Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Water Supply StudyDEVELOR4E TT OF MTICHELL CREEK PS A WATER SUPPLY FOR TAE WEST G F2MJOD SPRIMS WATER DISTRICT January, 1984 Prepared by Schmueser & Associates 1512 Grand Avenue Suite 210 Glenwood Springs, Colorado (303) 9455468 1 1 '1 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Scope of Study 1 Authorization 2 WATER REQUIREMENTS 3 Physical Water Supply 5 General 5 Diversion Records 7 Similar Watersheds 8 Physical Supply Conclusions 11 Water Quality 12 Legal Supply 14 TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES 17 General 17 Description of Alternatives 20 Conventional Filtration 20 Diatomaceous Earth 21 Capital Costs 23 Conventional Filtation Plant 24 Diatomaceous Earth Filtration Plant 29 Used Plant 35 Operation and Maintenance Costs 38 FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS 45 General 45 Operating Revenues 47 Ability to Finance Future Long Term Debt 47 Purchasing City Water 57 0.5 mgd Conventional Filtration Plant 60 Summary and Conclusions 67 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 9A Mitchell Creek and Possum Creek Drainages Figure 2 20A Schematic Flow Diagram Proposed Conventional Filtration Plant Figure 3 23A Schematic Flow Diagram Proposed DE Filtration Plant Figure 4 23B DE FIlter Plant Layout Figure 5 25A N/M Pictorial Trident Plant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 3A West Glenwood Springs Water District Recorded Meter Readings Table 2 8 1977 Diversion Records Reynolds and Cain Ditch Table 3 9 Possum Creek Streamflow Data Table 4 10 Estimated Low Flow Mitchell Creek Table 5 13 Chemical Analysis Mitchell Creek Table 6 24 Estimated Capital Costs 1 mgd Conventional Filtration Plant Table 7 30 Estimated Captial Costs 1 mgd DE Plant Table 8 35A Estimated Capital Cost of Utilization City of Rifle Pressure Sand Filters Table 9 38 Estimated Operation and Maintenance Cost of 1 Neptune Microfloc Water Treatment Plant 1 Table 10 41 Estimated Operation and Maintenance Costs of DE Water Treatment Plant Page Table 11 42 Estimated DE Requirements and Cost for Body Feed Table 12 48 West Glenwood Springs Water District Estimated 1983 Operating Revenue Table 13 50 Estimated Statement of Earnings New 1 mgd Plant Table 14 51 Estimate of Capital Available for Reduction of Future Long Term Debt Table 15 53 Debt Service Schedule $500,000 Bond Issue Table 16 54 Debt Service Schedule $600,000 Bond Issue Table 17 55 Debt Service for the 1980 General Obligation Bond Issue Table 18 58 Estimated Statement of Earnings Assuming Water Purchased from City of Glenwood Springs Table 19 59 Estimated Change in Financial Position Purchasing Water from City of Glenwood Springs at $1.22/1000 Gallons and $.61/1000 Gallons 1 Page ' Table 20 61 Amount of Water to be Purchased from the ' City of Glenwood Springs if WGSWD Installs a 0.5 mgd Plant Table 21 62 11 Estimated Capital Costs 0.5 mgd Conventional Treatment Plant Table 22 64 Estimated Statement of Earnings ' New 0.5 mgd Plant Table 23 65 Estimate of Capital Available for ' Reduction of Future Long Term Debt with 0.5 mgd Plant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 The West Glenwood Springs Water District (WGSWD) is a Special District as de- fined in the Colorado Revised Statutes under the Special District Act. The District supplies water for domestic, commercial and fire protection purposes. Historically the District and the City of Glenwood Springs have contractually agreed that the City would supply excess water to the District, maintain the system and collect revenues. The City charges District users one and a half times in -City users and returns approximately 30% of the revenues back to the District. In addition, there is a 15% surcharge, 100% of which is returned to the District. The Distric.- owns the physical facilities, provides for capital improvements and has the taxing authority within the District boundaries. Because of contractural problems and the potential for increased rates, the Board of Directors of the WGSWD have initiated this study to determine the feasibility of developing their own water supply from Mitchell Creek to meet the present needs of the Water District. Scope of Study The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not it is feasible to develop Mitchell Creek as a surface water source for the WGSWD. The District has not authorized us to estimate future water requirements. It is our under- standing that only the feasibility of supplying current demands is to be evaluated. The study reviews the physical supply that we feel is available in Mitchell; Creek and evaluates several alternatives for treating the water from Mitchell Creek. Capital costs, operation and maintenance costs and the practicality Nrk SCHMUESER 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. of phasing the construction of the plant will be presented in the report. Once capital costs and 0 & M costs have been determined, a financial analysis will be performed to determine whether the current rate structure of the District is capable of generating sufficient income to finance construction of the proposed improvements. Authorization This study was prepared in accordance with a verbal and written Agreement be- tween Schmueser & Associates and the WGSWD. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.St 2 The water requirements of the WGSWD are a crucial part of determining whether or not Mitchell Creek is a viable source for the District. The amount of water used will also determine what size water treatment plant the District should construct. Table 1 on the following page shows readings from the main meter installed in West Glenwood. Over the time period December 3, 1982 to December 8, 1983, the District utilized approximately 141 million gallons of water, which is an average day demand of approximately 380,000 gpd. Maximum day demands are an integral part of water facility planning and design. This maximum day demand would have to be the required capacity of the following if the District were to have a source and plant on line capable of meeting cur- rent water demands: A. Mitchell Creek during low summer flows. B. The raw water transmission facility. C. The proposed treatment facility. D. Transmission lines leading away from the treatment plant. Since the current data from the West Glenwood, main meter readings do not allow us to make a determination as to maximum day demands or peak hour demands, we will utilize a factor of three to one for the ratio of maximum day demand to average day demand. Thus, estimated current maximum day demands for the WGSWD are 1.14 mgd. This is the equivalent of 790 qpm or 1.76 cfs. This Sri SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 1 1 TABLE 1 GEST Gly SPRIIMS WATER DISTRICT RECORDED METER READINGS AND WATER USE Main Sunny WGSWD WGSWD - Gallons AVG. WGSWD # of Meter Acres Net Used Bataan, Readings Flaw Date Days (Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) Gal./Day '2/03/82 12/10/82 ' 12/18/82 11 12/26/82 2/27/82 (1) 1u1/03/83 1 1/08/83 1 L/17/83 1 1 "?/11/83 02/25/83 '07/11/83 108/11/83 ' u /27/83 I./15/83 ./08/83 0 0 7 1,445,000 5,600 8 3,784,400 18,500 8 6,020,000 34,520 8 7,641,000 347,100 5 9,254,000 418,700 9 11,640,000 551,800 _/29/83 12 14,539,000 814,400 './07/83 9 16,809,000 948,900 4 17,711,000 1,051,700 14 21,199,600 1,126,700 136 75,019,000 8,854,900 31 100,508,000 12,294,100 47 136,968,000 16,916,700 49 155,158,000 19,801,300 23 161,355,000 20,126,000 (1) Tank overflow 3A 1,439,400 3,765,900 5,985,480 7,293,900 8,835,300 11,088,200 13,724,600 15,960,000 16,659,300 20,072,900 66,164,100 88,213,900 120,051,300 135,356,700 141,229,000 1,439,400 205,629 2,326,500 290,813 2,219,580 277,447 1,308,420 163,552 1,541,400 308,280 2,252,900 250,322 2,636,400 219,700 2,235,400 248,378 699,000 174,825 3,413,600 243,828 46,091,200 388,905 22,049,800 711,284 31,837,400 677,391 15,305,400 312,355 5,872,300 255,317 Average day demand = 380,000 gpd estimated maximum day demand would occur in the summer and appears to be a reasonable estimate since the average day demand was 0.71 mgd during July and August of 1983. The current winter maximum day demand is estimated to be 0.6 mqd. Facilities which provided for continued growth in the West Glenwood area would have to be sized for flows greater than this 1.14 mgd. Since the District has requested that we not make projections relative to future demands we will eval- uate Mitchell Creek and a treatment facility which are capable of supplying current maximum day demands in the range of 1 mgd. Note that 1 mgd is being used instead of 1.14 mgd, since the maximus day to average day ratio of 3 to 1 is an estimated value and it is more practical to size treatment facilities of this size range in 0.5 mqd increments. Thus, we will evaluate Mitchell Creek in terms of meeting an estimated maximum day sumer demand of 1 mgd and determine the costs of providing a 1 mgd water treatment facility to meet these current demands. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 PHYSICAL WATER SUPPLY General This section evaluates whether there is sufficient physical supply available in Mitchell Creek on a year round basis to meet the current maximum day demands of the WGSWD. It must be noted that physical supply is only one of the parameters which must be addressed in determining whether or not a surface water source is a viable domestic water supply for any entity. Other items which are normally • part of the evaluation of any surface water source which are beyond the scope of this report (the District specifically requested they not be reviewed at this time) include: 1. Whether the source can legally provide the quantity of water required. 2. The quality of the raw water and the degree of treatment required to meet drinking water standards. 3. What will be required to deliver the treated water from the source to the area served, i.e. the location and elevation of the source with respect to the service area. Where water would physically be diverted from Mitchell Creek affects all three of the items above. The quality of water obtained from Mitchell Creek would be. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Sit dependent upon the location of the diversion. Since upstream development tends to reduce water quality, water quality generally improves as you go up stream. Thus, the farther up stream a diversion is located the better the water quality will be. The most significant developments affecting Mitchell Creek would be the area north of Donegan Road which contains single family residences through which Mitchell Creek flows and the Colorado Division of Wildlife's Mitchell Creek Fish Hatchery located approximately a mile north of Donegan Road. The diversion location has very significant impacts on the ability to deliver treated water from the source to the area served. A diversion location and treatment plant at an elevation above the West Glenwood Springs water storage tank would allow water to be delivered to the District with very minimal pump- ing costs. This alternative has a disadvantage of having to install a trans- mission line up Mitchell Creek to an area which is high enough to provide grav- ity flow into the District. On the other hand, locating a diversion and treat- ment plant in lower Mitchell Creek, where it would be easy to pump directly into the distribution system, has a disadvantage of having very high power costs for pumping water from this low elevation up the District's storage tank. These costs will be discussed in detail later in the report. The diversion location is very critical in terms of legal supply because of the water rights questions involved. Again, all of the above items with the excep- tion of whether the Mitchell Creek can physically supply the District's needs are beyond the scope of this report but are very critical factors which must be evaluated in depth before a final determination can be made relative to SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I1i 1 the viability of utilizing Mitchell Creek as a source of supply for the WGSWD. Diversion Records Since there is no stream flow data from a gaging station 6n Mitchell Creek other methods were utilized to make a determination relative to the minimum water supply available from Mitchell Creek. Water Commissioner's records for stream diversion are one source of information available for this evaluation. A review of diversions on the Reynolds and Cain Ditch, which has an appropria- tion date of April 19, 1883 for 5 cfa_and is the most senior water right on Mitchell Creek, shows that records are available from water year 1942 through 1983. In general, this review was limited to looking at what the minimum diversion was each year between May and September. Our conclusions from this review are that the Reynolds and Cain Ditch has historically diverted greater than 2 cfs during this time period, the exceptions being the August of 1964 and August of 1966 diversions at 1.5 cfs and 1.1 cfs respectively. Mr. Earl Warren, a 47 year resident of the Mitchell Creek area reports that the lowest summer time flows he observed in Mitchell Creek occured in the summer of 1977. Table 2 on the following page shows the diversion records for the Reynolds and Cain Ditch in 1977: St SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 2 1977 Diversion Records Reynolds and Cain Ditch Period Q cfs 4/21 - 4/26 4.8 4/27 - 5/15 1.65 5/16 - 5/23 2.20 5/24 - 5/31 2.45 6/01 - 6/30 2.65 7/01 2.65 7/02 - 8/21 3.10 8/22 - 10/11 3.00 10/12 - 10/24 2.80 As can be seen in the review of the 1977 dry year diversions, the Reynolds and Cain were able to divert in excess of 2.0 cfs throughout the summer. Similar Watersheds A review of similar gaged watersheds is also a common method used for estimat- ing flows in ungaged watersheds such as Mitchell Creek. Possum Creek, which lies just northwest of Mitchell Creek, is a small tributary to Canyon Creek. Possum Creek has a drainage area of 6.4 square miles at U.S.G.S. Gaging Station 09085400. Twelve (12) years of data from 1969 to 1980 were evaluated for Possum Creek and are shown in Table 3. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Table 3 Possum Creek Streamflow Data May -Sept Nov -April High Flow Low Flow Summer Winter Low Low Year cfs Date cfs Date cfs cfs 1980 66 6-6 0.75 11-23 2.2 0.75 1979 70 6-7 1.00 11-28,12-3.3-10 3.9 1.00 1978 80 6-11 0.44 2-22 2.7 0.44 1977 85 8-25 0.79 9-26,27,28,29 0.8 0.80 1976 24 5-21 1.20 3-30 2.2 1.20 1975 82 6-8 1.20 9-25 2.4 1.20 1974 31 5-20 1.60 12-6,7,3-5 2.2 1.60 1973 67 6-10 0.98 2-12 3.5 0.98 1972 59 5-26 0.94 11-20 2.0 0.94 1971 35 6-8 1.20 2-4 3.0 1.20 1970 59 5-26 1.20 3-19 3.0 1.30 1969(1) 34 5-12 1.30 3-19,20 2.5 1.30 Average 1.05 cfs (1) Data limited to period March - September Our review of this data shows that the summertime low flaw occured in late September of 1977 and the wintertime low occured in February 1978. These flows were 0.79 cfs and 0.44 cfs for simmer and winter respectively. Figure 1 shows the drainage area boundaries of Mitchell Creek and Possum Creek. Our review of the two drainage areas show that they have similar percentages of total drainage area within the elevation ranges of 8,000 to 9,000, 9,000 to 10,000 and above 10,000 feet. This is a good indication that the character- SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 9 IMO =I NMI .- AIM -MI — MIMI a, RIM IIIIII NMI 111.11, MN MN IM. — MN .. g L.; O 0 0 \ `w • 0 1 1• si , • !0 *3, r I '• :- (�� • v, istics of the two drainage areas are very similar. Since the drainages are adjacent to one another, the gaged Possum Creek drainage gives a good indica- tion of what can be anticipated in terms of low flows for Mitchell Creek if the Possum Creek flows are adjusted on a ratio which corresponds to the difference between the size of the two drainage areas. We have estimated that Mitchell Creek drainage has approximately 11.5 square miles at a point at the mouth of the canyon. Thus, based on this ratio of drainage areas it is our opinion that flows in Mitchell Creek should be rough- ly 1.85 times the flows in the adjacent Possum Creek drainage. Utilizing this 1.85 factor, winter and sumer low flows were estimated for Mitchell Creek for the available years of record of Possum Creek for 1969 to 1980 and are shown below in Table 4: TABLE 4 Estimated Low Flow Mitchell Creek Year Winter Flow, cfs Sumner Flow, cfs 1980 1.38 4.07 1979 1.85 7.21 1978 0.79 5.00 1977 1.48 1.46 1976 2.22 4.07 1975 2.22 4.44 1974 2.36 4.07 1973 1.81 6.47 1972 1.73 3.70 1971 2.22 5.55 1970 2.22 5.55 1969 2.40 4.62 Table 4 shows the estimated sumer and winter low flows over the 12 year period where 1.46 cfs and 0.79 cfs respectively. If it is assumed that 1.85 adjust- ment factor for the two drainages is appropriate, it can be concluded that NI SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 10 Mitchell Creek would at times be incapable of meeting current maximum day summer demands of 1.76 cfs and current winter day maximum demands of 0.93 cfs. However, there is an inconsistency in our estimated 1977 summer low flow of 1.46 cfs and the amount that diversion records show was diverted in the Reynolds and Cain Ditch during this time period. This basically means one of two things, that the conversion factor from Possum Creek to Mitchell Creek of 1.85 is incorrect, or it may mean that the Water Commissioner's readings during that time period are incorrect. Physical Supply Conclusions Based upon the above discussion and estimated current summer maximum day demand and winter maximum day demands of 1.76 cfs and 0.93 cfs respectively, we reach the following conclusions relative to the adequacy of the physical supply of water available in Mitchell Creek. 1. If Mitchell Creek were to be the sole source of water supply for the District, then the reliability in terms of meeting current summer and winter maximum day demands is questionable. This is evidenced by our Possum Creek/Mitchell Creek comparison which shows that in the summer of 1977 and the winter of 1978, Mitchell Creek would not have been able to supply the maximum day demands of the District for short per- iods of time. 2. If a surface water diversion from Mitchell Creek were not the sole S, SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. source of supply for the District and either alluvial wells or the ability to still obtain water from the City of Glenwood Springs on a short term basis was provided, Mitchell Creek would be an acceptable source in the terms of meeting physical supply requirements for cur- rent water demands. 3. A source would have to be provided in addition to Mitchell Creek in order to meet future maximum day demands of the District if the Dis- trict is going to continue to grow. 4. Raw water storage to augment summer and winter low flows would be very beneficial in increasing the reliability of Mitchell Creek for supply- ing present and future demands. Water Quality An in-depth evaluation of the water quality of Mitchell Creek and the degree of treatment required to meet State drinking water standards is beyond the scope of this report. However, Table 5 on the next page presents a very limited amount of water quality data for Mitchell Creek. Review of this data shows that the water quality of Mitchell Creek on the dates it was sampled is acceptable. The water is moderately hard but is in the range of most surface waters within the area. One important parameter which is not shown in the above data is the effect of spring runoff on water quality. This is a very important consideration in the design of any treatment facility and often controls the sizing of various treatment components. It is recommended SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'hemical TABLE 5 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS MIL CREEK (All numbers in ppm unless otherwise noted) Date Sampled - Day/Month/Year 9/27/73 1/24/74 3/20/74 4/17/74 4/23/74 5/3/74 Turbidity (JTU) Color (Co/pt Units) odor pH Total Solids )il and Grease Sodium :a1cigm Aagnes ium Chloride L.T. 1 L.T. 1 None 7.8 188 1.6 1.6 51 18.9 1.5 5.0 L.T. None 8.2 180 1.2 1.0 46 18.5 5.0 9.0 1 L.T. None 8.1 216 1.4 5.0 47 20 5.0 Sulfate 15.1 33 19.6 Sulfide Phenol Alkalinity 3s(CaCo3) 6.0 0.00 15 rotal Alkalinity 192 170 170 Total Hardness 205 200 205 L.T. 0.1 L.T. 0.1 L.T. k*ronon is Phosphate Nitrate kluminum Arsenic Potassium Barium Cadmium Cyanide Chromium Fluoride Iron Manganese Selenium Silica Copper Lead 0.7 0.18 1.18 L.T..001 0.5 0.25 5.7 0.03 L.T. .001 L.T. 1 ppb L.T. .001 L.T. 1 ppb L.T. .001 L.T. .005 L.T. .01 L.T. .005 L.T. .001 0.15 0.02 0.025 0.01 0.002 L.T. .001 L.T. .005 L.T. .001 8.5 7.0 0.004 L.T. .001 L.T. .001 L.T. 1 1 L.T. 1 None 7.9 186 0.2 1.0 42 10 5.0 10 0.1 0 5 185 185 L.T. 1 L.T. 1 L.T. 1 L.T. 1 None None 7.9 7.95 182 168 0.8 0.6 1.0 1.0 48 42 18 19 5.0 5.0 20 10.0 0 0 10 10 170 180 195 185 0.03 0.6 0.12 1.5 0.63 0.66 0.02 0.05 0.08 L.T. .001 L.T. .001 L.T. .001 0.35 0.8 0.7 L.T. 1 L.T. 1 L.T. 1 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 0.14 0.1 0.16 0.10 0.01 0.01 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 6.0 6.0 5.0 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 JTU = Jackson turbidity units Co/pt Units = standard color units L.T. = Less Than R.L. = Recommended Limit ppb = part per billion ppm = part per million *Source: "Glenwood Springs Master Plan for Water Supply Development and West Glenwood System Improvements" Eldorado Engineering Company June 14, 1974. 13 0.08 0.79 0.05 L.T. .001 .65 L.T 1 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 0.10 0.01 L.T. .005 L.T. .005 6.0 L.T. .005 that a thorough review of the water quality of Mitchell Creek during spring runoff and the length of this runoff be evaluated in detail prior to the design of any treatment facility for Mitchell Creek. Another water quality consideration which should be reviewed in detail is what effect, if any, the Colorado Division of Wildlife Mitchell Creek Fish Hatchery has upon water quality. Mr. Dick Collard, with the Colorado Division of Wild- life is in charge of the Mitchell Creek Hatchery. He reports that the facility is just a hatchery and that the maximum size fish kept there was approximately 2 to 2 1/2 inches. Water is not diverted from Mitchell Creek to the hatchery but comes from springs which run through the hatchery and then discharge to Mitchell Creek. The only use in Mitchell Creek itself is a raceway in which the Division keeps cutthroat trout. The Division will be constructing new facilities within the next 12 months according to Mr. Collard. It is proposed that water used in the first hatchery building will be run through the new facility before it is released to Mitchell Creek. The facility has no dis- charge permit from the Colorado Department of Health. From this preliminary review of the hatchery it is anticipated that no significant water quality de- gredation takes place as a result of the facility. Legal Supply Although an evaluation of Mitchell Creek water rights is beyond the scope of this report, the WGSWD must be aware that the ability of Mitchell Creek to physically supply the District's needs is of no value if adequate water rights SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. can not be obtained to allow the water to be legally diverted and used. The District has indicated that they may be able to purchase water rights from the Reynolds and Cain Ditch which diverts from Mitchell Creek. Some considerations which must be evaluated in detail prior to any purchase of water rights are presented below: 1. What are the diversion requirements? Current maximum day demands are 1.76 cfs. If the District were to construct a water treatment plant to meet this current demand, sufficient water rights to cover this diversion would have to be obtained. If sinner flows in Mitchell Creek are less than 5 cfs, which is the amount of water decreed to the Reynolds and Cain Ditch, then the District would have to purchase more than 1.76 cfs. For example, if Mitchell Creek were only flowing at 4.0 cfs and the District had to divert 1.76 cfs for its water treat- ment plant, the District would have to own 44% (1.76/4.0) of the Rey- nolds and Cain Ditch right or 2.2 cfs to legally make this diversion. 2. What is the historic consumptive use associated with the water riga and is the consumptive use greater than the consumptive use of the District? 