the building must be returned to the outside, no recirculation of inside airis allowed. This increases the heating and cooling load of the building, requiring a largerboiler and chiller to serve the building needs. The final component to consider is the factthat the existing lab cannot be shut down in an economically feasible way due to thecurrent testing requirements. This means that no remodel work can be done the existingbuilding until there is a new area in which to perform the current tests. Basically this

requires the construction of a stand alone addition with independent environmentalcontrols. This project is more like the construction of a small lab next to the existingfacility.

Outsourcing of Laboratory Services

There are outside laboratories that can be contracted to do the metals testing currentlyperformed by the lab. In order to use this service the City would need to negotiate a rate


8/38

8

structure based on the current testing regime. All samples collected by the treatmentplant staff would need to be prepared and delivered to the contract lab so they couldperform the required tests. The results would then be sent back to the lab for analysis andinterpretation. Any problems with the data would require split sampling or resamplingand retesting.

Using an outside lab for metals testing would free up the building space currently usedfor this purpose. The entire metals suite could then be used as wet chemistry space. Byretasking this area of the building, the current ventilation and space problems related tothe wet chemistry suite would be eliminated. The existing building would not require anaddition and only minimal remodel work would need to be performed.

Life Cycle Cost Analysis

A present value Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) was preformed using the two optionsabove. The options were compared over a 10 year building design period and all accrued

costs were brought back to present day dollars. The total costs of the two options werethen compared in an effort to choose the lowest cost alternative.

The staff at the central laboratory projected the expansion of testing for the next ten yearsin order to approximate not only the present day cost of the metals suite work, but alsoany additional work that would be required over the next 10 years. They also providedinformation on the current number of tests performed at the lab. Testing service feescollected from several outside labs were used to generate an average cost per test.Information was also provided on future instrumentation purchases required if the labcontinued to perform metals testing. This information was then used in the economicanalysis of the two options.

The cost for the construction of a metals suite was calculated by taking the currentconstruction cost estimate and design fees and on the costs for operating the building.Included in the operation cost were new instrument purchases, energy cost, buildingmaintenance cost and the addition 3 new FTEs. The final component considered wassalvage value of all new equipment and the building addition itself. The salvage valuewas obtained by performing straight line depreciation on the new instruments and thebuilding addition. This salvage values were taken at the end of the 10 year design period.The net present value of the building addition calculated out to be $4,412,457.

The cost for outside lab services was calculated by taking the cost per test multiplied by

the number of tests required by the lab. This was projected out for the next 10 years.This cost included not only the present workload but also all future predicted testing.Included in the summation of this option was the elimination of 3 FTEs from the labstaff. The net present value of outside contracting lab services calculated out to be$30,201,415. It is understood that this cost may be high since increased volume of testscould likely be leveraged to negotiate lower volume rates than those that were used in thecalculation. However, even cutting the charges by 50% would result in a cost for outsidelab services that far outpaces that for a building addition.


9/38

9

Recommendations

The cost analysis supports the construction of a metals suite addition to the existingbuilding. The present value cost analysis clearly shows that it is more affordable to dothe construction than it is to pay an outside lab for the next 10 years to perform the metals

lab services. Along with the cost justification, there is a lessened liability issue byperforming all lab tests at the treatment plant site. This on site lab facility is also veryimportant to the Citys pretreatment program. The City committed to the construction ofa dedicated facility 10 years ago and the economics still demonstrate that an on site labfacility offers the best value to the City. The recommendation based on the datapresented in this report is to proceed with the 3732 square foot addition to the existing labfacility at the West Boise WWTF. This option by far offers the best investment value onthe part of the City.


10/38

10

Appendix


11/38

11

CITY OF BOISEINTRA-DEPARTMENT

CORRESPONDENCEDate: 08/24/08

To: Bill JohnsonFrom: Marcia SchmelzerSubject: Survey of Municipal Lab Services

From August through November 2008, fourteen municipal labs were contacted andeleven surveys completed. Here are notable findings:

All treatment facilities have an on-site laboratory. The size of the laboratory isproportional to the size and complexity of the treatment facility.

The City of Portlands lab is a very close match to Boises lab by supporting 2plants and having nearly the same number of samples/yr and employees. Theirlaboratory is 39,000 sq ft while Boises is currently 9,000 sq ft.

Truckee Meadowss lab is also close to Boises in supporting 2 plants and similarnumber of analyses. They have 12,000 sq ft of dedicated lab space. Add another3,000 sq ft of shared common spaces and their lab approximates 15,000 sq ft.Ours is 9,000 sq ft.

Generally, contract labs were only used for parameters required 4 times/yr or less.All facilities with metals monitoring more frequently than quarterly performed in-house metals analyses.

The most common complaints by those who contracted out lab services is slowdata turn-around times, poor data quality, and loss of control. Several of thecontacts had regulatory problems which were blamed exclusively on contract labdata.

All contacts reported a significant work load increase due to BNR, especially inthe set-up years. Although contacts hesitated to provide estimates, most agreedthat process testing increased at least four-fold due to BNR.

Monitoring associated with reclaimed/reused water is reportedly three-fold that ofNPDES monitoring.

Where several large treatment facilities are located near one another, there is apattern of moving towards consolidation of municipal laboratories into a largeregional lab.

Industry Conclusions:As the treatment processes and plant capacity increase, on-site laboratories keep pace.

