Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Utility Rate and Financial Analysis 9003 West View Road, Austin, Texas 78737
Angela Taylor Rubottom, Principal Consultant email: a.taylorrubottom@gmail.com
Prepared By
Angela Taylor Rubottom
Principal Consultant
West View Financial Consulting
2
Introduction
Ms. Angela T. Rubottom of West View Financial Consulting was retained by Victory County Water
Control and Improvement District #1 (VCWCID#1) to conduct a study of its historical, budgeted and
forecast expenditures to provide cost of service information and to recommend to the Districts Board
of Directors water and sewer rates that reflect full recovery of costs and a fair allocation of costs
among the Districts customer rate classes. Ms. Rubottom received cost and customer information
from the District, its auditor and engineer that are the basis of the study. The study involved the
following steps.
1. Compiling individual customer information for commercial and institutional customers for
use in determining customer rate classes based on grouping customers with similar
characteristics together in rate classes. The resulting proposed rates classes are standard,
commercial, commercial lodging, institutional and wholesale.
2. Review and analyze the VCWCID#1s past, present and future costs of providing water and
sewer service and organize those costs into revenue requirement calculations for the current
and future 5 years. This includes inclusion of future capital expenditure needs as identified by
VCWCID#1s engineer.
3. Using customer usage information, allocate the present and future VCWCID#1 revenue
requirements to the proposed rate classes.
4. Using customer billing information provided by VCWCID#1, project estimated revenues that
could be expected from the current VCWCID#1 water and sewer rates for each proposed rate
class.
5. Compare the projected revenues at current rates to the projected allocated revenue
requirements of each proposed rate class.
6. Propose changes in rates based on the projected revenue requirements with the policy goal of
moving future rates towards cost of service recovery for each proposed rate class.
VCWCID#1s revenue requirements are calculated using the cash flow method applied to the
projected District costs for Fiscal Year 2015 budget through estimated future Fiscal Year 2020.
Various assumptions were utilized in making these estimates as described below.
The cash flow method of determining the revenue requirement sums Operation and Maintenance
Expenses, Debt Service payments and a reasonable Coverage amount for prudent financial planning
related to future uncertainties and the ongoing need for funding major and minor capital expenditures
necessary for the District to continue to provide adequate service. Attachment A, column labelled
2015 shows the details of the amounts used to determine the FY 2015 revenue requirement for the
District. The coverage ratio used is a modest 1.2X coverage. While this is a low ratio for a typical
retail utility, the District has a debt service and O&M tax that provide stability to its revenue flow that
is not available to some retail utilities. Also, by requirement of its bonds, the District maintains a
debt service reserve fund which offers additional coverage in extraordinary situations. The debt
service reserve funds are currently funded and the amounts in the fund are restricted as to their use,
that is, they can only be used to make payments on the debt.
To project the future District revenue requirements, a 3% O&M inflation factor is assumed. Existing
Debt Service is projected based on the schedule of debt service provided in the FY 3013 audited
financial statements. Future debt service is estimated based on the District Engineers estimated
capital expenditures for capital projects that are needed by the District to provide continuous and
adequate service. No projects are included related to growth on the system and the forecast of
revenues assumes no growth in the current number of customers. If growth were to occur in the
future, additional capital projects would be required. Attachment E lists the capital projects and their
estimated costs that have been included in the forecast. Debt Service related to these capital projects
is estimated using a simplified level principal and interest payment over a 25 year period and a 4%
interest rate. Additional cost of bond issuance is included at 1% of the capital expenditure amount.
No additional reserve funding is assumed as the current reserve fund appears to be adequate to
provide for future reserve funds.
Future revenues are projected assuming no growth in the number of customers consistent with the
estimated capital improvement expenditures. Comparing future revenue requirements to projected
revenues indicates the need for an approximate 20% rate increase over the next five years or 4%-5%
per year in order to meet the projected revenue requirements assuming the District goes forward with
the needed capital improvements as scheduled on Attachment A. A comparison of existing rate
revenues to the FY 2015 and FY 2016 revenue requirement indicates the need for an immediate
increase in rate revenues of approximately 10- 15%.
