Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
““You You CANCAN Compete with the Private SectorCompete with the Private Sector””
The City of Lawton, OK.The City of Lawton, OK.
Jerry Ihler, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer
Rusty Whisenhunt, Assistant Director of Sewer
“You Can Compete with the Private Sector!”
Jerry Ihler, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer
Rusty Whisenhunt, Assistant Director of Sewer Rehab & Collections
City Wide Sewer Rehabilitation Program
The City of LawtonThe City of Lawton
Lawton / Fort Sill
Population: 97,265
Oklahoma
2
HistoryØ EPA Administrative Order - September, 1994
Ø Reasons:Ø Noncompliance with NPDES Permit.Ø Unauthorized Overflows from the Sewer Collection System.
SSOSSO’’s s -- They have to Go!They have to Go!
ØSSO Contributing factorsØ Concrete PipeØ 70% of collection system
Ø Proximity of pipe manufacturing plantsØ Effects of H2S Gas
HistoryHistory
ØConsent Order Agreement (May 1995)Ø ParticipantsØ Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ)Ø EPAØ City of Lawton
ØØTo Perform SSESTo Perform SSES
3
The SSESThe SSESØ SSES was performed to identifyØ Necessary RepairsØ Required Expansions
Ø GoalsØ Eliminate Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs)Ø Reduce Inflow/InfiltrationØ Improve Pipe Carrying Capacity
Ø Scope of workØ 37 Flow meters Three (3) Drainage BasinsØ Physical inspection 6,094 manholes & 400 miles
of sewerlineØ T.V. inspection (CCTV) 111,000 L.F. televisedØ System modeling 10” and larger –
approximately 100 milesØ Smoke testing 1,614,000 L.F. based on
Flow MonitoringØ Rehabilitation/Expansion recommendations with costs
(1996 DOLLARS)
Item Quantity Estimated CostManhole Rehab 1,625 ea. $ 698,000Mainline Rehab 191,000 L.F. $ 18,986,000Expansion/Upgrade 92,500 L.F. $ 20,700,000Wet Weather Facility 15 MGD 1-ea. $ 2,250,000
Sub-Total Construction$ 42,634,000Engineering / Inspection LS $ 4,466,000Contingencies LS $ 5,460,000
Sub-Total(Eng./Contingencies) $ 9,926,000City Maintenance Rehab LS $ 7,500,000Admin of Private Service Rehab LS $ 680,000Flow Monitor Assessment LS $ 510,000
Estimated Grand Total $ 61,250,000
Cost SummaryCost Summary
Ø City of Lawton requested three construction phases
Ø Phase I - Includes the first 10 sub- basins (NuMuCreek Basin) and the first 7 expansion/upgrade projects.
Ø Phase II - Address the 14 sub-basins (Wolf Creek Basin) and 10 expansion/upgrade projects.
Ø Phase III - Address the 14 sub-basins (Cache Creek Basin) and 9 expansion/upgrade projects.
Ø Proposal was approved in September 1997.
Program ScheduleProgram Schedule
4
SubSub--Basin Location MapBasin Location Map
REHABILITATION SCHEDULE
NUMU BASIN 1998 – 2005
WOLF BASIN 2005 – 2012
CACHE BASIN 2012 – 2019
Expansion/Upgrade ProjectsExpansion/Upgrade Projects
n Conclusion of StudyThe SSESThe SSESØ System Rehabilitation Recommendations:Ø The City must reduce the wet weather inflow by 25% to 30%Ø Areas that the City must focus on to achieve reduction:Ø Public Mainlines Ø Private Service Lines Ø Manholes
Ø Only defects that contribute to system overflows were scheduled for repair (later expanded to include additional high maintenance sewer mains).
Ø The City should clean and inspect 400,000 linear feet of line pe r year.Ø 1,625 manholes were identified for some type of rehab work.Ø 191,000 linear feet of mainline segments were identified for rehab.Ø 2,109 private service lines were identified for rehab.Ø 92,500 linear feet of expansion/upgrade projects were identified (26
projects).Ø 1- (15) million gallon wet weather facility constructed at WWTP fo r wet
weather flows.
5
How is the City of Lawton going to meet this task?How is the City of Lawton going to meet this task?