Moving to a BNR process plus adding struvite and fermentation will significantly impactthe laboratories work load. If water reuse is contemplated, a huge increase in monitoringand lab work load should be anticipated. Since the City has monthly metals monitoringand significant industrial discharges (SIUs), in-house metals capabilities would be theindustrial norm. The two labs most similar to ours are larger than the Boise Lab will bewith the proposed addition.


12/38

12

Laboratory Service Survey

City of Las Vegas: Marcia spoke with Steve Miller, lab manager, 702/229-2437 onAugust 11, 2008.

Lab supports 3 facilities: One 91 MGD BNR plus 2 oxidation ditch satellitefacilities

Current lab is 12,000 ft2 with 14 people and located at the large plant Lab analyzes for conventionals and nutrients. The facility has only quarterly monitoring for metals and organics so they

contract to a private lab. (4-8 samples/yr)

Ambient monitoring and analyses (including the metals) conducted by ClarkCounty Sanitation district

Effects of BNR on lab: work load greatly increased especially during first year of start-up. Due to lack of lab resources and increased BNR needs, other process tests were

dropped and metals contracted out. In addition to analysis, the lab crunches and chartsprocess data for operators to use at the BNR plant.

Assessment of Using Contract Lab: Contract lab do not do as good a job as municipallabs. They have used 3 different contract labs in the last 9 years but still have not foundone they have confidence in.

As a consequence of high percentage of odd results, they keep split samples for all sentto contract lab. If a result comes back atypical or above a limit, they send the splits to 2other labs. If the results from these other two labs do not agree with the first, they arguethat the first datum was invalid. Although they have so far avoided fines with this

strategy, the state is not happy and has advised that they add metals back to the lab.

Long Range Plan for Lab: If the state increases metals frequency in permit, then theyplan to add metals back to lab repertoire. In the meantime, the lab manager would like touse the County lab but leadership fears competing with private enterprise.

Labs are expensive but permit violations cost much more


13/38

13


South Tahoe Public Utility District: Marcia spoke with Terry Powers, Lab Manager,530-544-6474 ex 6231 on August 11, 2008.

Lab supports a 4.5 MGD advanced secondary plant that pumps its effluent 30miles to a reservoir.

In summer, the reservoir water is used to irrigate 6 farms, 1 of which is owned bythe PUD. The lab does all environmental and regulatory testing associated withthese sites.

Current lab is approx 5000 ft2with 7 employeesand is located at the wastewaterplant.

The lab analyzes for metals, conventionals, microbiologicals, and nutrients. Theyanalyze drinking water; waste, surface and ground waters; and soil.

The lab was recently expanded. This allowed the addition of new instrumentationwhich has saved money by lowering labor needs of certain tests.

Effects of Water Reclamation on Lab: the WWTF was a tertiary plant that had aNPDES permit to discharge to a nearby reservoir. The PUD opted to build a 30-milepipeline and reservoir to remove the discharge from the Tahoe basin. By doing this, thePUD no longer needed a NPDES permit and could reduce the treatment level to advancedsecondary.

The conversion from a NPDES discharge to reclaimed water greatly increased demandson the laboratory. This increased work load resulted in the recent lab expansion. Themanager estimated the use of reclaimed water triples the regulatory monitoringrequirements over NPDES. All reclaimed/wastewater process and compliance samples

are analyzed in-house.

Assessment of Using a Contract Lab: This PUD contracts out radiologicals anddrinking water organics. Some infrequently analyzed metals are also contracted out.This lab has experienced two reoccurring problems with contract labs: long data turn-around times and missed sample holding times resulting in the need to re-sample.

During the plant expansion and reconfiguration process, the contract lab was 2-3 monthslate in turning results to the engineers. The engineering staff and their constructionprojects were negatively impacted.

Long Range Plan for Lab: the laboratory will grow as needed to see that 100% ofregulatory and process testing can be done internally.

You cannot trust outside labs


14/38

14


Clark County Water Reclamation District: Leslea spoke with Devon Morgan,Laboratory Manager (702-450-4444), on 8/20/08 @ 1 pm.

Lab supports a 100 MGD BNR plant, 5 monitoring ponds, plus various satellitefacilities around the county

The lab is responsible for the entire districts water issues The lab employs 17 people, does conventional wet chemistry testing, and is

currently upgrading to metals and organics

The lab has purchased an ICP-MS for metals and LCMS for pharmaceutical andpersonal care monitoring

The lab currently contracts out about of its priority pollutants, with a goodresponse time in getting data, but will be begin doing the testing in house to havebetter control of the data

The manager states the lab performs 12,000 test units/month Effect of BNR on lab: The manager states that BNR is labor intensive and had a

large impact on the lab workload

The lab manager states that an assessment was done on contract versus in houselab support. The contract lab was slightly cheaper, but would not have fastenough turn around time for data, especially emergency samples.