Using the FY2015 detail components of the District revenue requirement, individual costs were
allocated to the proposed customer rate classes using measurable characteristics of each class that
most closely relate to the respective cost. Attachments B and B-2 contain the cost allocations and the
results for FY2015. Also estimated are cost allocations for FY 2016-2020 based on the FY 2015
proportionate shares of the revenue requirement.
The resulting FY 2015 revenue requirement allocated to each customer rate class is compared to the
revenues for each rate class at current rates as calculated on Attachment C. The results indicate that
the current rates do not accurately reflect the allocated service. The District has expressed its goal of
moving rates towards a more accurate cost of service recovery as soon as possible. Based on that
policy goal, rate adjustments are proposed on Attachment C, column labelled Proposed Rates.
In particular, the Commercial Lodging class is significantly under recovering its allocated cost of
service. In part this is due to the fact that the customers in this class have been historically charged
the standard meter rate which was designed to collect revenues based on the cost the serve a single
residential unit. This misclassification has resulted in a large under recovery of the cost of providing
service to delivery points which serve multiple lodging units through one meter. A review of the
usage levels of these delivery points supports the need to provide this service under a separate rate
class category as proposed.
Other rate classes cost of service allocations compared to revenues at present rates are shown on
Attachment C and indicate varying degrees of need to change rates to more closely track allocated
cost of service. These relationships are reflected in the proposed rate changes for each customer class
respectively. The Institutional rate class allocated cost of service indicates that present rates are
recovering more than the allocated cost of service. As this classs usage varies widely from year to
year, another year of experience with this class would be beneficial before considering a rate
reduction, especially in light of the forecast future increasing overall system revenue requirements.
All customer billing data that is the basis for the rate and revenue amounts were provided by the
District. The cost of service allocation to rate classes included both water and sewer as the District
does not separately account for its expenses for water and sewer service. As such an adjustment was
made to the wholesale water rate class cost of service to reflect that the wholesale customer does not
currently receive sewer service.
Revenues from District taxes were taken in to account in calculating the revenue requirements needed
from water and sewer rates and were allocated to classes in proportion to the respective total O&M
and debt service cost allocations. The allocation of other tax revenues did not include the
Institutional or Wholesale classes as those customers do no pay taxes.
At this time, the District does not track costs separately for in and out of District service, so cost of
service distinctions were not made for in and out of District customers. As reported by the District,
the vast majority of customers receiving service are in the District.
Proposed Rates
The proposed rates are listed on Attachment C for each customer rate class. The new rate classes
which are proposed include the Commercial Non Lodging, Commercial Lodging and Institutional
classes. In addition, a wholesale rate class is established for the one wholesale water customer of the
District. The proposed rates are based on the allocated costs of service for both FY2015 and FY2016
as the current FY2015 is close to ending. Putting rates in to place that more accurately follow the
cost of service is a standard basis for utility rate setting. Looking to the future needs of the system
and balancing the Districts goals to provide adequate service at the most reasonable cost, the
recommendation puts in place rates that can begin to support the Districts capital plans.
The proposed rates serve to mostly realign customer class rates with the allocated cost of service,
particularly in the Commercial, Commercial Lodging and Wholesale classes. There is also a slight
proposed increase in rates to the Standard Residential class and a recommendation to leave the
Institutional class rates as they are at present. Below is a summary of proposed retail rates as detailed
on Attachment C.
After implementation of the proposed rates for a year or two, the Rate Study should be reviewed and
updated prior to the adoption of future rate changes as the revenue requirements can then be based on
actual future costs and the more specific timing of future capital expenditures. The rate study
forecast revenue requirements are merely the best estimates based on knowledge currently available
and should be updated at future points in time when future rate decisions are being made.