Mayor/Council Requested Staff Proposals
In-House vs Private Sector
Ø Benefits for In-House Design/ConstructionØ Phase I savings of $2.6 millionØ Cost Savings would come through:Ø Omitting costly contract modifications (i.e. change orders,
amendments)
Ø Design-Build projects should save time
Ø Established relationships with other utility owners
Ø Working knowledge of existing systemØ No profit
Proposal For Proposal For Design/Construction DivisionsDesign/Construction Divisions
Phase I Sewer Rehabilitation Program Cost Comparisons
Fiscal Year
Program Year
1996Contract
Other Costs
1996 Contract
Construction Costs
1996 Contract
Total Costs
Inflated Contract
Other Costs
Inflated Contract
Construction Costs
Inflated Contract
Total Costs
InflatedIn-House
Other Costs
InflatedIn-House
Construction Costs
InflatedIn-House
Total Costs
98-99 1 $604,000 $2,617,000 $3,221,000 $604,000 $2,617,000 $3,221,000 $592,500 $4,687,156 $5,279,65699-00 2 $491,000 $1,959,000 $2,450,000 $503,275 $2,007,975 $2,511,250 $491,488 $1,613,441 $2,104,92900-01 3 $543,000 $2,106,000 $2,649,000 $570,150 $2,211,300 $2,781,450 $558,075 $2,023,748 $2,581,82301-02 4 $535,000 $2,113,000 $2,648,000 $575,125 $2,271,475 $2,846,600 $562,763 $2,137,417 $2,700,18002-03 5 $901,000 $3,747,000 $4,648,000 $991,100 $4,121,700 $5,112,800 $978,450 $1,661,560 $2,640,01003-04 6 $596,000 $2,385,000 $2,981,000 $670,500 $2,683,125 $3,353,625 $657,563 $1,951,454 $2,609,01704-05 7 $651,000 $2,660,000 $3,311,000 $748,650 $3,059,000 $3,807,650 $735,425 $2,253,626 $2,989,051
Totals $4,321,000 $17,587,000 $21,908,000 $4,662,800 $18,971,575 $23,634,375 $4,576,264 $16,328,402 $20,904,666
* The 1996 numbers represent those provided in the Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Survey (SSES) prepared by Biggs and Mathews, Inc. (SSES Consultant)and which were submitted to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ). As a result, the ODEQ issued a consent order to construct Phase I of the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. It should be noted that the 1996 numbers do not incorporate an inflation factor for any of the Program Years.
* The Contract and In-House Costs include a 2 1/2% per year inflation factor.
* Other Costs consist of Engineering, Inspection, Flow Monitoring, Private Service Line Administration, etc.
6
n Capital Improvements Program (CIP) $ 5,507,359n Oklahoma Water Resources Board SRF Loans $15,397,307
Total Funding $20,904,666
Repayment of SRF Loans: Utility Bill - $2.35/mo. for 20 years
FundingFunding
Ø First steps in building the construction divisionØ StaffingØ Select construction technologiesØ Material and Equipment specs had to be written and approvedØ Bidding procedures had to be followed Ø Equipment purchased
Building the Construction DivisionBuilding the Construction Division
Engineering Associate
SSTD Civil Engineer
Assistant Directorof
Sewer
Scheduler
Construction Inspector
(2 employees)
CAD Technician
(1 employee)
Survey
Technician (1 employee)
Large Line Crew
(6 employees)
Small Line Crew
(6 employees)
Pipe Bursting
Crew (6 employees)
Manhole Rehab /
Cleanup Crew (3 employees)
Auto Mechanic II
(1 employee)
Construction Line Supervisor
(September 1998) Sewer Construction Division
Proposal for Construction DivisionProposal for Construction Division
7
ØEvaluation of Available TechnologiesØ CIPP (1.0%)
Ø Fold and Form / Slip lining (1.0%)
Ø Directional Bore (8%)
Ø Pipe Bursting (54%)
Ø Conventional Open-trench (36%)
Building the Construction DivisionBuilding the Construction Division
Building the Construction DivisionBuilding the Construction Division
Ø Equipment PurchasingØ Based on TechnologyØ Pipe BurstingØ Pneumatic Bursting
EquipmentØ Electro FusionØ Fusion tapping saddlesØ Fusion collars
Ø Butt Fusion of HDPE pipeØ Directional BoringØ Conventional
Ø SpecificationsØ BidsØ Delivery (60 day max delivery)
Ø Material PurchasingØ Selection of materialsØ HDPE, PVC, FITTINGS,
AGGREGATE, Etc.