City of Kalispell, Montana: Leslea spoke with Joni Emerick, plant manager (406-758-7817), on 8/20/08 @ 1:15 pm

Lab supports a 3.1 MGD BNR plant (which is being upgraded to 5.4 MGD) andthe pretreatment program, and will be supporting the storm water program in thefuture

The lab employs 2 people responsible for analysis, sampling, and receiving watermonitoring

The lab does conventional wet chemistry testing, as well as process controltesting, and calibrating of operator process equipment

Metals and organics are sent to a contract lab as the WWTP only has quarterlymonitoring requirements and it is cost prohibitive at a small facility to do thetesting in-house

The plant manager states that BNR increased the workload a lot, compared towhen they just had activated sludge

For process control, the lab does NH3 daily; VFA weekly; NH3, NO3, OPprofiles weekly in each zone; and that process control is 2/3 of the workload

The plant manager states that the lab will be expanded in the future, but slowly asthe storm water monitoring is added

God will forgive you, the state wont.


15/38

15


Irvine Ranch Water District: Leslea spoke with Mindy Bergen (949-453-5872) on8/20/08 @ 2:35 pm

The lab supports a 18 MGD activated sludge tertiary treatment plant, as well asdrinking water testing, and urban runoff monitoring

The effluent from the plant is used to water parks, schools, golf courses,streetscapes, etc.

The lab does conventional wet chemistry testing, metals, and organics Data is preferred to be generated in house because turn around is faster and there

is more control over data quality

Only specialty tests that are done infrequently are contracted out Mindy states that 70-80% of workload supports reclaimed water monitoring and

permit samples

The lab does a lot of daily organics and nutrient monitoring The lab underwent a large expansion 10-11 years ago, with another planned in 2-3

years because of a need for space for instrumentation

City of Snoqualmie: Leslea talked with Tom from the lab (425-888-4153) on 8/21/08 @12:40 pm.

The lab supports a 2.5 MGD extended activated sludge BNR plant, and does somedrinking water and storm water samples

The lab is a 400 sq. ft. room within the operator building that employs 2 lab staff The lab does conventional wet chemistry testing and a few metals Most metals and all organics are sent out since the equipment would be too

expensive for the small plant

Tom states the lab is too small for current needs but more room is not going tohappen any time soon

Tom states that the lab does process control samples daily and most of theworkload is process samples

El Paso Water Utility: Leslea talked with Paul Rivas, lab manager (915-594-5722), on8/21/08 @ 2:15 pm

The lab supports 3 WWTPs, 1 reclamation plant, 2 drinking water plants, onedesalination plant, and one arsenic treatment plant

The lab does testing for wastewater, drinking water, and stormwater The lab is the lab for El Pasos water issues, and does some support for the

smaller outlying areas

The lab was built 2 years ago and replaced 4 separate labs throughout the city, andtook 20 years to get the funding for it

The lab is a 10,000 sq ft, within a 27,000 sq ft facility that houses theadministrative offices, lab offices, store room, pretreatment offices, and thewastewater manager and staff


16/38


17/38

17

The lab has had many issues from not building the lab correctly. The reagentwater system does not have recirculation or UV, and they have A LOT of bugsgrowing in the pipes. The system is too expensive to fix and is gettingdecommissioned for bench top Millipore systems.

The HVAC was constructed incorrectly; the metal roof had to be replaced on thelab.

In order to achieve low level metals analysis, the lab is very careful to not cross-contaminate. They dedicate acid baths for cleaning, have plastic box caps over allthe metals instruments, redistill their nitric acid to ultra purify it, and do all workin laminar flow hoods.

Some instrumentation that the lab has: 3 GC-MS, ICP, ICP-MS, 2 SFA, DionixIC, will be purchasing a discrete analyzer within next year. They perform mostmicrobiology by Colilert methods, only having to do biosolids by MPN.

Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility Laboratory: Leslea talked with Bill,lab manager (775-861-4145) on 11/12/08 @ 8:40 am.

The lab supports 2 WWTP for Reno and Sparks for process control, NPDEScompliance, biosolids monitoring, river monitoring, well monitoring, pretreatmentsupport, and analyze all storm water for Washoe County.

Bill did not know the size of the lab, but it is a linear design containing 9 roomson two floors for the lab, lab office, and field office. He estimates that most of therooms are 30 ft X 30 ft, the office is 15 ft X 15 ft, and microbiology is 20 ft X 20ft. The lab was constructed 6 years ago.

The lab analyzes for metals by ICP and ICP-MS, nutrients, microbiology,invertebrates, bioassays, and general wet chemistry. The organics testing iscontracted out, no soils testing is needed.

The lab did 356,162 tests last year. The lab has 7 employees.

Clean Water Services Lab: Leslea talked with Steve Thompson, lab manager (503-681-3600) on 11/12/08 @ 9:50 am.

The lab supports 4 WWTP for 12 cities in Washington and Klakamus Cos inOregon.

The lab does process control, NPDES compliance, pretreatment monitoring,ambient monitoring and sampling, and storm water analysis.

The lab analyzes for metals by ICP and ICP-MS, general chemistry tests, andmicrobiology. The organics testing is contracted out; soils testing is sent out byfarm staff.

They have an ICP, ICP-MS, FIA, IC, other nutrient analyzers, and TOC analyzer.They use colilert for bacteria testing.

The annual number of tests 120,000-130,000.


18/38

18

Benchmark Study Data Table

Lab

Name/Location

# Plants

Supported

Flow #

Employees

Lab

Size(sq. ft.)