Standard Residential
Minimum Monthly: $25.00
Usage: $3.75/ 1000 gallons
Institutional:
Minimum Monthly:
<3/4 Meter: $24.00
1 Meter: $60.00
2 Meter: $192.00
3 Meter: $360.00
Usage: $3.75/ 1000 gallons
Commercial:
Minimum Monthly:
<3/4 Meter: $30.00
1 Meter: $75.00
2 Meter: $240.00
3 Meter: $450.00
Usage: $3.75/ 1000 gallons
Commercial Lodging:
Minimum Monthly:
<3/4 Meter: $95.00
1 Meter: $237.50
2 Meter: $760.00
3 Meter: $1,425.00
Usage: $3.75/ 1000 gallons
Total Other Revenue Sources 205,859 205,859 205,859 205,859 205,859 205,859
Revenue Needed From Rates 804,381 835,845 864,204 803,309 857,290 882,942
Existing Rate Revenues Actual/Projected 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384
Revenue Needed - Existing Revenue 75,998 107,461 135,820 74,925 128,906 154,558
Cumulative 10% 15% 19% 10% 18% 21%
Year over Year 4% 4% -8% 7% 4%
Water
TCEQ Compliance regarding Allowable Connections 244,203 643,138
Addressing Known Severely Deteriorated Lines 224,825
Reduce Significant Monthly Flushing 209,760
Improvements to Fire Protection 195,500 144,325
Engineering & Inspection 33,724 36,630 157,260 21,649 -
Total Water CIP 258,549 280,833 1,205,658 165,974 -
Sewer
Ralston Lift Station Basin Clay Pipe Replace 216,660 216,660 216,660 216,660
Ralston Lift Station Basin Clay Pipe Replace 165,000 165,600 165,600 165,600
Engineering & Inspection 32,499 57,249 57,339 57,339 24,840
Total Waste Water CIP 249,159 438,909 439,599 439,599 190,440
Percentage Exclude Wholesale & Institutional 662,003 O&MNoWI 80.1% 3.3% 16.6% 100.0%
Debt Service 269,534 System Peak 205,056 5,722 48,092 3,161 262,031 7,503
No Wholesale Sewer Adjustment 2,936 82 689 45 3,752 (3,752)
Total Adjusted Debt Service 269,534 207,992 5,804 48,781 3,206 265,782 3,752
Percentage Exclude Wholesale & Institutional 262,576 DSNoWI 79.2% 2.2% 18.6% 100.0%
Coverage Ratio 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Coverage 53,907 41,011 1,144 9,618 632 52,406 1,501
Total Cost of Service 1,010,241 784,187 29,252 169,466 15,417 998,323 11,918
Revenue Requirement less Existing Revenues 75,998 16,469 3,469 64,729 (12,672) 71,995 4,002
Percentage Difference 10% 3% 17% 97% -45% 10% 51%
Revenues at Proposed Rates 798,590 612,045 24,863 125,101 28,089 790,098 8,492
FY 2015 Difference (5,792) (8,903) 395 (6,529) 12,672 (2,365) (3,426)
FY 2016 Difference (37,255) (33,192) (562) (11,678) 12,069 (33,363) (3,892)
FY 2017 Difference (65,614) (55,084) (1,425) (16,319) 11,525 (61,302) (4,313)
FY 2018 Difference (4,719) (8,075) 427 (6,354) 12,693 (1,309) (3,410)
FY 2019 Difference (58,700) (49,746) (1,215) (15,187) 11,658 (54,490) (4,210)
Total Annual Usage Usage 46,023,774 1,457,550 10,863,266 824,230 59,168,820 1,496,500 60,665,320
Percentage 75.9% 2.4% 17.9% 1.4% 97.5% 2.5% 100.0%
Class Peak Month Usage Class Peak 4,854,160 176,470 1,125,020 94,640 6,250,290 173,500 6,423,790
Percentage 75.6% 2.7% 17.5% 1.5% 97.3% 2.7% 100.0%
System Peak Mo Usage System Peak 4,741,544 132,310 1,112,046 73,090 6,058,990 173,500 6,232,490
Percentage 76.1% 2.1% 17.8% 1.2% 97.2% 2.8% 100.0%
Number of Customers Customers 631 9 22 17 679 1 680
Percentage 93% 1% 3% 3% 100% 0% 100%
Customer Weiightings/Meter Size 1 5 5 5 5
Meter Size Wted Customers Mcustomers 631 45 110 85 871 5 876
Percentage 72% 5% 13% 10% 99% 1% 100%
Customer Weightings Admin 1 5 5 1 5
Admin Wted Customers Acustomers 631 45 110 17 803 5 808
Percentage 78% 6% 14% 2% 99% 1% 100%
Meter
