Concept to Construction: Asset Management In Project Design Highline Water District

Concept to Construction:Asset Management In

Project DesignHighline Water District

Matthew J. Maring, P.E.

AWWA PNWS Conference May 1, 2008

Concept to Construction I May 1, 2008

Initial Project Design Concept

Transmission Capacity Improvements–4600’ 16” Diameter Mains

Dead-End Main Looping Improvements–6500’ 8” Diameter Mains

New Pressure Zone Creation–7 PRVs and 12 Isolation

Valves $4.7M Total Estimated Capital

Cost


Asset Management Project Approach

Asset Management Predesign Review–Business Case Evaluation–Hydraulic Modeling Analysis–Alternative Design

Approaches Identify, Optimize, Assess, Compare

– Identify Preferred Design Solutions

Detailed Design Construction


Business Case Evaluation Process

Form Expert Team – Highline and BC Staff

Problem Definition Level of Service Definition Data Collection, Problem

Characterization Alternative Development

Brainstorming Alternative Performance Evaluations

–Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Alternative Performance, Cost, and

Risk Comparison Preferred Solutions Detailed Design


Business Case Difference

Lifecycle Cost – A dollar is a dollar–Capital, O&M, R&R, Risk Costs

Triple Bottom Line Lifecycle Costing–Financial–Community/Social–Environmental

Preferred Solution = Lowest Lifecycle Cost that Meets Level of Service

Decisions– Justified, Documented,

Repeatable–Publically Defensible and

Transparent


Problem Definition

Problem 1: Transmission Capacity–Low Pressures–Limited Fire Flow

Problem 2: Dead-End Mains–Water Circulation and Turn

Over–Low Pressures–Limited Fire Flow

Problem 3: High Pressure Areas–Frequent Main Breaks


Level of Service Definition

Peak Hour Demand Pressures > 30-40 psi

Max Day Demand + Fire Flow > 20 psi

Dead-End Mains–Address Pressures and Fire Flows–Correct where Financially

Preferable High Pressures and Main Breaks

–Distribution Leakage Standards–Correct where Financially

Preferable–Goal: Max Static Pressures < 100

psi


Data Collection and Problem Characterization

Hydraulic Model System Performance–Minimum Pressures, Fire Flows

Water Main Breaks–3 to 4 Times More Frequent in

High Pressure Areas–$6K+ Average Cost per Break

Repair Labor, Materials, EquipmentLost Water, Insurance Claims/Deductibles

–Reduce High Pressure Breaks to “Normal” Levels = $18K Annual Savings

Dead-End Main Flushing is “Cheap”


Future Model Scenario: Existing System Pressure and Fire Flow

Performance


High Pressure AreaRaw Main Break Data

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

An

nu

al M

ain

Bre

ak C

ou

nts

High Pressure Areas Normal Pressure Areas Total System


High Pressure Area Main Break Comparison

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

An

nu

al M

ain

Bre

aks

Pe

r P

ipe

Mile

High Pressure Areas Normal Pressure Areas Total System


Main Breaks: High Pressures or Acidic Soils?


Alternative Development

Problem 1: Low Pressures and Fire Flows–Pipe and Pump Improvements–Various Sizes and Combinations

Problem 2: Dead-End Mains–Looping–Alternating and Continuous

Problem 3: High Pressure Areas–New Pressure Zone–PRV Quantity and Locations– Isolation Valve Quantity and

Locations


Alternative Performanceand Hydraulic Modeling

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Fu

ture

Sce

nar

io P

eak

Ho

ur

Dem

and

Pre

ssu

re (

psi

)

Static Pressure

Alt 7: Pipe and PumpImprovements

Alt 6: PumpImprovements

Alt 5: PipeImprovements




Alt 1: Do Nothing/StatusQuo/Existing System

South Area Model Nodes

North AreaModel Nodes


Alternative Performanceand Hydraulic Modeling

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Fu

ture

Sce

nar

io F

ire

Flo

w D

efic

ien

cy Alt 7: Pipe and PumpImprovements

Alt 6: PumpImprovements





Alt 1: Do Nothing/StatusQuo/Existing System

So

uth

Are

a M

od

el N

od

es10

00 g

pm

Fir

e F

low

No

rth

Are

a M

od

el N

od

es10

00-1

500

gp

m F

ire

No

rth

Are

a M

od

el N

od

es25

00 g

pm

Fir

e F

low

No

rth

Are

a M

od

el N

od

es35

00 g

pm

Fir

e F

low


Alternative Performance New Zone Area Pressures, Before and

After


Lifecycle NPV Cost Comparison

Lifecycle Net Present Value (NPV) Analysis–Capital (Design, Construction, CM)–O&M, R&R, Risk Costs

–Amount Invested Today to Fund All Current and Future Asset Costs


Risk Cost Considerations

Risk Cost = (Probability) x (Consequence)–Example A:

(Annual Number of Main Breaks) x (Average Break Repair Cost)

–Example B:(Likelihood of Insurance Claim) x (Insurance Deductible + Staff Costs)

Benefit Cost = (Probability) x (Avoided Consequence)–Example C:

(Avoided Number of Main Breaks) x (Average Break Repair Cost)


Preferred Solution for Detailed Design

Transmission Capacity Improvements–1800’ 12” Diameter Mains–Pump Station Upgrades

Dead-End Main Looping Improvements–2700’ 8” Diameter Mains

(Alternating) New Pressure Zone Creation

–3 PRVs Supply 50 psi Pressure Reduction

–Existing Valves Provide Zone Separation


Preferred Solution Delivers Optimal Performance and Cost

SavingsInitialConcept Scop

e

Preferred

Solution

Scope

InitialConce

pt Capit

al

Preferred

Solution

Capital

InitialConce

pt Lifecy

cle

Preferred

Solution

Lifecycle

TransmissionCapacity

4600’

16” Dia.

1800’ 12” Dia. And Pump Upgrades

$1.8M $1.8M $1.1M $1.5M

Dead-End Loops

6500’

8” Dia.

2700’ 8” Dia.

$2.1M $2.1M $0.9M $0.9M

New PressureZone

8 PRVs12 Iso. Valves

3 PRVs $0.8M $1.2M $0.3M $0.4M

Totals $4.7M $5.1M $2.3M $2.8M


Avoided Risk Costs Demonstrate Project Value

High Pressure Areas Main Breaks–$0.5M Lifecycle NPV Repair

Cost New Pressure Zone Creation

–$0.4M Lifecycle NPV Cost–$0.5M Lifecycle NPV

Avoided Repairs–$0.1M Savings Over Status

Quo


Asset Management Approach Success

Business Case Evaluation and Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Approach Results:

Cost Savings– $2.6M Capital Costs = 53%– $2.3M Lifecycle Costs = 45%

Higher Overall Level of Service Takes Advantage of Existing Assets

– Pump Station Upgrades vs. New Water Mains

New Pressure Zone Pays for Itself– $0.4M Lifecycle Cost vs.– $0.5M Avoided Lifecycle Main

Break Repair Costs


Acknowledgements

Highline Water District: Matt Everett, General

Manager Tom Keown, Engineering and

Operations Manager Mike Becker, Operations

Supervisor Dave Stanley, Field Supervisor Dan Sleeth, Maintenance Lead


Questions?

Documents

Concept to Construction: Asset Management In Project Design Highline Water District