Type of Testing # Annual

Testing

Water PollutionControl Lab:

City of Portland

2 200MGD

5-

10MGD

16 39,000 General Chem,Inorganics,

Metals, Organics,

Micro

40,000 (est320,000 if

assume 8

analytes/samp

Las Vegas 1 + 2Oxydation

Ditch Fac)

91 MGD 14 12,000 General Chem,inorganics

South Tahoe

Public UtilityDistrict

1 4.5

MGD

7 5000 General Chem,

Inorganics,Metals, Micro

Clark CountyWater

Reclamation

District

1 + 5monitoring

ponds +

othersatellite

facilities

100MGD

17 General Chem,Inorganics,

adding Metals and

Organics

144,000

City of Kalispell, 1 3.1 2 General Chem.,


19/38

19

Montana MGD

(soon 5.4MGD)

Inorganics,

calibrates/operatesprocess equip.

Irvine Ranch

Water District

1 18 MGD General Chem,

Inorganics,Organics, most

metals

City of

Snoqualmie

1 2.5

MGD

2 400 General Chem,

Inorganics, somemetals

El Paso WaterUtility

3 + 1 rec.plant, 2

DW plants,

1desalination

plant, 1 Astreatmentplant

27 10,000 General Chem,Inorganics, Micro,

Metals, some

organics

Dept. of NaturalResources, Env.

Monitoring Lab

3 + 2 moresoon

70 37,000 General Chem,Inorganics, Micro,

Metals, Organics,

Biomonitoring

Truckee

Meadows WaterRec. Fac. Lab

2 36 MGD

4 MGD

7 Est.12,000

in 9

rooms;

sharedcommonareas

not in

total

General Chem,

Inorganics, Micro,Bioassay,

Invertibrates,

Metals

356,162


20/38

20

Clean Water

Services

4 (2) 25-30

MGD(2) 6-8

MGD

21 Will

getback to

me

General Chem,

Inorganics, Micro,Metals

120,000-

130,000

City of Spokane


21/38


22/38

Matrix/use/range TA ** FG AN EV ACZ

2008 2008 -2006

Hg water , process, screening ppb-ppm 35 80.5 + 30 27 20

Hg low range water NPDES ppt X 120.75 + 100 88.2 75

Hg solids SW-846 ppm 45 80.5 + 30 27 23

metals water , process, screening ppb-ppm 9-30 (19.5) 20.7 + 12-27 (19.5) 12.6 8-20 (14)

metals low range water NPDES ppt-ppb 10-45 (27.5) 20.7 + 12-75 (43.5) 19.1 16-20 (18)

metals solids SW-846 ppm 9-30 (19.5) 20.7 + 14-19( 16.5) 12.6 9-20 (14.5)

water /solid /waste RCRA TCLP 20 x 12-87 (54) 13 10-24 (17)

* ALI low level Hg mdl is 10 ppt

** FG Numerous fees associated with eah sample.

TA, Test America -Denver

FG, Frontier Geosciences-Seattle

AN, Anatek Labs -Spokane /Moscow

EV, Evergreen Analytical- Wheat Ridge

ACZ, ACZ Labs -Steamboat SpringsALI, Analytical Labs Inc- Boise

22


23/38

Alternative BuildingSh

ell(35

yearlife

)

BuildingSy

stems

(20yearlife)

Total

Outdife laboratory contract -$ -$ -$

Laboratory Additionwith digester gas space heating 760,000$ 2,690,000$ 3,450,000$

Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Alternatives Capital

Costs

23


24/38

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS INPUTS

Case -->

ParameterEconomic Factors

Interest Rate (% per year) 5.0% 5.0%

Discount Rate (% per year) 5.0% 5.0%

Building Economic Life- shell (years) (1) 35 35

Building Economic Life- interior including mech systems (years) 20 20

Capital Costs: See Cap Costs worksheet

Annual Capital Cost Escalation Rate (%) 3.0% 3.0%

Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Requirements

Number of Operators Required for addition 0.00 0.07 12 hr/ month

Average Burdened Labor Rate ($/Hr) (2) $32.74 $32.74

Annual Boiler Maintenance Cost (Materials) ($) $0.00 $0.00

Annual O&M Cost Escalation Rate (%) 3.0% 3.0%

Number of Lab personnel change from present

Number of Operators Required -3.00 0.00

Average Burdened Labor Rate ($/Hr) (3) $38.91 $38.91

Annual Lab Cost Escalation Rate (%) 3.0% 3.0%

Digester Gas Cost

Unit Cost ($/MMBTU) $0.00 $0.00

Annual Fuel Cost Escalation Rate (%) 5.0% 5.0%

Natural Gas Cost

Unit Cost ($/MMBTU) $11.00 $11.00

Annual Fuel Cost Escalation Rate (%) 5.0% 5.0%

Power Price

Idaho Power Average Cost at West Boise WWTF ($/kWh) $0.0360 $0.0360

Annual Power Price Escalation Rate (%) 3.0% 3.0%

(1) Lab life for City economics is 45 years, but since it is already 10 years old, use a life of 45-10, or 35 years for the addition.