Proposed Rate Classifications Size Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14
Standard
Usage S 2,747,640 2,932,050 3,663,220 4,280,740 4,854,160 4,066,290 4,131,970 4,741,544 3,775,620 4,082,110 3,606,000 3,142,430
Number of Customers 596 591 608 614 613 628 636 647 646 655 661 671
Commercial Non- Lodging
133 S 14,600 78,800 21,000 14,100 17,400 12,100 15,300 16,200 13,400 14,600 12,100 11,900
60 S 26,440 24,410 30,410 30,340 32,000 47,130 35,540 41,930 38,960 33,490 34,810 35,360
585 S 17,590 11,620 6,390 5,680 6,990 16,160 16,820 8,280 7,150 4,830 390 10,410
54 S 40 30 30 80 100 30 40 90 40 40 80 90
27 2 600 900 2,400 700 800 200 1,300 300 200 1,000 400 200
29 2 12,800 12,000 25,600 17,400 20,600 24,000 14,900 16,300 13,600 8,000 7,700 5,500
643 S 3,280 13,610 3,070 2,890 8,530 2,060 3,150 3,070 2,930 3,340 10,860 11,510
1195 S 48,720 33,800 33,870 24,320 23,720 28,410 36,240 44,330 44,060 46,520 23,290 22,450
1252 S 950 1,300 1,170 4,770 3,010 1,470 1,400 1,810 2,810 2,150 3,720 2,240
Total Commercial Non-Lodging
Usage 125,020 176,470 123,940 100,280 113,150 131,560 124,690 132,310 123,150 113,970 93,350 99,660
Number of Customers 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Commercial Lodging
256 S 57,070 51,310 53,590 51,370 51,170 53,870 51,110 79,030 148,290 48,930 70,640 80,180
257 S 192,770 238,360 202,630 181,380 122,280 110,910 201,340 220,630 100,830 297,250 154,960 225,530
757 S 30,370 51,290 58,720 38,540 41,670 94,900 79,370 131,100 153,770 144,400 145,570 151,250
802 S 42,770 91,090 70,940 102,840 135,400 176,260 177,840 210,920 130,140 106,570 91,590 52,400
843 S 63,900 77,950 161,180 79,640 55,540 59,840 80,060 61,720 69,390 83,840 125,110 100,050
1028 1 79,700 51,240 54,800 53,980 63,580 55,350 39,260 43,340 49,570 45,630 46,300 73,070
1055 S 9,600 10,780 12,250 10,620 12,410 13,960 10,620 13,500 21,670 13,330 22,640 18,420
1105 S 21,760 22,030 18,910 17,690 18,040 17,500 24,570 31,350 34,190 14,020 22,370 10,350
1232 S 7,450 8,850 8,500 11,620 9,720 13,180 8,800 9,670 19,290 - 37,480 15,980
1268 S 36,280 41,990 42,540 50,790 43,600 43,850 70 - 20 - - -
1276 S 6,910 9,360 10,740 11,340 13,840 21,640 37,270 80,240 94,190 97,880 116,970 116,510
1298 S 3,710 1,910 2,550 2,890 6,970 4,110 3,340 5,560 4,000 3,850 2,570 1,110
1366 1 30,620 23,600 29,050 33,110 32,330 40,700 40,930 59,520 31,650 39,830 49,320 36,800
1509 S 12,980 20,080 20,220 22,510 19,840 17,890 12,900 19,900 27,600 22,450 24,290 40,890
1538 S 7,430 6,140 7,850 12,290 10,220 10,060 8,760 6,860 7,750 22,730 10,190 14,650
1539 S 400 38,150 15,590 21,750 27,260 22,540 45,950 28,930 20,920 42,080 60,720 32,930
1541 S 14,880 16,720 15,130 15,970 22,960 32,950 27,610 11,750 9,480 13,230 7,400 6,370
1547 S 2,590 3,450 5,170 8,940 7,920 9,330 5,280 9,920 8,240 6,690 7,190 6,330
1553 S 14,910 13,760 12,810 12,970 4,860 11,490 10,010 12,046 7,660 14,800 10,960 11,090
1622 S - - - - 6,010 10,660 8,120 17,380 19,700 15,690 9,280 11,010
1637 S - - - - - 1,470 47,350 58,680 56,970 59,880 58,310 63,670
1664 S - - - - - - - - 8,860 31,940 24,860 28,500
Total Commercial Lodging
Usage 636,100 778,060 803,170 740,240 705,620 822,460 920,560 1,112,046 1,024,180 1,125,020 1,098,720 1,097,090
Number of Customers 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Meter
Proposed Rate Classifications Size Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14
Institutional Customers