3. Can the point of diversion for the water right be transferred to a new point of diversion for the District's water supply intake? SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 15 The City of Glenwood Springs had acquired a significant portion of the Reynolds and Cain Ditch right through water rights dedication when taps are purchased. In the 1977 report entitled "Glenwood Springs Master Plan for Water Supply Development", this amount was estimated to be 2.44 cfs. The WGSWD may want to negotiate with the City of Glenwood Springs as well as other parties for the purchase of Reynolds and Cain water rights.. The District must determine if it is economical to purchase sufficient Reynolds and Cain water rights to cover their full diversion requirements. If these rights are expensive it may be more practical to only put in a small water treatment plant and minimize the need for purchasing a large amount of the Reynolds and Cain right. In this case, alluvial wells could possibly be dril- led in lower Mitchell Creek for the remainder of the District's needs. Since these wells would not affect any of the senior water rights on Mitchell Creek, a legal supply would be easy to obtain by augmenting the Colorado River rights (possibly with less expensive Ruedi water). If the District decided to proceed in this manner, the critical factor is determining if successful alluvial wells can be drilled along Mitchell Creek. Si SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES General In recent years the Colorado Department of Health has expressed strong concern over the ability of water treatment plants to remove the parasite pathogen Giardia lamblia which is a flagellated protozoa. This protozoa has two forms of life. A free living form and an incapsulated or cyst form. Both forms can be excreted by animal hosts. The cyst form is more resistant and tends to be -the daminant.form outside of the host. In cold water these cysts can remain viable for upwards of two months. Humans are not the only hosts for Giardia. Other hosts include a variety of other mammals including dogs, cats, beavers and muskrats. Beavers are of particular concern as animal hosts because they have the potential to inhabit streams which are tributary to water supplies. Thus, the potential for Giardia exists in water supplies which have no upstream human activity. Several outbreaks of Giardiasis have been documented in the State of Colorado in the last couple of years. These outbreaks do not indicate an increase in the prevalence of Giardia in the state but instead, indicate that surveillance programs and detection methods now make is possible to determine that Giardia is in fact the source of the outbreaks. Giardia cysts are normally associated with surface water, but have been found in well samples that have been contaminated with sewage. Dr. Charles Hibier, of Colorado State University, has conducted extensive re- search on Giardia cysts and surface waters throughout the State of Colorado. His research indicates wide spread presence of Giardia in surface waters in the state. Although not every surface water has been sampled Athere is sufficient SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 17 information available to indicate that all surface water sources are a risk. Giardiasis has many symptoms, the most common of which is diarrhea. Other symptoms include weakness, weight loss, cramps, greasy stool, nausea, vomiting, belching and fever. Studies have indicated that patients can carry the parasite for up to five years in their intestine. In these cases constipation was common and was alternated with episodes of diarrhea. Thus, because of the evidence of the presence of Giardia in the majority of surface waters throughout the state and because of its somewhat severe symptoms the State Health Department is now requesting that additions, expansions or upgrading of existing water treatment facilities take a hard look at providing the most effective treatment possible, not only for the removal of turbidity and bacterial contamination, but also for the removal of Giardia cysts. Based upon current research, the following conclusions have been drawn relative to a treatment process's ability to remove Giardia cysts as well as turbidity and bacterial contamination: 1. Facilities which provide complete conventional treatment consisting of presedimentation, coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration by gravity granular multi -media filters or sand filters and chlorina- tion have been shown to be very effective in removing Giardia cysts. 2. Pressure filters which have been used extensively in the area in small packaged water treatment plants have been found to be ineffective SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. in the removal of Giardia cysts. It is felt that the high rates of filtration, which are customarily 2 to 4 times greater than that in gravity filters, may be the cause of the ineffectiveness in removing the cyst. 3. The research has shown that diatomacious earth filtration is a process that is very effective in removing Giardia cysts. 4. The Colorado Department of Health is encouraging the use of slow sand filters which have also proved to be very effective in removing bacteria viruses and Giardia cysts. Slow sand filtration is a process that simply filters water through 2 to 4 feet of sand at a rate 20 to 50 times slower than conventional sand or granular media filters. Thus, slow sand filters require 20 to 50 times more filter area than conventional sand or multi -media filters. Two factors affect the viability of utilizing slow sand filters for municipal water treatment today. One factor is land cost where land area is restricted and is very expensive. The much larger area required for slow sand filters. may add considerable capital costs to the construction of the facility. Also, the effect of cold weather performance has not been thoroughly evaluated, but it is believed that severe weather conditions may adversely effect filter performance unless the filters are covered. Because of the large area required for slow sand filters, it is probably not cost effective to cover and heat the filters for winter operation. SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 19 Description of Alternatives Conventional filtration and diatomacious earth filtration are the two treatment processes which appear to be the most viable for the treatment of water from Mitchell Creek to effectively remove turbidity, bacterial contamination and Giardia cysts. A description of these two alternatives is presented below: Conventional Filtration. Figure 2 presents a schematic flow diagram for a conventional filtration plant. This facility would consist of a diversion structure to divert water from Mitchell Creek to a preliminary settling basin. This preliminary settling basin would be sized to provide a minimum 24 hour de- tention period for the flows being diverted from Mitchell Creek. The main pur- pose of this basin would be to remove heavier suspended material which would be carried by the stream particularly during spring runoff. Since a detailed site evaluation of the treatment facility is beyond the scope of this report, we are assuming that water after passing through the preliminary settling basin will. flow to a wet well in the plant from which it will be pumped to a flocculator clarifier. Prior to entering the flocculator clarifier alum and polymer will be added and rapid mixed. The purpose of the alum and polymer will be to pro- vide coagulation in the flocculator clarifier. (Coagulation is simply the clumping together of fine colloidal particles to the extent that they will rapidly settle out). St SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 N I 1111II = MI I i i M N M — E o'z011g -' u=N6= I =mm rn air rINm 1100, {fl or 0 yo N 0-1 p 00 0 WVy JDVIO MO1d 011b'1613HOS T-1IdONV 7 01 S0110S >10fbi 1 r 1NV1t1N83d(1S 31.1-70810313K70d r NIS '8 JN1-7113S .l b'VNIWi73dd 1 co n 0, FLOCULATOR CLARIFIER D N011n 11 rn 0 z n Water which has then entered the flocculator clarifier will have coagulated the colloidal particles to a state where a floc has formed and they will settle out in this unit. Water leaving the flocculator clarifier will be greatly reduced in terms of turbidity and fine suspended solids and will be ready for filtra- tion. Water effluent frau the flocculator clarifier is then filtered through the gravity multi -media filters and is discharged to a clearwell. High service pumps will pump water from the clearwell through the distribution system to the District's existing storage facility. The clearwell is used to provide a volume of water for the backwashing of filters once they have started to clog, and chlorine contact prior to pumping. Backwash water frau the filter cleaning operation will discharge to the backwash ponds located adjacent to the plant. These ponds will also receive the settled material from the flocculator clarifier. Facilities would be provided to pump any supernatant or overflow water frau the backwash ponds back through the preliminary settling basin in order to avoid having to discharge any of this water back to Mitchell Creek. This conventional filtration plant is the standard approach to water treatment which has been utilized for many years and is a very effective process for the removal of turbidity, bacterial contamination and Giardia. Diatomaceous Earth. Diatomaceous Earth filters were developed in the Sit SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 21 1940's as a means of removing amoebic cysts (the cyst that is associated with causing amoebic dysentery). Because amoebic cysts, are in the same size range as Giardia cysts diatomaceous earth filtration has been found to be effective in the removal of Giardia cysts. Diatomaceous earth (DE) is basically a fine whiteish powder that is available in a wide range of gradations. D.E. in the range of 10 to 25 microns is the most typical media used in water treatment practice. This media is substantially smaller than the media in sand filters and unlike the conventional flocculation/filtration process, straining is the primary mechanism for particle removal in diatomaceous earth filters. The filtration - process works by containing the filter in a pressure vessel and inducing flow through the filter as a result of the pressure on the -inlet. Operation of a diatomaceous earth filter consists of three phases: 1. Precoat. Prior to beginning a filter run the septum is coated with a layer of diatomaceous earth to form the, filter media. Research has indicated that the quantity of precoat has a significant impact on the effectiveness of particle removal. Preapplication rates up to two pounds per square foot are recamiended. 2. Filtration. During filtration water is passed through the layer of diatomaceous earth which is held in place by the resulting force of the water against the septum. As the filter run continues it is advantageous to continue feeding diatomaceous earth through the SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 addition of a (body feed) as this prevents accumulation of filter material at the surface of the precoat layer. The dosage of this body feed depends on the quantity of solids present in the raw water and dosages are normally set using a body feed to turbidity ratio. 3. Backwash. At the completion of a filter run the diatdnaceous earth is removed from the septum by a number of different processes depending on which type of D.E. equipment is utilized. The used diatomaceous earth is then wasted with the backwash water. The backwash is requir- ed to adequately clean the septum as is the case with the granular media filtration system. Figure 3 presents the schematic flow diagram for a diatomaceous earth plant treating surface water from Mitchell Creek. Figure 4 presents one manufacturer's layout for the specific diatomaceous earth filtration equipment. Capital Costs Capital costs for a conventional filtration plant, A DE plant and a used plant frau the City of Rifle are presented below. Capital costs of obtaining the used DE plant frau the Town of Eagle could not be obtained because the Town of Eagle is now without a Town Manager and the Tbwn Public Wbrks Director failed to return any of our phone calls. A very important item which must be noted with regard to capital costs is that the cost of purchasing the necessary water rights for diversions and use of water from Mitchell Creek have not been inclu- ded in this anlaysis. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 23 u� 11111 111111 MI U 111 111111 2 38nOld z 11111 11111 I M N cn mm mm ?1 O Dzi C � mm I13MJV31J NOISSIW SNV8.1 1-1 Conventional Filtration Plant. Table 6 below presents our estimated capital costs for a 1 mgd conventional filtration plant: TABLE 6 ESTIMTED CAPi'iOL COSTS 1 mgd OaNVENNONAL FILTRATION PLANT 1. Basic Equipment (1) $ 165,000 2. Building, Complete with Lights & Heating 45,,000 13. Clearwell, 41,000 gallons 25,Or►u 14. Diversion with Pretreatment Preliminary Settling Basin 27,250 15. Backwash pond 8,000 16. Raw Water Pumps 20,000 17. High Service Pumps 25,000 18. Chlorination Equipment 10,000 19. Plant Piping 25,000 10. Raw Water Piping 10,000 11. Finished Water Piping 10,000 12. Land 30,000 3. Site Improvements15,300 4. Electrical 25,000 5. N/M Installation 25,000 Subtotal $ 465,550 Plus 25% 116,400 Total 581,950 (1) Purchase of 1 mgd Neptune Microfloc package Trident Plant is assumed. The use of these numbers shall not be construed as an endorsement for the purchase of this equipment. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. N, 24 The following is a list of the design criteria and assumptions which were utilized in developing the costs shown above in Table 6: 1. Basic Neptune Microfloc Equipment. Because it is more economical in the 1 mgd water treatment plant size range to provide a packaged treatment plant as opposed to building each of the treatment plant components from scratch, Item 1 in Table 6 is the cost of purchasing a package Neptune Microfloc Model TR -210 Trident Water Plant. This is a 700 gpm or 1 mgd treatment facility and includes two tanks each with an absorption clarifier and mixed media filters. Polymer and alum feed equipment, air scour equipment, control valves. A backwash pimp and a control panel for automatic operation of the facility are included as a part of the package. A third module could be added to the plant at a future date to expand the facility to a capacity of 1.5 mgd. Figure 5 presents Neptune Microfloc's pictorial presentation of a Trident Plant. 2. Building. This item reflects the cost of an 1800 square foot metal building which would be erected using slab on grade construction with the exception of a clear well which will be discussed later. The building is sized to house the initial two Neptune Microfloc treatment units plus allow the installation of a third unit at a later date. This would increase the plant capacity to 1.5 mgd. Heat and lights are included in this cost estimate. A unit cost of $25.00 per foot is assumed for construction of the building. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 25 I 0 CO N 2 0 PICTORIAL VI° )=4 CC K-LU 0 A wmEILAERATOA-FAr[ 25A 1 1 1 11 1 1 O 3. CleatWell. A clearwell is necessary in a water treatment plant to provide storage for backwash water and for chlorine contact time before treated water is released into the distribution system. For a .1 mgd treatment plant, we are estimating that approximately 41,000 gallons of clearwell volume would be required of which 21,000 gallons would be for contact time and 20,000 gallons for backwash volume. It is assumed that the clearwell would be located in concrete tankage below the floor of the building. 4. Diversion and Preliminary Settling Basin. Diversion facilities will consist of a concrete diversion structure in Mitchell Creek, the ap- propriate screen and headgate which will discharge by pipeline to the - preliminary settling basin. The Colorado Division of Health Regula- tions require that preliminary settling ponds provide a minimum of one day detention time at peak flows which in this alternative would be 1 million gallons of volume. With a pond having a depth of 7.5 feet, sideslopes at 1:1 and 2 1/2 feet of freeboard, the outside dimensions of this preliminary settling basin would be approximately 140 feet by 220 feet. This would require approximately 0.7 acre of land. 5. Backwash Porxi. The frequency of backwash during spring runoff will be the major factor which will dictate the size of the backwash pond that will be required. For this evaluation we have assumed that a pond of approximately 20,000 cubic feet providing around 150,000 gal- lons of storage will adequate. The outside dimensions of this pond SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.SA 26 will be approximately 90 'by 100'. 6. Raw Water Pumps. The Neptune Microfloc Trident system requires that that the influent supply provide 20 feet of head to overcame static head requirements. To allow for friction loss in the influent piping, and to establish a conservative design criteria we have assumed that the raw water pumps must be capable of supplying 700 gpm at 40 feet of head. Assuming an 80% motor efficiency, a total of 10 hp would have to be provided in vertical turbine pumps installed in the raw water wet well at the head of the plant. (any two pumps capable of supplying It is assumed that three pumps the provided to assure reliable operation. could provide for gravity flow into the maximum day demand) would be Final design of the facility Trident system if the diver- sion and preliminary sedemintation basin are installed at a high enough elevation to gravity feed the plant. 7. High Service Pumps. For the purpose of this estimate, it is assumed that the water treatment facility is located on lower Mitchell Creek and it is necessary to pump treated water from the clear well up to the District's water storage tank. Design criteria are 700 gpm at 365 feet of head. With 80% efficient motors, this would require 80 hp vertical turbine pumps. Again, for reliability of supply two pumps would be installed. Final design of the facility could provide for gravity flow into the system if it were feasible to locate the plant at a high enough elevation on Mitchell Creek. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 27 8. Chlorination Equipment. This item covers the cost of the instal- lation of a separate chlorine room meeting all of the reauirements of the Colorado Department of Health. Included are two 150 pound chlor- ine cylinders, automatic switch over system, emergency repair kit, gas mask and tank, chlorine piping and chlorine diffuser. 9. Plant Piping. Basic Neptune MicroFloc equipment does not include associated plant piping. Thus, the cost for this item in the above table reflects influent piping, backwash piping, piping to the clear well, air and surface wash piping and chemical feed piping. 10. Raw Water Piping, Outside Plant. It is assumed that 500 L.F. of 8" raw water piping would be required. 11. Finish Raw Water Piping, Outside Plant. It was assumed that 500 L.F. of 8" pipeline would be required to connect the high service pumps to the existing distribution system. 12. Land Requirements. It is assured that the treatment plant would require approximately one half of an acre which would include the backwash ponds and the treatment plant building. An additional 0.7 acre would be required for the installation of the preliminary set- tling basin. Assumed land costs are S25,000 per acre. SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13. Site Improvements. This item reflects the cost of fencing the water treatment plant and providing an estimated 500 L.F. of graveled access road into the treatment plant. 14. Electrical Service. This item includes the cost of providing 500 feet of primary underground electrical service line, and a 600 coop 225 KVA transformer. Additional items included are the cost of wiring the pumps, connecting the control panel provided by Neptune Microfloc, and the cost of tying the existing tank controls to the new facility. 15. Neptune Microfloc Installation. Neptune Microfloc supplies a con- siderable amount of equipment which basically comes unassembled and must be assembled at the job site by the contractor. The 25% contingency added to the subtotal is intended to cover engineering - design, contract administration, inspection, surveying, legal fees and a small contingency for miscellaneous items which were not detailed in the above cost estimate. Diatomaceous Earth Filtration Plant. Shown in Table 7 on the following page are the estimated capital costs for a diatomaceous earth filtration plant. St SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 7 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS 1 mgd DE Plant 1. DE Equipment $ 185,000 2. DE Controls 30,000 3. Building, Complete with Lights & Heating 40,000 4. Clearwell, 25,000 gallons 20,000 5. Diversion Structure or Infiltration Gallery 27,250 6. Backwash Pond 2,000 7. Raw Water Pumps 20,000 8. Finished Water Pumps 25,000 9. Chlorination Equipment 10,000 10. Plant Piping 10,000 11. Raw Water Piping, Outside Plant 10,000 12. Finished Water Piping 10,000 13. Land 16,700 14. Site Improvements, Access Fuad and Fencing 13,500 15. Electrical Service and Wiring for Pumps and Plant Equipment 20,000 16. Equipment Installation 5,000 Sub Total $ 444,450 Plus 25% 110,100 Total $ 555,550 J SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 Listed below are the design criteria and design assumptions that were made in comparing the estimates shown in Table 7 above: 1. DE Equipment. Information supplied by Johns Manville Corporation who are suppliers of diatomaceous earth and also 'information from various diatomaceous earth filter manufacturers indicate that diatoma- ceous earth filtration plants can supply water at mately 1 gpm per square foot of filter leaf area. sumed that a 1 mgd plant must have 700 square feet of filter leaf area. Our estimate assumes -that two 350 square foot filters would be installed to provide operational flexibility.- The basic layout and equipmentfurnished was shown previously in Figure 4, a rate of approxi- Thus, pproxi Thus, we have as - 2. DE t)ontrols.___.This_item_includes_ the purchase and installation of the control panel and automatic valves for complete automated opera- tion peration of the diatomaceous earth plant. 3. Building, Complete with Lights and Beating. This item includes the construction of a 1500 square foot prefabricated metal building which would allow for the installation of the two 350 gpm filters plus. provide for the installation of a future 350 gpm filter in the event that the plant should be expanded to a capacity of 1.5 mgd. A significant amount of space would have to be put aside in the building for the storage of diatomaceous earth. Our estimate assumes that 500 square feet of storage would be provided for this purpose within the building. Heating and lights are also included in this cost estimate. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.NI 31 4. Clearwell. The clearwell will provide 30 minutes of chlorine con- tact time at a flow of 700 qpm for a total chlorine contact volume of 21,000 gallons. 1,050 gallons are required for backwash of the diatomaceous earth filters. Thus, we have proposed a total clearwell clearwell treatment volume under this alternative of 25,000 gallons. Again, the would be concrete structure located beneath the floor of the plant building. 5. Diversion Structure. This item includes the construction of a con- crete diversion structure screen and headgate on Mitchell Creek which will divert water to oval sand roughing filters installed adjacent to Mitchell Creek. These roughing filters would basically consist of 2 feet of sand over 12 inches of clean rock with 4 inch perforated pipe to collect the water beneath the sand. These small basins would be approximately 10 by 20 feet in diameter. They are being proposed with the diatomaceous earth plant, as an alternative to a preliminary settling basin. The purpose of these roughing filters will be to provide some treatment in addition to that which is normally received in a preliminary settling basin because the DE plant does not include chemical addition, coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation. Thus, some form of treatment is required to get the raw water down to a treatable turbidity range during spring runoff. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 6. Backwash Ponds. Diatomaceous earth plants generate a very small amount of backwash water, containing the spent diatomaceous earth, in comparison to the volume generated by conventional filtration plants. It is assumed that two 20 by 40 ponds approximately 3 foot deep would be designed as infiltration or percolation ponds for disposal of backwash water. The ponds would be set up so that no discharge back to Mitchell Creek would be allowed. 7. Raw Water Pins. Raw water pumping requirements would be 700 gpn at 140 -feet -of ZDH.4 This 140 feet of head is -necessary because diatoma- ceous--earth -filters - are .pressure :: filters. -It is assured _that_ the pressure filters would be operated at 50 psi. An additional 25 feet of head is included for friction loss. 700 gpm at 140 feet of TDH would require a total of 30 hp in pump motors. 8. Finished Water Pumps. The assumptions are the same as for the pre- vious alternative. 9. Chlorination Equipment. The assumptions are the same as for the previous alternative. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 10. Plant Piping. This item includes raw water piping to the dual fil- ters, finished water piping to the clearwell and backwash piping. 