(2) Maintenance Mechanic N16, midpoint rate is $17.99/hr, times 1.82 for wage burden(3) Water Quality Lab Technician N18, midpoint rate is $21.38/hr, times 1.82 for wage burden

Commentscontract

metals lab

testing

Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF ------- Alternatives

Footnotes

expandexisting lab,

use dig gas

24


25/38


26/38


27/38

Total CapitalCost

(uninflated)

Net PresentValue (NPV) of

all capital costs commentsAlternative 2008 $ 2008 $

Contract metals testing -$ 29,801,673$ includes elimination of 3 FTE salariesLaboratory Addition(capital cost with

digester gas space heating) 3,450,000$ 4,732,908$

includes addition of 3 FTE salaries(one in 2010 and two in 2012)

Central Laboratory at West Boise WWTF Alternatives Summary

27


28/38

28

Value of City WQ Lab to Pretreatment

Central to a private contract labs primary mission is to turn a profit. There are numerous casesof contract labs getting in trouble with regulatory agencies for taking short cuts on QA/QC as

well as dry labbing to bolster their bottom line. For a regulated entity like the City, this

presents potential liability and non-compliance with control mechanisms like NPDES permits.Ultimately, the City has the final responsible for the integrity of the data generated as required by

permit. This includes industrial user monitoring data required by the pretreatment regulations.

The Citys Water Quality Lab has two primary objectives. One is to generate legally defensibledata, vis--vis, Clean Water Act compliance. Two is internal customer service. Their primary

mission is high quality results at competitive price, not profit margin.

High quality DataContract labs commonly report data with higher (i.e. less precise) Minimum Detection Limits

(MDL) than the Water Quality Lab, routinely by an order of magnitude or more. Price shoppingwithout considering data consistency and quality is comparing apples and oranges . In addition,

in many cases, these less precise MDLs result in less-than data, rather than hard numbers,

requiring use of surrogate values for statistical analysis. This diminishes the quality of theanalysis and can skew results in an undesirable manner. The Citys Water Quality Lab

consistently provides low level comparable detection limits with quantifiable values that results

in higher quality representative statistical analysis.

Tier 2 Reportables

The City labs standard analysis report is comparable to the Tier 2 Report, which includes a

QA/QC profile on each analytical run. Contract labs will provide that level of report, provided itis requested in advance and a premium is paid for the service.

QAP Compliance

Section I.F. of both NPDES Permits issued to the City requires the development andimplementation of a Quality Assurance Plan. At a minimum, the plan shall include the

following: sampling techniques (field blanks, replicates, duplicates, control samples, etc);

sampling preservation methods; sampling shipment procedures; instrument calibration

procedures and preventive maintenance (frequency, standards, spare parts); qualification and

training of personnel; analytical methods (including quality control checks,

quantification/detection levels); and analytical test methods that will be used to achieve the

method detection limits in Part I.C.6.These are the very requirements that contract labs

routinely short cut. The best way to eliminate liability and ensure compliance with these

requirements is for the City to maintain its own water quality lab with qualified personnel andtwo primary objectives: provide high quality customer service and data; and, ensure compliance

with the permit. In addition, direct control of these requirements eliminates an oversight/auditresponsibility by pretreatment staff for contract lab performance.

FlexibilityThe Citys Lab is very responsive to short notice special analysis requests and it provides fast

turnaround. The lab routinely accommodates special requests without charging a differential for

the extra work. A contract lab would need lead time and routinely charge much more for special


29/38

29

requests, especially fast turn around time. In addition, a contract lab may need to subcontractwork they may not be able to perform. The customer very well may not have any say in what lab

will actually perform the work. The Citys Lab works with the customer in seeking the best

subcontract lab in such cases.


30/38

30

Boise Central Lab Planning Report

Prepared by

Anthony J. Perreira

City of Boise Public Works

November 13, 2006

INTRODUCTION

The City of Boise Public Works Department operates a laboratory at the West Boise WastewaterTreatment Facility. This lab performs all of the testing required by the treatment plants National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Boise Central Lab (BCL) has

been in operation at their current location since November of 1998. Since taking occupancy ofthe building the lab has experienced growth both in the number of employees and in the number

of tests performed. This growth has been due to changes in treatment plant regulations which

resulted in the lab needing to perform additional laboratory tests. Subsequently, the lab has

reached the capacity of their existing facility and needs to develop a plan for how to handlefuture growth.

The Public Works Engineering Division has been working with the BCL over the past 4 years tosolve several problems related to the buildings environmental control system. Most of these

problems have been resolved but in the course of working on these projects it became apparent

that there needed to be a plan for future growth of the building. The lab has expanded its testing

regiment and number of employees over the past 8 years without any alteration of theenvironmental systems and without consideration of when additional floor space will be needed.

The BCL staff and the Engineering Division felt that it was appropriate at this time to develop a

long term plan for improvements to the BCL building that would account for the next 5, 10 and

possibly 20 years of growth. This plan will outline immediate needs projects as well as the morelong term building modifications that would be required due to changes in treatment plants

NPDES permit. It will prioritize these projects and recommend a schedule for when they shouldbe completed.

This report will summarize the last 8 years of growth at the BCL, outline the current and future

building needs and make recommendations on how to stage future projects. Future buildingsystem needs will encompass floor area additions as well as ventilation and climate control

upgrades. The timing of these projects is intended to allow the lab to keep pace with its

expanding work load while providing a safe work environment for its growing number ofemployees.

HISTORY

Laboratory Needs Study

In 1994 the Public Works Department hired CH2M Hill to prepare a laboratory evaluation report

to define the laboratory needs of the expanding treatment plant. This plan recommended that the

City build a new laboratory building dedicated to the needs the West Boise WWTF. This report

took in account not only the labs needs at the time but also made projections for a ten year


31/38

31

growth window. The following tables, copied from this report, show the predicted number ofemployees and estimated floor area needed that would be required for 10 years of expansion.