Ø Write Specs., Bid, and Award Contracts
Ø Yearly contracts to allow purchasing as needed
The City of Lawton, Sewer Construction Division isThe City of Lawton, Sewer Construction Division isReady to Begin Construction.Ready to Begin Construction.
ConstructionConstruction
8
Ø Council approved In-House Construction Program. (September 1998)
Ø Equipment started arriving. (January 1999)
Ø Crew personnel started coming onboard. (February 1999)
Ø Small line crew started laying pipe. (March 11, 1999)
Ø Large line crew started laying pipe. (March 19, 1999)
Ø Pipebursting started installation of pipe. (April 19, 1999)
Ø Fully Operational in 6-month time frame.
ConstructionConstruction
ConstructionConstruction
ConstructionConstruction
Expansion/Upgrade Project - Bishop Road Interceptor (Large Line Crew)
3800 L.F. of 36” PVC
9
ConstructionConstruction
Expansion/Upgrade Project - Bishop Road Interceptor
(Siphon Construction)
ConstructionConstruction
Expansion/Upgrade Project - Bishop Road Interceptor (Completed)
ConstructionConstruction
Setting trench box at NW 24 th & Gore – 21” PVC pipe
for the 24th Street Upgrade
10
ConstructionConstruction
Directional boring used for air impact pipe bursting
for the Arlington Avenue Project
ConstructionConstruction
Air impactor for the
Arlington Avenue Project
12” HDPE pipe
ConstructionConstruction
Sub-Basin 316 - Pipebursting Winch
8” HDPE pipe
(NW 42nd & Lindy)
11
ConstructionConstruction
HDPE Pipe Fusion Equipment - Large Diameter Pipe (30” – 42”)
Installed in 6-weeks
(2400 L.F. of 30” HDPE)
ConstructionConstruction
HDPE Pipe Fusion Equipment - Large Diameter Pipe (30”)
(2400 L.F. of 30” HDPE)
ConstructionConstruction
Expansion/Upgrade - Large Line Pipebursting (30”)
12
ConstructionConstruction
Directional Bore Equipment In Action
Sub-Basin 203 (pipe bursting)
Between NW 25th Street and NW 26 th Street (North of Gore Blvd.)
Sheridan Road Upgrade Project – Phase I (open trench)
SW 21s t Street (South of Gore Blvd.)
SW 21s t Street (South of Gore Blvd.)
NW Morford Avenue (North of Gore Blvd.)
13
Sub-Basin 316 –Phase II
Wet Weather Facility (map)
Wet Weather FacilityWet Weather Facility
14
Manhole RehabilitationQuadex/Strong Seal
Aluminaliner
n ½ ton pickup 6n 1 ton flat bed truck 6n 6 wheel dump truck 3n 10 wheel dump truck 6n 580L Case backhoe, 4WD, extd/hoe 3n LB75 New Holland, 4WD, extd/hoe 1n 230 John Deere large trackhoe 1n 120 John Deere mid size trackhoe 1n 80 John Deere mid size trackhoe 1n 50 John Deere mini track hoe 1n 624 John Deere front end loader 2n John Deere skid steer loader 2n McElroy TracStar butt-fusion welder 1n Trimble GPS – RTK survey system 1n Close- Circuit TV inspection van 1
Equipment ($3,000,000)Equipment ($3,000,000)n Electro fusion machine (fusion fittings) 2n Evanco tandem axle trailer 10 & 20 ton 4n 1620 Directional bore machine 1n 35 & 65hp – 26” concrete saw 2n Manhole form system 3(sets)n Manhole rehab machine 1n Assorted trench shields and boxes 5n 6” trailer mounted pump 2n 7, 8 & 16” pneumatic bursting hammer 1n 8” pneumatic bursting hammer 1n 7” pneumatic bursting hammer 1n Pipeline laser 5n 10 & 12 ton TT winch 2n Tool trailer 4n 750 cfm air compressor 1
Challenges...