11. Raw Water Piping, Outside Plant. It is assumed that 500 L.F. of 8" raw water transmission line would have to be installed which is the same as for the previous alternative. 12. Finished Water Piping, Outside Plant. The assumptions are the same as for the previous alternative, i.e. 500 L.F. of 8" transmission lines would be required to connect the plant to the existing distri- bution system. 13. Lana Requirements. It is assumed that the water treatment -plant -and roughing filters would require approximately 0.67 acres. Estimated land costs are $25,000 per acre. 14. Site Improvements. This item includes fencing the water treatment plant site, and providing 500 L.F. of access road into the treatment plant. 15. Electrical Service. This item is the same as Electrical Service un- der the previously discussed alternative, i.e. 500 L.F. of primary underground with a 600 amp 225 KVA transformer. It also includes the service drop, wiring of the control panel and the pumps within the treatment facility. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.NI 34 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16. Equipment Tristal7aticn. This item is the estimated cost for the in- stallation of the diatomaceous earth equipment. A 25% contingency has been added to the subtotal in the above table to allow for engineering, construction management, surveying, legal expenses and a small contingency for miscellaneous items not included in the cost estimate. Used Plant. The City of Rifle, Colorado has a 2 mgd water treatment plant for sale. The plant consists of four pressure sand filters, with associated piping and chemical feed equipment. Schmueser & Associates has in the past looked at the purchase of this equipment for a new treatment facility for ano- ther entity. The plant has a rated capacity of 2 mgd and was utilized to treat water diverted from the Colorado River. The plant was abandoned in 1981 when the City of Rifle built the new Graham Mesa Water Treatment Plant. Table 8 shown on the next page is the estimated cost of purchasing the old Rifle plant and utilizing the salvagable equipment for the construction of a treatment facility for the West Glenwood Springs Water District. Listed below are the design criteria and assumptions that were utilized in de- veloping the cost estimate shown on the next page on Table 8: 1. Basic Rifle Equipment. This item includes the cost of purchasing the Rifle plant, removing the roof frau the existing building, disas- sembling the plant piping, removal of the filters and raw water pumps, and replacing of the existing . roof and repair of the SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 35 TABLE 8 E ST I1ATED COST OF UTILIZING CITY OF RIFLE PRESSURE SAND FILTERS 1. Basic Equipment $ 130,000 2. Additional Equipment a. Contact Tank b. Chemical Feed Equipment and Piping c. Trucking and Crane 3. Building 4. Clearwell 5. Diversion 6. BW Fond 7. Pumps, Raw and Finished 8. Chlorine Equipment 9. Plant Piping 10. Yard Piping, Raw and Finished 11. Land 12. Site Improvements 13. Electrical Service 50,000 8,000 10,000 45,000 25,000 27,250 8,000 50,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 25,000 15,300 35,000 Sub Total 448,550 Plus 25% 112,150 Total $ 560,770 SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 35A building as would be required by the City of Rifle. Pressure filters normally operate at a rate of 8 gpm per square foot of filter area. This normal design rate would only require two of the pressure sand filters to be utilized for a 1 mgd capacity. However, since recent research has shown that pressure filters at this high rate are not hi- ghly effective in removing Giardia, we have assumed that a design rate of 4 gallons per square foot per minute would effectively remove Giardia and that all four filters would be required for a 1 mgd plant. 2. Additional Equipment. Raw water could not be effectively treated by the pressure filters alone. It is assumed that a coagulation/ floc- culation/sedimentation process would have to be included. Thus, we have included the cost of a contact tank and chemical feed equipment. 3. Building. This assumes a 2,000 square foot building including heat- ing and lighting at a cost of $25.00 per square foot. 4. Clearwell. The assumptions here are the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. 5. Diversion The assumptions here are the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 36 6. Backwash Ponds. The assumptions here are the same as for the Nep- tune Microfloc alternative. 7. Raw and Finished Water Pumping Systems. The assumptions here are the same as those utilized for the diatomaceous earth alternative. 8. Chlorination Equipment. The assumptions here are the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. 9. Plant Piping Installation. Minimal new piping would have to be pur- chased since the existing piping at the Rifle plant would be reinstal- led in the same configuration. This item basically just includes the labor for installation of plant piping 10. Yard Piping, Raw and Finished. The assumptions here are basically the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. 11. Land Requirements. The assumptions here are the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. 12. Site Improvements. The assumptions here are the same as for the Neptune Microfloc alternative. 13. Electrical Service and Control Panel for the Plant. The assumptions here are basically the same as those for the Neptune Microfloc SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 37 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 alternative with the exception that the purchase and installation of a new control panel for the plant is included. Again, a 25% contingency has been added to the subtotal shown in Table 8. Operaticn and Maintenance Costs Shown below in Table 9 are the estimated operation and maintenance costs for the Neptune Microfloc Trident Plant. TABLE 9 ESTIi-1AT D OPERATION AND HAINTMANCE COST OF NEPTUNE MICROFLOC % TER TREATMENT PLANT 1. Chemical Costs 2. Raw Water Pumping 3. Finished Water Pumping 4. Plant Power 5. Building Electric 6. Demand Charge 7. Miscellaneous Plant Maintenance Materials 8. Plant Operator $ 5,000 1 ,750 13,000 1,000 8,400 13,200 2,500 15,000 Total $ 60,000 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 38 Listed below are the assumptions utilized in preparing the above estimates: 1. Chemical Costs. It is assumed that both alum and polymer will be utilized for effective coagulation and flocculation. 20 mg per liter and 0.2 mg per liter of alum and polymer respectively. will be applied. Alum is assumed to cost $0.14 per pound and polymer $3.86 per pound. It is estimated that with current flows, approximately 23,000 pounds per year of alum will be utilized at a cost of $3,350. Approximately 231 pounds of polymer will be utilized per year at a cost of $900.00. It is assumed that chlorine will be applied at 2 mg per liter at a cost of $0.33 per pound or $750 per year. - 2. Raw Water Pumping. At current demands raw water pumping will con- sume approximately 26,000 kWh per year. At a cost of $0.067 per kWh the annual power costs for raw water pumping will be $1,750. 3. Finished Water Pumping. It is estimated that finished water pumping will require approximately 200,000 kWh per year. At current water us- age, the annual cost will be $13,500 assuming 6.74 per kWh. 4. Plant Power. It is estimated that $1,000 per year will be required for miscellaneous power for operation of the plant including the surface wash pump, the air blower for backwashing and for the compressor for automatically controlled valve operation. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 39 Listed below are the assumptions utilized in preparing the above estimates: 1. Chemical Costs. It is assumed that both alum and polymer will be utilized for effective coagulation and flocculation. 20 mg per liter and 0.2 mg per liter of alum and polymer respectively will be applied. Alum is assumed to cost $0.14 per pound and polymer $3.86 per pound. It is estimated that with current flows, approximately 23,000 pounds per year of alum will be utilized at a cost of $3,350. Approximately 231 pounds of polymer will be utilized per year at a cost of $900.00. It is assumed that chlorine will be applied at 2 mg per liter at a cost of $0.33 per pound or $750 per year. 2. Raw Water Pumping. At current demands raw water pumping will con- sume approximately 26,000 kWh per year. At a cost of $0.67 per kWh the annual power costs for raw water pumping will be $1,750. 3. Finished Water Pumping. It is estimated that finished water pumping will require approximately 200,000 kWh per year. At current water us- age, the annual cost will be $13,500 assuming 6.74 per kWh. 4. Plant Power. It is estimated that $1,000 per year will be required for miscellaneous power for operation of the plant including the surface wash pump, the air blower for backwashing and for the compressor for automatically controlled valve operation. St SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 39 I it 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5. Building Electric. It is assumed that an average of $700 per month will be required for heat and lighting and miscellaneous power within the building. 6. Demand Charge. The Glenwood Springs Electric System is currently charging $12.40 per kw in terms of a demand charge. Based upon the proposed motors in the Neptune Microfloc Plant, we estimate that there will be a maximum demand of approximately 89.5 kw each month. At S12.40 per kw, the demand charge would be $1,100 per month or $13,200 per year. -7. Miscellaneous Plant Maintenance Materials. This item is the estima- ted cost for miscellaneous materials which will be required for pump repair, valve repair, etc. 8. Plant Operator. We have included $15,000 for this item, assuming that a half time operator would be sufficient for maintaining the plant and performing miscellaneous maintenance duties on the distribution system. The $15,000 provides for four hours per day of operator salary at $10.00 per hour plus unemployment insurance, FICA, and Workman's Compensation insurance. Shown in Table 10 on the following page are the estimated O&M costs of a DE filter plant. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 40 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 10 ESTIMATED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CC TS OF DE V7ATER TREATAERT PLANT Item Estimated Cost 1. DE Cost $ 18,000 2. Raw Water Pumping 5,100 3. Finished Water Pumping 13,500 4. Building Electric 8,400 5. Demand Charge 13,200 6. Miscellaneous Plant Maintenance Materials 2,500 7. Plant Operator 15,000 8. Chlorine Cost 750 $ 76,450 Listed below are the assumptions utilized in preparing the above estimated operation and maintenance costs for a diatomaceous earth filtration plant: 1. DE Costs. There are two uses of diatomaceous earth in a DE filter plant. The first and most important in terms of the volume of DE used is for body feed. Research has shown that the optimum use of diatomaceous earth for body feed is to provide 3 mg/1 of DE SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 41 for every mg/1 of suspended solids. Table 11 below shows the amount and cost of DE at an assumed cost of 204 per pound based upon an esti- mated average concentration of suspended solids and estimated average flows for each month. TABLE 11 ESTIMATED DE REQUERETERTS AND COST rot BODY FEED Est. Est. Avg. SS Avg. Q Lbs.DE Cost for Month mq/1 mgd for month @ 3:1 Month January 10 .25 1,875 $ 375 Febuary 10 .25 1,875 375 March 10 .25 1,875 375 April 15 .25 2,815 563 May 50 .40 15,000 3,000 June 50 .50 22,500 4,500 July 15 .70 7,900 1,580 August 15 .75 8,450 1,690 September 10 .60 4,500 900 October 10 .30 2,250 450 November 10 .25 1,875 375 December 10 .25 1,875 375 Total 72,790/yr $14,558/yr SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 42 The second use of diatomaceous earth is for precoating the filter af- ter it is backwashed. For precoating operations it is assumed that 20 pounds of DE for each 100 square foot of filter would be utilized and that 120 precoats per year would be required, utilizing a total of ap- proximately 17,000 pounds per year. At a cost of 20 per pound, the annual cost for precoating is $3,360. 2. Raw Water Peeping. It is estimated that approximately 76,000 kWh per year would be required at current water usage for raw water pump- ing. At 6.7(P per kWh, the annual cost for raw water pumping would be $5,100. 