Table 4Current and Proposed Laboratory Staff FTEE

a

Staff Position Year 1994 Year 2004Laboratory Manager 1.0 1.0

QA/QC Officerb 0.4 0.9

Health & Safety Officerc 0.0 0.1

Data Manager 0.6 1.0Senior Laboratory Analyst 0.0 2.0Laboratory Analyst (Chemist/Microbiologist) 5.0 8.0

Laboratory Assistant 1.0 2.0

Seasonal Laboratory Analyst 1.0 1.0Seasonal Laboratory Assistant 0.5 0.5

Sampler/Calibration/Field Support Techniciand 0.0 1.0

Clerical Assistant 0.0 1.0Totals 9.5 18.5aFull Time Equivalents.

bQA/QC required for laboratory certification.

cHealth and safety required by OSHA.

dCurrently preformed by laboratory staff.

TABLE 1

TABLE 2

* Tables 1 and 2 have been copied from the report Central Laboratory Evaluation prepared by CH2M Hill on May 1994.

The City agreed with the reports recommendation and proceeded with a project to build a

laboratory on the West Boise WWTF site.

Table 5

Proposed Laboratory Areas

InternalArea Area Area

Designation Function (ft2)

Office, Lab Director Laboratory administration 180

Office, QA/QC/Safety Administration of federal/state required programs (accreditation and OSHA) 180

Reception Entry point for laboratory users, copy machine 180

Storage Laboratory support 240

Rest Rooms (2) Laboratory support 180

Mechanical/Storagea Heating, ventilating and air conditioning, air/vacuum pump, reagent water 360

Conference/Library Staff and visitor meetings, reference books, vendor catalogs 396

Data Management Central microcomputer, report generation, data archives, computation 484Receiving

b Delivery of samples or supplies, staging for sampling, sample log in 550

Wet Chemistryb BOD, COD, solids analysis, COD 550

Instrumentationb Nutrients, halides, cyanides by colorimetry or ion specific electrode 550

Microbiologyb Coliforms, plate counts, microscopic examination 550

Operations/R&Db pH, settleabililty, mixed liquor solids, process optimization and R&D 550

Metals Preparation Metals preparation for low level samples ("clean techniques") 275

Metals Preparation Metals preparation for high level samples 275

Metals Instrumentationb Metals by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) or alternatives 550

Subtotal 6050

Undesigned space, circulation and walls at 25%c 1513

Total 7563

aAdditional space may be required adjacent to the facility or on the roof.bIncludes analyst's sit-down computation space with provisions for telephone and microcomputer.

cCH2M HILL architect's estimate.


32/38

32

Building Design

The CH2M Hill report was used to develop the design for the existing laboratory building at theWest Boise WWTF. In the original building design, the BCL was meant to provide enough

working space to accommodate 13.5 analysts and 5 support staff employees (all employee counts

are in Full Time Equivalent Employees, FTEE). This comes out a total of 18.5 employees. This

staffing number was based on a 10 year growth prediction using the data from the 1994 report byCH2M Hill. When the lab opened in 1998 there were 7.75 analysts and 2 support staff for a total

of 9.75 people working in the lab. The table below lists the floor area of the existing building. It

shows the building was designed to the floor area guidelines of the CH2M Hill report.

Building Area Internal Areasft^2

Entry Vestibule 64Library/Break Room* 388Toilet* 54Lab managers Office* 100Technicians Common Area 399Data Entry Room* 266

Organic/Anion Instrumentation* 414Mens Vestibule 60Mens Locker/Shower Room 110

Womens Vestibule 77

Womens Locker/Shower Room 197Toilet* 63Toilet* 61Mechanical Room* 604Corridor* 1602Entry Vestibule (Employee) 51

Storage Room* 51Metals Vestibule* 61Metals Acid Wash* 435Metals Sample Preparation* 384Metals Instrumentation* 512Electrical Room 87

Water System Room 120Acid Waste Neutralization 84Storage Room* 51Dry Goods* 52Chemical Dispense/Storage* 200Microbiology Lab* 188Wet Chemistry Lab* 1323Sample Receiving* 240Sample Staging* 482Vehicle Garage/Storage 434

Building Total 9214

Total floor area of rooms in bold text 7531

* Denotes building areas that were included in the 1994 report by CH2M Hill

TABLE 3

Growth

The BCL took occupancy of their new building in November of 1998. Since this time several

new employees have been added and new lab testing equipment has been installed. Although the

lab has kept up with growth over the last 8 years by purchasing new equipment and increasingthe number of employees, there has been no need to modify the building or its environmental


33/38

33

systems for these changes. This is because the original building design accounted for 10 years ofgrowth. The lab has now been in operation for 8 years and they have fully utilized this 10 year

growth space. Any further growth experienced by the lab will overload both the internal

building area and its environmental system.

CURRENT CONDITIONS

Building Space and Number of Employees

The BCL has been operating at its new building for 8 years and has seen significant growth in

this time. The lab currently has 15.75 analysts and 2 support staff employees for a total of 17.75FTEE. Although this is less than the prediction of having a total of 18.5 FTEE by 2008, the 18.5

FTEE only accounted for 14.5 analysts. These numbers show that there are currently 1.25 more

analysts than predicted, meaning that lab space is occupied slightly beyond its design capacity.It also demonstrates that the lab has reached its 10 year growth prediction in just 8 years. The

following graph shows where the employee count will be in 2008 if it continues at its current

trend.