The City of LawtonThe City of Lawton
15
ØØ Increased Footage Increased Footage (~ 7000 ft/yr)(~ 7000 ft/yr)
ØØPurchasingPurchasingØØ Strict Purchasing ProceduresStrict Purchasing ProceduresØØ Impacted Construction SchedulingImpacted Construction Scheduling
ØØFinancingFinancingØØ GrantsGrantsØØ OWRB Revolving FundsOWRB Revolving FundsØØ Record Keeping/AccountingRecord Keeping/Accounting
ØØ Inflation of MaterialsInflation of Materials
ChallengesChallenges
ØRehabilitation Footage VariationsØ Maintaining projected footagesØ Equipment malfunctionsØ Additional footageØ Unidentified defective lines exceed the
4,100 feet expected from SSES reportØ Phase I Footage Production (24,600
ft/year)
Challenges
Vendor 1999 Cost Vendor Current Cost DifferenceIncrease %8" PVC pipe Midstate Utility $1.65 per foot Oklahoma Contractors $3.50 per foot $1.85 112%
8" Poly pipe Oklahoma Winwater $2.77 per foot Oklahoma Winwater $4.77 per foot $2.00 72%
1 1/2 crusher run Dolese $3.25 per ton Dolese $5.25 per ton $2.00 62%#57 rock Dolese $4.80 per ton Dolese $6.00 per ton $1.20 25%
Concrete (cu yd) Southwest Ready Mix $52.5 per cu yd Southwest Ready Mix $74 per cu yd $21.50 41%
Rock Hauling Lawton Transit Mix $1.95 per ton Beall Trucking $4.50 per ton $2.55 131%
Diesel Low Bid $0.65 per gallon Low Bid $2.15 per gallon $1.50 230%CURRENT PRICES UPDATED: 01 July 2005
Budgeted Inflation Rate Was 2.5% per year for total of 7.5% from start of programActual CPI rate average was 3.82% per year for total of 27.72% from start of program
Material Cost Comparison1999 vs 2005
Phase I Phase I ChallengesChallenges
Material Costs - Inflation
16
ØØPersonnel/StaffingPersonnel/StaffingØØ TurnoverTurnoverØØ Skilled workersSkilled workersØØ Maintaining full crewsMaintaining full crewsØØ Employee motivationEmployee motivationØØ Available work forceAvailable work force
ChallengesChallenges
Challenges
Ø WeatherØ Bad Weather Days
Ø Utility EasementsØ Poorly Maintained by
Property OwnersØ EncroachmentsØ BuildingsØ Fences
Ø UtilitiesØ SBC (SWBT)Ø CenterPoint Energy
(ARKLA/Reliant Energy)Ø AEP (PSO)Ø CATV (Cablevision)Ø Waterlines
EasementBefore...
Fields & Dunning Addition (between Oak and Maple)
Easement After...
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS
17
Engineering/Construction Costs...
The City of LawtonThe City of Lawton
Accumulated Costs to Complete Phase I:Ø Original In-House (1997-2005) $20,904,666.00Ø Projected (1997/2005) $19,002,103.00Ø Emergency Liner Project (04/05) $ 867,715.00
Savings over Contracted SSES Projections:Ø Total Savings In-House $ 1,034,848.00Ø Original Budgeted Savings $ 2,600,000.00TOTAL SAVINGS PHASE I $ 3,634,848.00
Engineering, Construction, and Other Costs
Results…
The City of LawtonThe City of Lawton
Participants
18
SSO Reduction SSO Reduction –– Phase IPhase I
Results-Phase I
Ø Inflow/Infiltration (I&I) has been reduced and documented by flow monitoring of NuMu Creek Basin.
Ø Total I&I reduction of 40%, which exceeded our goal of 25 to 30%.