3. Finished Water Pumping. The cost for finished water pumping for a DE plant is the same as that for a Neptune Microfloc Plant, i.e. 200,000 kWh per year at an annual cost of $13,500, assuming a kWh cost of $.067. 4. Building Electric. It is assumed that $700 per month would be required for lighting and heating of the treatment plant and miscel- laneous other power requirements. 5. Demand Charge. Demand charge for a DE plant is basically the same as that for a Neptune Microfloc Plant, i.e. a demand of 89.5 kWh at $12.40 per kWh or approximately $1,100 per month. SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 43 2. The second use of diatomaceous earth is for precoating the filter af- ter it is backwashed. For precoating operations it is assumed that 20 pounds of DE for each 100 square foot of filter would be utilized and that 120 precoats per year would be required, utilizing a total of ap- proximately 17,000 pounds per year. At a cost of 204 per pound, the annual cost for precoating is $3,360. Raw Water Ping. It is estimated that approximately 76,000 kWh per year would be required at current water usage for raw water pump- ing. At 6.7 per kWh, the annual cost for raw water pumping would be $5,100. 3. Finished Water Pupping. The cost for finished water pumping for a DE plant is the same as that for a Neptune Microfloc Plant, i.e. 200,000 kWh per year at an annual cost of $13,500, assuming a kwh cost of $0.67. 4. Building Electric. It is assumed that $200 per month would be required for lighting and heating of the treatment plant and miscel- laneous other power requirements. 5. Demand Charge. Demand charge for a DE plant is basically the same as that for a Neptune Microfloc Plant, i.e. a demand of 89.5 kWh at $12.40 per kWh or approximately $1,100 per month. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 43 1 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 1111 I SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 44 6. Miscellaneous Plant Maintenance Materials. The same assumptions that were used in Item 7 in Table 9 are used here. 7. Plant Operator. A half time operator would be sufficient for plant operation. 8. Chlorine. At an application rate of 2 mg/1 it is estimated that approximately 2,300 pounds per year of chlorine would be utilized. At a cost of $0.33 per pound, the annual cost for chlorine would be ap- proximately $750. 11 1 1 1 1 I 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 1 11 1 1 f 1 1 1 F RANCIAL General •o•S RIS As can be seen from the construction cost estimates in the previous section, a large investment will be required in order for the WGSWD to construct a new water treatment facility. The ratio of dollars of investment to dollars of revenue produced is usually great for any water utility in comparison to the ratio of most other types of business enterprises including electric and gas utilities. As a result of this, obtaining monies to finance the initial pur- chase or construction of a water plant as well as to finance extensions, im- provements and replacements is an important part of management planning and controlling activities. There are a number of alternate financing sources available to the WGSWD. It is the responsibility of the District to employ a combination of funds from various financing sources which, over the long run amortizes the cost of money to the utility. There are constraints either of a legal or economic nature which limit the use of each financing source. Merely attempting to minimize the effective interest rate at all cost is not always the wisest decision in the long run. Obtaining minimum effective interest rates may not be desirable if it requires that the District place severe restrictions on the ability of the utility to issue additional debt, to refinance, or to respond to changing SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 45 1 `1 -111 1 11 11 11 11 u 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 market conditions in the future. The purpose of this section will be to: 1. Estimate current operating revenues. 2. Prepare a statement of earnings which would show operating revenues and operating expenses under the scenario that a new 1 mgd water treatment plant has been installed. This statement of earnings will show a net income or loss from this operation. 3. Estimate the amount of working` capital under the above scenario =that - would be available for the reduction of future long term debt. 4. Qanpare the amount of capital available for reduction of future long term debt with the cost of financing a new a 1.0 mgd water treatment plant to determine if the construction of a plant is feasible. 5. Prepare an estimated statement of earnings assuming that water will continue to be purchased from the City of Glenwood Springs and deter- mine what effect this purchase would have on District's working capital if the District were to take over the operation of the water system. This discussion will be presented to show what the financial implications of contracting for City water will be. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 46 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w 1111 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Operating Revenues The first step in determining whether the WGSWD has the ability to finance a new 1 mgd water treatment plant is to determine what operating revenues may be available. Presented on the next page is Table 12, which shows the estimated 1983 operating revenues for the West Glenwood Springs Water District. Table 12 shows the total monies that were collected by the City of Glenwood Springs from flat rate services and metered services. These values represent the funds that would be available to the District in 1983 from charges for ser- vice if the current rate structure were to be maintained and the District col- lected 100% of the revenue. The 15% surcharge added on by the District and property taxes are also included as a part of the estimated operating revenue. The table is derived from the summary of payment forms submitted by the City of Glenwood Springs to the West Glenwood Water District for the period of February thru November. No summary of payment forms were available for January or December. Thus, these two months had to be estimated. Property tax revenues were obtained from the December 31, 1983 unaudited financial statement of the District. Ability to Finance Future Icng Tenn Debt To evaluate the ability of the WGSWD to finance future long term debt for the construction of a new water treatment plant we have prepared Tables 13 and 14 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 47 1 1 1 (t 4J O VD N to LI) in O Cr) lD cr N N O cr N r O N O Cr) r N 01 01 O CO N N N 01 O 01 N CO Cr) Cr) O O N 0\ r cr LO N 01 d CO CO Cr) O .- to O 01 = CO O LIl r N r- to l0 N l0 r CO O r l0 l0 N 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 o O O c O o 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N - Cr) N 01 Cr) l0 r- d' 01 01 • • 1 • . I- N M r - r Cr) 01 Cr) O 'Cr r co r l0 O • • 1 1 O O M lo N T- CO ( \I r O N CO CO tf) r cr d cr N cr cr Cr) M r- N O CO CO N N r Cr) N N CO Cr r- N N O CO N N N 01 'c O d V d cr • • r 1/40 o O 01 ▪ cr r 01 co • to to 1/40 'Cr N lD 4.0 l0 O O M to to M (Y) if) tf7 to VD O r lD to to r 4•1' N 01 cr O to N l0 O Co CO r O l0 "G' N VD l0 Cr) m M Lc") co co 01 lC N O N l0 C• r) C▪ r) - O l0 M 01 m cr 01 to O O d M d r- r Or M r N r . . . . ► . . . N N cr Cr) Cr) ` I' to 'Cr d' Cr) ▪ Cr) V' N N r O 01 O O N O CO O O N Q1 l0 r N N to 'Cr 'Cr Cr) 0) N r O C▪ r) CO CO l0 r r O O O O O 01 01 01 01 O O r O' "7' LII d v v' Or v v CA- O O O d N N to r r cr r r O in d' r- 'Q M 01 m M N O O O M ▪ N 01 cr to to 01 01 O CO CO CD tf) r r r N LI) co co r r I-- .- M co Q\ O 01 01 Q\ 01 01 co co . . . . . . . . . 1/40 .- on 01 O 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 t- r r rl Si'El n:- S' -P i i %r4 to 48 $205,868.73 �p • 4-) 4-4 as C7 O 4 4J -4 a) U U) M co 6 IBJ cNi M lD N O r 4.4 Vi W O- O UU C N (8 0- m M co 4-1 Q1 O r) O M co l0 rn (n - cc II 3.7 LIl 3.7 • 0 U v Q \ r G • �>1 VD • -inv • KC U •zr (Li . • U) Sr O • ao Unaudited Financial Statement 4-I 41 4-1 t7j O co M CV 4-4 on the following pages. Table 13 shows the estimated statement of earnings for the following scenario: 1. The WGSWD has constructed and has on line a new 1 mgd water treatment plant. 2. The District has complete control and responsibility for the mainte- nance and repair of the distribution system. 3. The District will charge for service at the current rate of structure with the 15% surcharge and collect 100% of the operating revenues as estimated in 1983. Tap fees will be the same as for 1983. Depreci- ation of the new plant is ignored. The bottom line from Table 13 is the District would have a net income of approximately $50,000. Table 14 estimates the capital available for the reduction of future long term debt. This table is basically an analysis of working capital. The table shows that in addition to the working capital provided from net income which is approximately $50,000, the District would have working capital from depre- ciation and amortization which are actually operating expenses not requiring an outlay of working capital. In addition, 1983 tap fees of $17,290 were in- cluded in working capital. Thus, the total estimated working capital would be $87,685. Of this amount $20,000 goes for the reduction of current long term debt and we have assumed that $3,000 would be required for miscellaneous improvements to District facilities. The bottom line from Table 14 is that the net working capital available for reduction of future long term NA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. TABLE 13 FSTIi•!ATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS NEW 1 mgd PLANT Operating Revenues Charges for Service Property Taxes - Net(1) $ 191,400.00 14,400.00 Total Operating Revenues 205,800.00 Operating Expenses Water plant O&M Distribution System Repair & Maintenance Amortization Expense Accounting & Legal Directors' Fees - Depreciation (2) Insurance Office Expense Meeting Room Rent Telephone Engineering Fees Total Operating Expenses Operating Income (Loss) Nonoperating Revenue Expenses Interest Income Interest Expense Net Income(Loss) 60,000.00 10,000.00 933.00 21,600.00 2,205.00 19,671.00 1,500.00 1,200.00 500.00 700.00 4,800.00 $ 123,109.00 82,691.00 11,200.00 (44,100.00) 49,791.00 (1) The Garfield County Assessors Office Reports that 1983 taxes will increase to $19,425. (2) Depreciation of new plant ignored. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 50 TABLE 13 ESTIMATED STATEMENT CF EARNINGS GS NEW 1 mgd PLANT Operating Revenues Charges for Service Property Taxes - Net(1) 'S 191 ,400.00 14,400.00 Total Operating Revenues 205,800.00 Operating Expenses Water plant O&M Distribution System Repair & Maintenance Amortization Expense Accounting & Legal Directors' Fees Depreciation (2) Insurance Office Expense Meeting Room Rent Telephone Engineering Fees Total Operating Expenses Operating Income (Loss) Nonoperating Revenue Expenses Interest Income Interest Expense Net Income/Loss (CR) 60,000.00 10,000.00 933.00 21,600.00 2,205.00 19,671.00 1,500.00 1,200.00 500.00 700.00 4,800.00 $ 123,109.00 82,691.00 11,200.00 (44,100.00) 49,791.00 (1) The Garfield County Assessors Office Reports that 1983 taxes will increase to $19,425. (2) Depreciation of new plant ignored. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 50 TABLE 14 ESTIlN OF CAPITAL AVAILABLE FOR REDUCTION OF FUTURE ICNG TEMI4 DEBT FOR NEW 1 n d PLAINT Working Capital Provided From: (1) Net Income (Loss) $ 49,791.00 (2) Add Expenses Not Required Outlay of Working Capital (a) Depreciation 19,671.00 (b) Amortization 933.00 Working :_Capital ° Provided - From> (a) Operations- (b) Tap Fees 70,395.00- 17,290.00 Total Working Capital Provided 87,685.00 Working Capital Used For: (a) Reduction of Current Long Term Debt (b) Miscellaneous Improvements 20,000.00 3,000.00 Total Use of Working Capital 23,000.00 Net Working Capital Available for New Long Term Dept for 1 mgd Plant $ 64,685.00 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.NA 51 debt would be approximately $64,685. In order to determine how far this net working capital available for the re- duction of new long term debt would go towards financing the construction of a new treatment plant, Kirschner Moore and Company, underwriters of tax exempt municipal bonds, were contacted and asked to prepare debt service schedules for revenue bonds for both a $500,000 and $600,000 bond issue. Table 15 and 16 on the following pages present these debt service schedules. Approximately $70,000 per year would be required to service the debt from a $500,000 bond issue _ and approximately _ $85,000 , per year would _ be required_to service a debt frau a $600,000 bond issue. Since the capital costs of -con- struction for a 1 mgd filtration plant were estimated, to be approximately $582,000, it is most appropriate to review the ability to finance the new plant by comparing the estimated net working capital available for financing new long term debt with the cost of servicing a $600,000 bond issue. This comparison shows that the estimated $64,685 available for financing new long term debt would not be sufficient to cover the $85,000 per year debt service for a $600,000 bond issue. If it were assumed that a low budget, no frills 1 mgd water treatment plant could be installed for $500,000, the net working capital available for financ- ing long term debt of $64,685 is within 10% of meeting the annual debt service requirements of $70,000 for a $500,000 bond issue. The construction of a 1 mgd plant then appears viable considering .that the ability to service SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 52 TABLE 15 II ISnn�rV ;+nQ Jry WEST GlENtiOOP SFPINFS WATEF: PISTF:ICT wATc_a F:EVENUE FONDS II UATEU MCH 11 1984 PATE FRIH^_IPAL COUPON INTEFEST TOTAL ANNUAL II9/ 1/1984 23675.04 23675.00 23675.00 3/ 1/1985 25000 7.000 23675.00 42675.00 II 9/ 1/1985 22800.00 22800.00 71475.00 31 1/1986 25000 7.500 22800.00 47300.00 9/ 1/1986 - 21862.50 21862.50 69662.50 II 3/ 1/1987 30000 8.000 21362.54 51862.54 9/ 1/1987 20662.50 20662.50 72525.00 3/ 1/1988 30000 3.500 20662.50 50662.50 ' 9/ 1/1988 19387.50 19387.50 70050.00 3! 1/1589 35000 9.000 19387,50 54387.50 9/ 1/1989 17812.50 17812.50 72200.00 II 3/ 1/1990 35000 9.250 17812.50 52812.50 9/ 1/1990 16193.75 16193.75 69006.25 3/ 1/1991 40000 9.500 16193.75 56193.75 9/ 1/1991 14293.75 14273.75 70487.50 II 3/ 1/1992 45000 9.750 14293.75 59293.75 91 1/1992 12100.00 12100.00 71393.75 II 1/1993 / 1/1993 50000 10.000 12100.00 62100.00 9/9600.00 9600.00 71700.00 3/ 1/1994 55000 10.200 9600.00 64600.00 II 9/ 1/1994 6795.00 6795.00 71395.00 3/ 1/1995 60000 10.400 6795.00 66795.00 9/ 1/1995 3675.00 3675.00 70470.00 II3/ 1/1996 70000 10.500 3675.00 . 73675.00 73675.00 II SUBTOTALS 500000 377715.00 277715.00 877715.00 FF'EH• (DISC) .00 .00 .00 TOTALS 500000 377715.00 877715.00 877715.00 II PCC IF;T; •QQ FATE• 9.9138 BOND TFs; 3810.44 AVE LIFE: 7.6200 FIRST PAYHEtT WAS NOT F:EDUCEA BT ACCF.UEA INTEF:EST 1 1 1 1/13/1924 AT 13:33:1? 53 1 TABLE 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1600,000 WEST GLENWOOD SFRINGS WATER DISTRICT WATER REVENUE BONDS DATED MARCH 1, 1984 DATE PRINCIPAL COUPON INTEREST TOTAL ANNUAL 9/ 1/1984 28415.00 28115.00 28415,00 3/ 1/1985 30000 7.000 28415.00 58115.00 9/ 1/1985 27365.00 27365.00 85790.00 ' 3/ 1/1926 30000 7.500 27365.00 57365.00 9/ 1/1986 26240.00 26210.00 83605.00 3/ 1/1987 35000 8.000 26240.00 61240.00 9/ 1/1987 24840.00 24810.00 86080.00 3/ 1/1988 35000 8.500 24840.00 59810.00 9/ 1/1988 23352.50 23352.50 83192.50 3/ 1/1989 40000 9.000 23352.50 63352.50 9/ 1/192? 21552.50 21552.50 84905.00 3/ 1/1990 45000 9.250 21552.50 66552.50 9/ 1/1990 19471.25 19471.25 86023.75 3/ 1/1991 50000 • 9.500 19471.25 69471.25 9/ 1/1991 17096.25 17096.25 86567.50 3/ 1/1992' 55000 9.750 17096.25 72096.25 9/ 1/1992 14415.00 14415.00 86511.25 3/ 1/1993 60000 10.000 14415.00 74415.00 9/ 1/1993 11415.00 11415.00 85830.00 3/ 1/1994 65000 10.200 11415.00 76115.00 9/ 1/1994 8100.00 8100.00 84515.00 3/ 1/1995 75000 10.400 8100.00 83100.00 9/ 1/1995 4200.00 4200.00 87300.00 3/ 1/1996 80000 10.500 4200.00 84200.00 84200.00. SUBTOTALS 600000 452925.00 1052925.00 1052925.00 PREM, (DISC) .00 .00 .00 TOTALS 600000 452925.00 1052925.00 1052925.00 ACC INT: .00 RATE: 9.9108 BOND YRS: 4570.00 AVE LIFE: 7.6167 FIRST PAYMENT WAS NOT REDUCED BY ACCRUED INTEREST 1/13/1984 AT 13:15:42 54 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 the long term debt would be possible because property tax revenue for 1983 taxes collected in 1984 will be $5,000 more than the amount shown in Table 12. If operating revenues, operating expenses and debt service for the current long term debt were to remain constant, then the construction of a 1 mgd water plant in the $500,000 price range does appear to be a viable' option for the District. However, nothing remains constant. It is reasonable to assume at the present rate structure, operating revenues will increase somewhat due to new taps. Operating expenses would probably increase in line with inflation for the area. The major factor which changes in the future in this analysis is the amount of working capital required for existing debt service. Table 17 below presents a debt service schedule for the 1980 general obligation bonds issued by the District: TABLE 17 DEBT SERVICE FOR THE 1980 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ISSUE Total Year Principal Interest Requirements 1984 $ 10,000 $ 23,375 $ 33,375 1985 10,000 22,525 32,525 1986 10,000 21,675 31,675 1987 60,000 18,700 78,700 1988 60,000 13,600 73,600 1989 65,000 8,287 73,287 1990 65,000 2,763 67,763 S 280,000 $ 110,925 $ 390,925 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 55 The analysis which estimated a value of $64,685 for new working capital avail- able for reduction of new long term debt included an interest expense of ap- proximately $24,000 and a principal payment of $10,000 for a total of $34,000 debt service for the 1980 G.O. bond issue. As can seen from Table 17, the total debt service requirements would remain in the $30,000 range until 1987 when the total debt service requirements would increase to $78,700. (Please Note that the annual debt service requirements for the 1978 revenue bond issue remain fairly constant throughout the life of the bonds.) The net effect of this approximate $46,000 increase in debt service for the 1980 bond issue is that in 1987 there would be a $46,000 reduction in the net working capital available for financing new long term debt.- The conclusion which must be drawn from this is that the WGSWD is not capable of financing a $500,000 bond issue unless the 1980 G.O. bonds can be refinanced in some manner to keep the total debt service requirements around $32,000 per year. As an alternative the District could provide for an increase in operating revenue either by increasing service charges or increasing the mill levy to generate additional property tax. An alternate source of providing an increase working capital would be to increase tap fees. If the WGST D wishes to pursue the financing of a $500,000 to $600,000 improve- ment, it is recommended that a qualified bond counsel be retained to review this report and to investigate the viability of new bond issues and the pos- sibility of refinancing the 1980 G.O. bond issue. The possibility of generat- ing additional operating revenue from service charges or mill levy should also be reviewed in detail in conjunction with the increase in working capital that SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Si 56 could be obtained by increasing tap fees. Purchasing City Water In March of 1983 Schmueser & Associates prepared a report for the WGSWD. The purpose of this report was to assist the Board of Directors of the District in determining the feasibility of entering into a contract with the City of Glen- wood Springs for purchase of water from the City for distribution to users within the District. The feasibility analysis included several projected fi- nancial summaries and concluded that at a cost of $0.61 per 1,000 gallons with the District assuming full operation maintenance responsibilities of the sys- tem, the projected net income for 1983 would be $9,730. In order to arrive at this net income, water use had to be estimated since only three months of meter readings were available from the West Glenwood main meter vault. Because the West Glenwood main meter has now been read for over one year, we have a full year of operating revenue data from the City of Glenwood Springs available. A much more accurate projection can now be made of the net income that would be available to the WGSWD if they were to contract for water from the City of Glenwood Springs and take over complete operation, maintenance and accounting of their system. Tables 18 and 19 on the following pages present an estimated statement of earnings and estimated change in financial position assuming that the WGSWD purchases water from the City of Glenwood Springs at a cost of $0.61 per 1,000 gallons or $1.22 per 1,000 SA SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 57 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I TABLE 18 ESTIMATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS ASSUMM WATER PURL ASED FROM CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS Operating Revenue Charges for Service Property Tax Tbtal Operating Revenue Operating Expense Cost of Purchased Water Distribution System Maintenance Maintenance Supervision Depreciation Amortization Legal and Accounting Directors Fees - - - Insurance Office Expense Meeting Room Rent Telephone Engineering Fees Total Operating Expenses Operating Income (Loss) Nonoperating Rev.(Exp) Interest Income Interest Expense Net Income (Loss) Water Cost $1.22/1000 gals. $ 191,400 14,400 S 205,800 Water Cost $.61/1000 gals. $ 191,400 14,400 $ 205,800 $ 170,000 $ 85,000 10,000 10,000 9,600. 9,600 19,700 19,700 900 900 21,600 21,600 2,200 ----- 2,200 800 800 .1,200 1,200 500 500 700 700 4,800 4,800 $ 242,000 (36,200) $ 11,200 (44,100) (69,100) SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 58 $ 157,000 48,800 $ 11,200 (44,100) 15,900 TABLE 19 ESTIMATED CSE IN FINACIAL POSITION PURCHASING WATER FROM CITY OF GLEN40 JD SPRINGS AT $1.22/1,000 GALLONS & $.61/1000 GALLONS Working Capital Provided From: (1) Net Income (Loss) (2) Add Expenses Not Req. Capital Outlay (a) Depreciation 19,700 (b) Amortization 900 $1.22/1000 (69,100) $.61/1000 $ 15,900 19,700 900 Working Capital Provided From: (a) Operations (48,500) 36,500 (b) Tap Fees 17,290 17,290 Total Working Capital Provided (31,210) 53,790 Working Capitol Required For: (a) Current Long Term Dept 20,000 20,000 (b) Miscellaneous Improvements 3,000 3,000 Increase (Decrease) in Working Capital Analysis of Annual Change in Working Capital (54,210) 30,790 (a) Increase (Decrease) Current Assets (54,210) 30,790 (b) Increase (Decrease) in Working Capital (54,210) 30,790 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 59 gallons. A review of these tables shows that the current service charges, mill levy and tap fees are not adequate to generate sufficient working capital to purchase water at a cost of $1.22 per 1,000 gallons. At this cost, the District would currently be operating at approximately a $54,000 per year loss. Purchasing water at $0.61 per 1,000 gallons on the other hand, gener- ates an annual net increase in working capital of approximately $31,000 per year. 0.5 mgd Conventional Filtration Plant The purpose of this discussion will be to evaluate the feasibility of con- structing a conventional filtration plant capable of treating 0.5 mgd of water from Mitchell Creek. Since this size plant will not be capable of supplying the complete needs of the District on a full time basis, it will be assumed that water use in excess of the 0.5 mgd capacity will be purchased frau the City of Glenwood Springs. Table 20 on the following page shows our estimate of the amount of water that would be required to be purchased from the City of Glenwood Springs under this scenario. This amount is estimated to be approx- imately 23 million gallons per year. Thus, at current demands, a 0.5 mgd wa- ter treatment plant would supply over 80% of the water needed by the District. At costs of $0.61 per 1,000 and $1.22 per 1,000 gallons the cost of purchasing this water from the City of Glenwood Springs would be $14,000 and $28,000 respectively. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.St 60 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE: 20 A[•]OUNP OF WATER TO BE PURCHASED FRCM THE CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRTMS IF 14 D INSTALLS T S A 0.5 mgd PLANT(1) Q Provided Total Def. Est. Avg. By WDSWD Def.Avg. for for month Accum. Total Month Q.mgd rngd Month mqd mg Def., mg January 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Febuary 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 March 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 April 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 May 0.40 , 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 June 0.65 0.5 0.15 4.50 4.50 July 0.70 0.5 0.20 6.20 10.70 August 0.75 0.5 0.25 7.75 18.45 September 0.65 0.5 0.15 4.50 22.95 October 0.30 0.5 0.00 0.00 22.95 November 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 22.95 December 0.25 0.5 0.00 0.00 22.95 (1) This is an estimate based on current 1983 demands. X11 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 61 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Shown below in Table 21 are the estimated costs of 0.5 mgd conventional filtration plant: TABLE 21 ESTIMATED CAPITAL CON'S 0.5 mgd CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT PLANT 1. Basic Equipment $ 125,000 2. Building 25,000 3. Clearwell 15,000 4. Diversion 20,000 5. Backwash Ponds 3,000 6. Pumps, Raw and High Service 25,000 7. Chlorination Equipment 10,000 8. Plant Piping 15,000 9. Yard Piping, Raw and Finished 20,000 10. Land 25,000 11. Site Improvements 15,000 12. Electrical 20,000 13. Equipment Installation 20,000 Subtotal $ 338,000 Plus 25% 84,500 Total $ 422,500 SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 62 Design assumptions will not be listed for each of the items in the above table. However, the same type of analysis was performed for this alternative as was conducted for the analysis of the 1.0 mgd conventional and diatomaceous alternatives. The cost estimate does not include any provisions for expanding the plant to a larger size such as oversizing the building, clearwell, diversion, piping, backwash ponds, etc. for a future larger facility. Since this plant will annually produce approximately 80% of the water that a 1.0 mgd plant will produce, it was assumed that operation and maintenance costs of the 0.5 mgd plant are 80% of those previously estimated for the 1.0 mgd conventional filtration plant or ($60,000 x 0.8). Tables 22 and 23 on the following pages present an estimated statement of earnings and an estimate of the net working capital available for financing future long term debt assuming a new 0.5 mgd conventional treatment plant is installed. The tables also show how the cost of purchased water affects net income and net working capital available for financing new long term debt. At a cost of $0.61 per 1,000 gallons for purchased water from the City, $62,685 would be available to the District in terms of net working capital available for financing new long term debt. At a cost of $1.22 per 1,000 gallons for water purchased from the City, $48,685 would be available to the District in terms of net working capital available for new long term debt. It is estima- ted that approximately $55,000 to $60,000 would be required in terms of debt service to finance a $420,000 bond issue necessary for the construction of a 0.5 mgd plant. Thus, it can be seen that at a cost of $0.61 per 1,000 gallons the District could generate sufficient net working capital to finance SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Si 63 r ' TABLE 22 ESTIMATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS NEW 0.5 mgd PLS 1 Operating Revenues 11 Charges for Services $ 191,400.00 Property Taxes - Net (1) 14,400.00 Total Operating Revenues $ 205,800.00 Operating Expenses @$0.61/1000 gal. @$1.2.2/1000 gal. Water Plant O&M $ 48,000 $ 48,000 Cost of Purchased Water 14,000 28,000 II Distribution System Repair and Maintenance 10,000 10,000 Amortization Expense 933 933 Accounting & Legal 21,600 21,600 Directors' Fees 2.205 2,205 Depreciation 19,671 19,671 Insurance 1,500 1,500 Office Expense 1,200 1,200 Meeting Room Rent 500 500 Telephone 700 700 Engineering Fees 4,800 4,800 Tbtal Operating Expenses $ 125,109 $ 139,109 IIOperating Income (Loss) 80,691 66,691 II Nonoperating Revenue (Exp.) Interest Income 11,200 11,200 Interest Expense (44,100) (44,100) i1 1 1 1 1 1 Net Income (Loss) 47,791 33,791 (1) The Garfield County Assessors Office reports that 1983 taxes will increase to $19,475. (2) Depreciation of new plant is not included. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 64 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 23 ESTIMATE OF CAPITAL AVAILABLE FOR REDUCTION of FoTURE LONG TERM DEBT WITH 0.5 mgd PLANT @$0.61 /100 @$1.22/1000 Working Capital Provided from: (1) Net Income (Loss) $ 47,791 S 33,791 (2) Add Expenses not requiring outlay of Working Capital (a) Depreciation 19,671 19,671 (b) Amortization 933 933 Working Capital Provided From: (a) Operations 68,395 54,395 (b} Tap Fees 17,290 17,290 Total Working Capital Provided 85,685 71,685 Working Capital Used For: (a) Reduction of Current Long Term Debt 20,000 20,000 (b) Miscellaneous Improvements 3,000 3,000 Total Use of Working Capital 23,000 23,000 Net Working Capital Available For 62,685 48,685 New Long Term Debt for 0.5 mgd plant SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 65 the debt service for a $420,000 bond issue. However, if the District had to purchase water from the City at a cost of $1.22 per 1,000, gallons the $48,685 of net income generated would not be sufficient working capital for debt service for the new $420,000 bond issue. Although the construction of a new 0.5 mqd plant appears feasible if water could be purchased at a cost of $0.61 per 1,000 gallons, it must be noted that increases in the debt service requirements for the 1980 bond issue which will occur in 1987, will require an additional $46,000 per year of debt service. Thus, net working capital will be decreased by the same amount. The construction of a 0.5 mgd plant would not be feasible unless additional operating revenue were generated, unless additional working capital from tap fees was generated or unless the 1980 bond issue could be refinanced to keep debt service at approximately its same level. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 66 SUMARY AND CONC LUSIC S Listed below is a summary of the findings of this report: 1. The WGSWD is currently using approximately 139 million gallons per year of water. Current maximum day demands are estimated to be approximately 1.0 mgd (700 gpm or 1.6 cfs) See Table 1. 2. If the WGS%'D were to construct a water treatment plant which in itself would supply the complete current needs of the District, a 1 mgd plant would be necessary. 3. If Mitchell Creek were to be the sole source of water supply for the District, the reliability of the source is questionable in terms of continuously supplying current summer and winter maximum day demands. If either alluvial wells and/or the ability to pur- chase water from the City of Glenwood Springs on a short term basis was provided, Mitchell Creek would be an acceptable source in terms of meeting current maximum day demands. 4. A source in addition to Mitchell Creek will be necessary in order to meet future maximum day demands of the District. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 67 5. A limited amount of raw water storage to augment summer and win- ter low flows would be very beneficial in increasing the relia- bility of Mitchell Creek for supplying present and future demands of the District. 6. From a limited review of existing water quality data, Mitchell Creek appears to be a high quality source. The effects of spring runoff and the Mitchell Creek Fish Hatchery on water quality should be investigated further if the 1CSWD intends to develop Mitchell Creek as a source. See Table 5. 7. The ability of Mitchell Creek to physically supply the District's needs is of no value if sufficient water rights cannot be obtain- ed to allow water to legally be diverted and used. The cost to obtain this legal supply must be evaluated if the WGSWD intends to develop Mitchell Creek as a surface water source. 8. A conventional filtration plant and diatomaceous earth filtration plant are the two treatment processes felt to be the most viable for treatment of water from Mitchell Creek. 9. Estimated capital costs of a 1 mgd conventional plant and DE plant with a 25% contingency are $581,950 and $555,550 respect- ively. See Tables 6 & 7. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 68 1 1 11 111 u 111 111 10. The estimated cost of retrofitting the City of Rifle's old pres- sure sand filters to treat water frau Mitchell Creek is estimated to be $560,770. See Table 8. 11. Annual operation and maintenance costs of a conventional plant and DE plant are estimated to be $60,000 and $76,450 respec- tively. See Tables 9 & 10. 12. At current service charges it is estimated that the WGS D would have a current annual operating revenue of $205,868.00 if the District collected all revenues. See Table 12. 13. Under the scenario of supplying their own water and having com- plete operation and maintenance responsibility for the total wa- ter system, the District would currently have approximately $64,000 of net working capital available for financing new long term debt. See Tables 13 & 14. 14. $500,000 and $600,000 bond issues would require annual debt ser- vice of approximately $70,000 and $85,000 respectively. See Tables 15 & 16. Thus, the revenue from existing service charges and property tax along with the working capital frau tap fees are not sufficient to offset estimated operating expenses and exist- ing debt service and leave sufficient net incase to cover the SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 69 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 the City of Glenwood Springs, sufficient working capital for new debt service is currently generated only if water could be purchased at $0.61/1000 gallons. However, the 1987 increase in debt service for the 1980 G.O. Bond issue would again reduce available funds by $46,000, making the ability to finance a 0.5 mgd plant difficult unless additional operating revenue is generated. SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ' 72 Tables 18 & 19. 18. If the WGSWD were to construct a 0.5 mgd water treatment plant, the plant would supply approximtely 80% of the water currently used by the District. The estimated capital cost of a 0.5 mgd plant is $422,500. Annual operation and maintenance is estimated to be $48,000. Assuming water used in excess of that produced from the 0.5 mgd plant is purchased from the City of Glenwood Springs, the annual cost of purchased water would be $14,000 and $28,000 per year based on respective water costs of $0.61/1000 gallons and $1.22/1000 gallons. See Tables 20 & 21. 19. Based upon the estimated operating costs of an 0.5 mgd plant and current revenue projections, the net working capital available for financing new long term debt would be $62,685 if water not supplied from the new plant was purchased from the City of Glenwood Srrings at a cost of $0.61/1000 gallons. At a cost of $1.22/1000 gallons $48,685, would be available. See Tables 22 & 23. 20. The estimated annual debt service requirements for a $420,000 bond issue for the construction of a new 0.5 mgd plant are $55,000 to $60,000. Thus, under the scenario of constructing a new 0.5 mgd plant and purchasing a limited amount of water from SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 71 debt service for a new $500,000 to $600,000 1 mgd water treatment plant. 15. 1983 property taxes will increase operating revenue by approxi- mately $5,000 over that collected for 1982. This increase in revenue would bring the current net working capital available to finance new long term debt close to the total debt service re- quirements for a $500,000 bond issue. However, in 1987 the an- nual -debt service requirement of the 1980 General Obligation Bond Issue will increase by $46,000. The net effect is that in 1987 there will be a $46,000 reduction of the net working capital available for new long term debt. 16. At the current level of service charges, property tax and tap fees, the WGSWD is not capable of financing a 1 mgd water treat- ment plant (assuming a plant could be built for $500,000) unless the 1980 G.O. bonds can be refinanced in some manner to keep the total debt service requirements around $32,000 per year. 17. If the WGSWD were to negotiate a contract with the City of Glen- wood Springs to purchase water and take over complete operation, maintenance and accounting of the water system, it is estimated that the District would have a net annual increase (decrease) in working capital of ($54,210) and $30,790 if water were purchased at $1.22/1000 gallons and $0.61/1000 gallons respectively. See SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 70