Number of Lab Employees

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

22.00

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Year

Numberofemployees

Employees Potential

Predicted

FIGURE 1

The graph in FIGURE 1 shows that if the hiring trend continues, by 2008 the lab will have 2.75

more analysts than predicted in the 10 year design. This will put a further burden on the building

lab space.

The testing regiment at the lab has also increased significantly since 1998. Since occupying the

building the number of tests that the staff is required to perform has doubled. This not only

contributed the hiring of new employees but also to the purchase of additional testing equipment.These added tests have increased the workload at the lab by four times and required the purchase

of 28 new pieces of equipment. These pieces of equipment supplement the 16 that were moved

into the lab at building occupancy. Growth at the BCL is continuing and they are currently

10 yearpredicted

growth level

18.5 FTEE


34/38

34

waiting on the delivery of two more pieces of equipment. With all this new equipment most ofthe counter space has been occupied as well as the fume hood space. The graph below shows the

timing of new equipment purchases over the last 8 years.

Instrument Purchases

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year

TotalInstruments

Instruments

FIGURE 2

Ventilation Issues

With the increased number of instruments and the additional employees there has also been an

increased demand on the buildings environmental systems. The environmental system includesfresh air ventilation, exhaust of fumes, temperature control and regulation of air pressure

between building zones. The addition of employees and instruments directly affect the volume

of air that needs to be provided by the exhaust and supply fans. The HVAC system wasdesigned to account for 10 years of added demand but like the building space it has now reached

its capacity. The lab is now operating the ventilation system without any further room for

expansion. This is a critical issue due to the fact that in the lab environment proper ventilation isan employee health and safety issue. The lab works with many hazardous chemicals and harmful

biological agents on a daily basis. Without adequate ventilation these agents cannot be properly

exhausted out of the building and away from the employees. Any future equipment requiring

exhaust or fume hood space will over tax the existing system and jeopardize the safety of thepeople in the building.

Environmental System Repairs

Since occupancy in 1998 the staff at West Boise has fought with several challenges related to theHVAC computer control hardware and software. Most of these problems have been repaired butthere are a few that need to be addressed.

The other problem related to the controls is the existing control hardware. Although it is

working properly now, the computers are several generations. When this equipment finally stopsworking, there is no manufacturers support of the hardware. The only option would be to buy

used equipment or do a complete upgrade to the most current technology. Upgrading the


35/38

35

hardware is the best approach but up until now no planning has been done regarding how orwhen to do this.

Current Use of Existing Space

Up until now the lab has been able to fit the equipment and employees into the 10 year growth

space of the building. With the last instrument purchases this 10 year growth space has been

completely occupied. There is now no room for new equipment without rearranging the existinginstruments or occupying some of the space designated as employee workspace.

The metals lab has added multiple pieces of equipment since moving into the building. Thisequipment requires dedicated fume hoods in order to vent corrosive and hazardous fumes out of

the building. These were placed in a hood that was originally planned as an employee work area.

Another problem stems from the unexpected need for the BCL to open a soils testing lab. Thissoils lab needed its own room due to space temperature requirements. The only available space

that had independent temperature control was the existing sample receiving room. The new

testing equipment was moved into that the space and it was converted into the soils lab. Eventhough the temperature control band is not as critical as the other lab spaces, this higher

temperature creates some challenges in regards to boiler control and air distribution.

The lab has kept pace with their growth in terms of employees and instrumentation but nochanges have been made in terms of the building size or environmental systems. The

components of the environmental system include exhaust air, supply air, air distribution,

temperature control and electronic components. At the present time the BCL has maximized itssupply and exhaust airflow capacity and has used nearly all of the available countertop and fume

hood space. The HVAC control hardware and software is several generations old and no longer

supported by the manufacturer.

These things clearly indicate that planning needs to occur that will allow the building and its

systems to accommodate at least the next 10 years of growth.

PROJECTS

Lab Planning

There are 4 main project categories where planning and projects need to be focused. These have

been ranked in order of priority in TABLE 4. Several of these are related to the HVAC system.The HVAC control system that was installed is now several generations old and the hardware is

no longer supported by the manufacturer. This creates problems with system maintenance and

getting replacement parts. Recent investigation has also shown that the ventilation equipment as

installed is running at its maximum capacity. The airflow in the building cannot be increasedwithout the purchase of new fan equipment.