Contract Cost ComparisonContract Cost Comparison
19
Phase ILines Completed214,000 L.F +
ResultsResults
Phase 1 Footages by Year
SSESYEAR ** Original SSES / PHASE 2 & 3 Revised SSES Additional Maintenance Actual Installed
Consent Order Projects Rescheduled Schedule Identified LinesPre-99 0 7,215 7,215 21,765 28,9801999 17,428 2000 19,428 3,810 23,2382000 34,505 400 27,169 1,525 28,6942001 29,064 5000 30,445 0 30,4452002 23,227 1560 26,055 6,912 32,9672003 20,927 2420 28,709 -3,250 25,4592004 26,362 300 23,569 2,686 26,2552005 16,138 18,042
Total to date 151,513 18,895 162,590 49,586 214,080** Includes 4100 L.F. of maintenance identified lines (estimated at $375,00 per year)Actual footage installed plus proposed installation will produce 214,080 Total line Constructed In Phase 1
Rehabilitation Footages
Proposed Sewer Rehabilitation Footage Installation Schedule
Results
20
Private Service InspectionsPrivate Service InspectionsUpdated: July 1st 2005
SSESNon-
SSES SSESNon-
SSES SSESNon-
SSES
111 16 84 8 1 6 0 0 1% Working, inspected with Carver Street Upgrade (Phase 3)Subtotal 16 84 8 1 6 0 0 1%
201 244 215 29 215 29 0 0 100% Complete202 89 79 10 79 10 0 0 100% Complete203 326 300 26 300 26 0 0 100% Complete204 885 210 167 210 167 0 0 100% Complete206 117 103 14 103 14 0 0 100% Complete206 409 32 45 32 45 0 0 100% Complete207 32 31 1 31 1 0 0 100% Complete208 211 170 41 170 41 0 0 100% Complete209 134 114 20 114 20 0 0 100% Complete210 69 62 7 62 7 0 0 100% Complete
Subtotal 2516 1316 360 1316 360 0 0 100% Squaw Creek Basin Complete
316 49 47 2 47 2 0 0 100% Complete (Phase II)Subtotal 49 47 2 47 2 0 0 100%
TOTALS 2581 1447 370 1364 368 0 0 94%
Private Service Inspection status, 2nd QTR, 2005
Sub-Basin Inspections
M a d eDefects Found Defects Corrected Non-Compliance % Complete
SSES
Cache Creek Basin
Numu Creek Basin
Wolf Creek Basin
Note
Goals for Phase II
The City of LawtonThe City of Lawton
Ø Remain ahead of DEQ required scheduleØMaintain a full staff for Sewer Construction
crewsØReduce turnoverØTrain crew members in all aspects of
sewer constructionØ Improve the condition of the sewer collection
system for the Citizens of LawtonØ Continue to provide cost savings to the
Citizens of Lawton
GoalsGoals
21
GoalsGoals
Ø Increased ProductionØ Production will increase 5,800 ft/year above SSES
Ø Phase II Footage Total ProductionØ 30,400 ft/year
Ø Phase II In-House Estimated Construction Cost Ø $29 Million
Task Schedule – Phase IIProject Task Date
Complete Phase I Design ___________________________________________________ October 1, 2003
Begin Flow Monitoring Assessment Phase I ____________________________________ August 1, 2004
Begin Phase II Design _____________________________________________________ October 1, 2004
Complete Construction / Rehabilitation Phase I ________________ _________________ July 1, 2005
Begin Construction / Rehabilitation Phase II ___________________________________ July 1, 2005
Complete Flow Monitoring Assessment Phase I _________________________________ January 1, 2006
Submit a Proposal for Schedule for Phase III __________________ _________________ January 1, 2011
Complete Phase II Design __________________________________________________ July 1, 2011
Begin Flow Monitoring Assessment Phase II ___________________________________ January 1, 2012
Complete Construction / Rehabilitation Phase II ________________________________ July 1, 2012
Complete Flow Monitoring Assessment Phase II ________________________________ January 1, 2013
Expansion/Upgrade Schedule – Phase II
22
Ø Sewer Systems Technical Division, Public Works/Engineering 2100 Southwest 6th Street (580) 581-3324
Ø Jerry Ihler, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer
Ø Rusty Whisenhunt, Assistant Director of Sewer Rehabilitation & Collections
Ø Roger L. Bridges, P.E. SSTD Civil Engineer
ContactsContacts
Questions?Questions?
End of PresentationEnd of Presentation