36 3 12,000 30,500 23,200 32,400 32,400 16,500 3,700 2,300 33,900 29,800 30,500 20,200
59 S 470 610 490 570 830 640 680 760 630 720 840 700
91 2 2,000 1,500 1,000 1,900 12,400 1,100 500 100 1,600 1,000 1,400 800
93 S 170 90 240 140 150 310 190 670 380 180 180 510
101 S 450 1,190 1,650 1,290 1,820 1,700 1,920 1,240 1,180 11,070 8,580 2,250
168 S 300 610 350 380 11,780 480 340 480 350 340 340 440
180 S - - 30 220 1,280 30 - 170 840 100 80 10
277 S 360 5,540 3,530 12,100 220 360 350 280 480 280 260 360
289 S 3,260 2,220 5,110 7,600 6,560 40,090 5,660 17,340 15,120 9,170 1,080 10,290
324 S 2,100 3,200 3,100 4,800 4,200 5,500 4,100 5,800 23,500 7,400 2,800 3,500
491 S 4,110 1,340 1,030 1,680 2,370 1,260 1,240 1,720 900 2,030 1,560 1,050
511 S 190 160 110 310 420 630 2,380 11,450 310 130 200 80
535 S 40 620 160 20 80 1,360 120 240 420 210 10 20
589 1 8,030 11,000 12,350 15,350 13,720 18,300 14,020 22,370 13,150 11,790 12,040 14,810
813 S 630 630 1,180 1,210 4,390 3,130 1,010 3,120 1,880 3,770 940 1,960
1480 S 6,960 1,820 810 190 430 210 30 4,680 - - 260 480
1626 S - - - - 50 230 370 370 - 1,430 310 100
Total Institutional
Usage 41,070 61,030 54,340 80,160 93,100 91,830 36,610 73,090 94,640 79,420 61,380 57,560
Number of Customers 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
Wholesale
Usage 2 101,900 108,600 116,100 114,300 137,400 110,100 110,200 173,500 145,100 103,700 149,100 126,500
Number of Customers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Summary
Usage
Standard 2,747,640 2,932,050 3,663,220 4,280,740 4,854,160 4,066,290 4,131,970 4,741,544 3,775,620 4,082,110 3,606,000 3,142,430
Commercial 125,020 176,470 123,940 100,280 113,150 131,560 124,690 132,310 123,150 113,970 93,350 99,660
Commercial Lodging 636,100 778,060 803,170 740,240 705,620 822,460 920,560 1,112,046 1,024,180 1,125,020 1,098,720 1,097,090
Institutional 41,070 61,030 54,340 80,160 93,100 91,830 36,610 73,090 94,640 79,420 61,380 57,560
Wholesale 101,900 108,600 116,100 114,300 137,400 110,100 110,200 173,500 145,100 103,700 149,100 126,500
Total 3,651,730 4,056,210 4,760,770 5,315,720 5,903,430 5,222,240 5,324,030 6,232,490 5,162,690 5,504,220 5,008,550 4,523,240
Number of Customers
Standard 596 591 608 614 613 628 636 647 646 655 661 671
Commercial 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Standard 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2" 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Commercial Lodging 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Standard 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
1" 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Institutional 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
Standard 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14
1" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Wholesale 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total 693 688 705 711 710 725 733 744 743 752 758 768
PROPOSED WATER SYTEM IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS VCWCID NO. 1 - BLOOMINGTON, TX
** This includes those improvements needed to 1) bring the WCID in compliance with TCEQ standards regarding
the allowable number of connections on a 2" line; 2) replacment of two presently known lines that are known
to be severely deteriorated; and 3) provide a fire hydrant within 500 ft +/- to most existing homes
TOTALS with
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SCOPE AND ESTIMATED COST SUB-TOTALS 15% cont.