36/38

36

Lab future planning costs table

W 1 HVAC system upgrade (priority 1) $52,500 Total

i Consultant study and design $7,500 60 hours @$125 per hour

t y Construction $45,000 Sum of items below

h e 3 new supply fans $15,000

i a 2 new exhaust fans $8,000 alternate fan option

n r 4 new exhaust fans $20,000

Duct modification $10,000

High priority due to employee safety concerns- Metals lab may be inadquately ventilated indicated by corrosion on equipment

- Wet chemistry hoods unable to capture smoke fumes from ovens

- Wet chemistry fume hoods need improved ventilation rates

Additional airflow volume

Additional fume hood space

System modifications to improve performance

Increased WB maintenance efforts

W 2 Miscellaneous HVAC items $14,200 Total

i 2 Spring/fall temperature alarms * $1,200

t y 3 Building freeze protection $1,500

h e 4 Soils lab temperature control $3,500

i a 5 New fume hood in metals lab $4,500

n r 5 Room 122 exhaust hood $3,500s

Upgrade HVAC control system (priority 6) $22,500 Total

Consultant study and design $7,500 60 hours @$125 per hour

Construction $15,000

Yearly service contract $7,500 * paid by WB maintenance budget

B 2 Building addition (priority 7) $420,000 Total

y 0 Consultant study and design $45,000 12% of construction cost (A & E)

0 Construction $375,000 $250 per sq. ft @ 1500 sq. ft

9 New instrumentation (paid by lab budget)

Increased WB maintenance efforts

*Original building design documentation stipulates that it would be challenging to hold +/-2 C in the spring and fall.

The spring/fall temperature alarms may be better addressed as a seasonal maintenance task.

TABLE 4

The following paragraphs explain each of the tasks in TABLE 4 in greater detail.

HVAC System Upgrade (Priority 1)

This is a project for increasing the total supply and exhaust air volume in both the metals and thewet chemistry labs. These labs have added employees and instrumentation without any

alterations to the ventilation systems. It has been given priority 1 because inadequate ventilation

is an employee safety issue.

The metals lab works with acid and other chemicals which produce fumes that need to be

exhausted out of the building. Concern about ventilation arose when the lab staff noticed

corrosion in a few areas of the lab. This corrosion has appeared on exposed steel parts on testinginstruments, fire sprinkler heads and office supplies. Employees began to wonder if this was an

indication of adequate ventilation. The existing ventilation system is operating at full capacity so

airflow cannot be increased without purchasing new fans. Since opening, additional equipmenthas been added but the ventilation rate has not been increased. This new equipment has been


37/38

37

housed in an existing hood originally designated as an employee workspace. With the additionalinstruments it is possible that the hood exhaust capacity has been overloaded the exhaust system

is unable to remove all of the fumes generated. The best solution to this problem is to add 1 or 2

fume hoods and increase the total air volume drawn from the space. This would require thepurchase of the new hoods and replacement of the existing fans.

The wet chemistry lab has seen an even greater increase in number of instruments plus additional

employees. This lab has had problems with its fume hoods since that lab opened and thesituation has only worsened as new instruments have been installed. Evidence of inadequate air

volume in this lab is shown by improper air velocity through that sash hoods and failure of

canopy hoods to capture all equipment exhaust.

The issue with inadequate air exchanges needs to be addressed as this creates a potentially

hazardous work environment. An air balance performed in December 2004 adjusted distributionof air and it currently meets OSHA standards. This will allow the current system to function

properly with the lab at its present workload.

Miscellaneous HVAC Items (Priorities 2-5)

These are smaller cost items that need to be addressed but do not directly pose a concern for

employee health.

Upgrade HVAC Control System (Priority 6)

The existing computer control equipment, though out of date, still functions properly. The

concern here is if there is a catastrophic failure of this equipment there is nothing on the market

to replace it with. An upgrade of the equipment needs to be done within 2 years due to the labsimportance to the operation of the treatment plant.

Building Addition (Priority 7)

The need for additional lab floor space is dictated by changes to the treatment plants NPDES

permit requirements. These requirements are difficult to predict so an alternate method needs to

be developed for making this prediction. By using historical instrument purchase and employeehiring data, a trend was established that can be used as an indicator for when more building space

will be required. The instrument trend was established by linear regression of the equipment

purchases. The employee trend is based on a simple linear projection of the past hires. Byprojecting these trends forward to the year 2020, an addition could be needed as early as the year

2009. For planning purposes this is chosen as the year when a building addition is needed.


38/38

Instruments (growth projection by linear

regression)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Year

Numberofinstruments

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Floorarea

Number of Inst. Actual

Linear regression

Building expansion

1500 sq. ft

addition in

2009-2010

1500 sq. ft

addition in

2015-2016

Employee growth

(Linear estimation)

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Year

NumberofEmployees

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Floora

rea

Existing Employees

Future Employees (Low Estimate)

Future Employees (High Estimate)

Building Growth Phases

1500 sq. ft

addition in

2010-2011

1500 sq. ft

addition in

2016-2017

FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4

RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The information in this report demonstrates that there is a need for not only planning for thefuture but also to address more immediate concerns resulting from lack of an ongoing growth

plan. If the lab continues to add tests and employees they will find that the working conditions

in the building will become hazardous for the staff. The problem of the buildings ventilation aircapacity needs to be addressed and should be done within the next year but no later than within

the next 2 years.

Along with this a long term plan also needs to be developed that will provide building services

for predicted growth over the next 10 to 20 years. This plan would developed by a team

consisting of BCL staff, Public Works Engineering and possibly an outside consultant.

Recommendation

It is recommended to proceed immediately with the 1 and 2 year tasks identified in TABLE 4.These are employee safety issues as well as ongoing problems at the building and need to be

addressed. Its is also recommended to prepare a CIP for a 1500 square foot building expansion

in the year 2009 and another 1500 square foot addition in the year 2014. This additional spacewould house testing facilities required to comply with changes in the treatment plant discharge

permit. This plan will need to account for all HVAC system modifications required to integrate

the addition with the existing building system

Documents

36963_item 2 Central Lab Study Dec 08