LISTED IN PRIORITY
TCEQ compliance # conn's 6" on Hwy 185, Johnston and Goode from Herbert to Rogers (2 bores)
(too many connections on exist 2"; 6" will allow for Fire protection)
2487 LF 6" $50.00 $124,350.00
160 LF bore $100.00 $16,000.00
TCEQ compliance # conn's 6" on Market and 5th from 3rd to Indiana
(too many connections on exist. 2"; 6" will allow for future fire protection)
1100 LF 6" $50.00 $55,000.00
VCWCID #1 - Attachment E -Estimated Future Capital Projects Provided by District Engineer 2 of 3
TCEQ compliance # conn's 6" on 5th St. from Hwy 185 to Herbert
(too many connections on exist. 2"; 6" will provide fire protection)
650 LF 6" $47.00 $30,550.00
80 LF bore $100.00 $8,000.00
TCEQ compliance # conn's 4" on Illinois from 3rd to 7th
(too many connections on exist. 2";
fire protection can be provided on exist. 6" and 8" mains)
1400 LF 4" $40.00 $56,000.00
TCEQ compliance # conn's 4" on alley east of Hwy 185 from 3rd and 5th
(too many connections on exist. 2";
fire protection can be provided on exist. 6" and 8" mains)
700 LF 4" $40.00 $28,000.00
TCEQ compliance # conn's 4" on Illinois and 8th from 7th St to Indiana
(too many connections on exist. 2" in area;
fire protection can be provided on exist. 8" mains)
650 LF 4" $40.00 $26,000.00 $203,550.00 $234,082.50 3
TCEQ compliance # conn's 6" on Rio Grande and Katribe from Commerce to Hatchett
(too many connections on exist 2"; 6" will allow for Fire protection)
1500 LF 6" $50.00 $75,000.00
TCEQ compliance # conn's 4" on 1st St. and Market from Herbert to 3rd
(too many connections on exist. 2" in area;
fire protection can be provided on exist. 8" mains)
2420 LF 4" $40.00 $96,800.00
80 LF bore $100.00 $8,000.00 $179,800.00 $206,770.00 4
Loop to eliminate dead-end flushing 4" on row parallel /south of Katribe, Blk 91 and 81, Cuero and Katribe
( tie in all 2" dead-ends to eliminate required monthly flushing points)
4800 LF 4" $38.00 $182,400.00 $209,760.00 6
Upsize 4" to 6" for fire protection 6" Loop on Kings Rd from Rogers to Rogers
(FH's are not within 500 ft +/- of exist. Homes)
3400 LF 6" $50.00 $170,000.00 $195,500.00 7
Upsize 4" to 6" for fire protection 6" on Hedges from Leonard to Alton
(FH's are not within 500 ft +/- of exist. Homes)
1470 LF 6" $50.00 $73,500.00
Install FH on existing 6", 8" 10" lines (bore across Hwy to proivde hydrant on west side mid way btweeen 7th and Texas Ave.
1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000.00
80 LF bore $100.00 $8,000.00 $125,500.00 $144,325.00 8
In order to establish a budget linear foot cost for sewer rehabiliation, we take the average of the total bids of the
2012 Wastewater replacement project and divide by the lnear footage of replaced sewer main.
Base Bid Alt 1 Alt 2
2012 wastewater project 2323 702 667 LF
$147,891.43 $42,499.76 $44,433.98 total cost Avg
$63.66 $60.54 $66.62 cost/LF $63.61
So use $64/LF for budgeting
Top priority is to replace the clay piping in the Ralston drainage Basin - other than the pipe replaced in 2012
all piping is clay that was installed prior to 1966.
RALSTON LEFT STATION BASIN 11,775 LF
$64.00 cost per year over 4 years with 15% contingency
$753,600.00 $188,400.00 $216,660.00 1
Next Priority would be the Katribe Lift Station - all piping is clay that was installed prior to 1966.
KATRIBE LIFT STATION BASIN 9,000 LF
$64.00 cost per year over 4 years with 15% contingency
$576,000.00 $144,000.00 $165,600.00 2
Victoria County WCID #1 Water and Sewer Rate Study 2015
Attachment F
Data Provided by District