February 9, 2011 1 Water and Wastewater Budget 1. Overview - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

2011 Water & Wastewater Budget February 9, 2011

1

Water and Wastewater Budget

1. Overview

• High level objectives
• 2. Water & Wastewater 101
• Legislative drivers
• Operational drivers

3. Capital Infrastructure priorities 4. Financial environment and summary of 2011 proposed budget

2

3

that provides resources to enable us to accomplish our objectives. “a means to an end”

A Budget is a Tool -

4

What are our Objectives?

 Safe drinking water  A reliable system of delivery  Full cost recovery

• Avoid deferring burden to future generations

 Quality of life

• Protection of natural environment
• Eliminate basement flooding/sewer backups

Open up lands for growth & revenue

• pportunities

5

Water & Wastewater Services

Operations 101

6

Water & Wastewater Services Operations 101

• Water Distribution
• Water Quality Monitoring
• Leak Detection
• Hydrants, Valves, Services,

Meters

• Distribution System
• Wastewater Collection
• Main Sewer Collection Piping
• Manhole Structures
• Laterals
• Extraneous Flow Reduction

7

Regulatory Framework

• O. Reg. 170/03

Drinking Water Systems O.Reg. 188/07 Licensing of Municipal Drinking Water Systems

• O. Reg. 453/07

Financial Plans Safe Drinking Water Act 2002 Post Walkerton Tragedy

8

9

Water Quality Monitoring

• Weekly Microbiological
• 10 per week
• Disinfectant Residual
• > 1250 Annually
• Quarterly

Trihalomethanes

• 9 –12 quarterly
• Bi-Annual Lead Sampling
• 72 per sampling period

10

Leak Detection

• Leak Detection Program
• Daily Monitoring Treated

Flows

• Acoustic Sounding
• Pipe Correlation
• Immediate Response To

Identified Leakage

• Cast Iron Water Main

Replacement Program

11

Leak Loss Calculation for Main Breaks - Circle Breaks

Width Pressure (PSI) Pipe Size 1 80 12 1/32" = 0.03 1/16" = 0.0625 Circumference Area 1/8" = 0.125 37.70 37.70 1/4" = 0.25

Flows

7687 GPM 11068716 Gallons Per Day 77481013 Gallons Per Week 332061486 Gallons Per Month (30 Days) 4040081416 Gallons Per Year 34.9 M3 per minute 50318 M3 Per Day 352229 M3 Per Week 1509552 M3 Per Month (30 Days) 18366210 M3 Per Year Location: Widths 1521 Stockton Ln - 12' CI Significant Water Loss - Supported by Rosehill Daily Data Sheets

12

13

Watermain Break Repairs

• Emergency Repairs
• Notifications
• Locates
• Crew Dispatch
• Repair
• Post Flushing / Sampling
• Avg. 55 Breaks/Year

14

Water Losses

Water Meter Inspections

• Illegal Connections
• Service Lines Prior to Meter
• Unmetered Consumption
• Revenue Losses

15

Distribution System Fixtures

• Minimum 3

Annual Inspections

• Flow Test
• Leak Sounding

Fire Hydrants 1398 Town 184 Private Average Annual Repair / Renewal 125 12,300 Service Lateral Connections

• Inspections
• Exercising
• Repairs

2373 Main Valves 100mm - 400mm

• Investigations
• Repairs
• Renewals
• Pit Installations

Water Meters 12,600 265 km Watermain Average 55 Breaks / Year

16

Wastewater Collection

Systematic Town Wide

• Routine
• Problem Areas

Main Line Cleaning Annual Program

• Condition Assessment
• Required Repair

CCTV Inspections Annual Program Repair / Replacement Manhole Inspections & Repairs Home Inspections Sewer Back Ups Exflow Reduction Lateral Inspections & Repairs Wastewater Collection System 190 km Main Line Sewer

17

Home Inspections

Inspections to Date Private Side Deficiencies Town Side Deficiencies 2943 12.2 % or 361 3.2% or 97 Subsidy for Private Side Works Town 2008 - 2010 $426,541 Region Contribution $213,258 Original Target Area 2249 Homes 94% Complete Next Target Area Stevensville Sewer Shed 2011 Program

18

Extraneous Flow Reduction

• Manhole Repairs
• Town & Private Side Lateral

Repairs

• Weeping Tile Disconnections
• Sump Pump Disconnections
• Roof Leader Disconnections

19

Extraneous Flow Reduction Program

Progress in Crescent Park

Tools to Establish Effectiveness

• Flows were monitored in 2004 and again in 2009 at the same

location

• Detailed analysis and comparison of these data were completed to

draw conclusions on the effectiveness of the program

• Comparison completed for dry weather conditions and for wet

weather conditions

20

Dry Weather Flow Comparison

• From 2004 to 2009, the average dry weather flow was reduced from

26L/s to 15L/s (42% reduction). More capacity is now available for wet weather extraneous flow.

• Represents an annual reduction in flows being treated at the Anger

Avenue of approximately 300,000 m3.

• This reduction was achieved by reducing the amount of dry weather

groundwater infiltration that enters the sanitary sewer system through foundation drains and cracks within lateral and street sanitary sewers.

21

Wet Weather Flow Comparison

• For a total of seven rainfall events
• Overall reduction in extraneous flow event volumes of 60% was

achieved with repairs completed to date

• Overall reduction in extraneous flow event peak flows of 55%

was achieved with repairs completed to date.

• Measured frequency of bypass events at the Dominion Road

Pumping Station will be assessed through modelling

• Difficult to assess using collected data due to variability of

weather patterns

22

Key Drivers – Infrastructure/Capital

Water Master Plan

• Approved in 2009
• Per capital presentation optimal annual funding is $2.3 m
• Current operating budget allocation to reserves $1.2 m

Gap of $1.1 million

2011 budget recommends $50,000 increase in reserve allocation to fund gap.

23

Key Drivers – Infrastructure/Captital

Wastewater Master Plan

• Relying on previously approved version with updates

from new draft

• New version for April 2011 Approval
• Per capital presentation optimal annual funding is $2.0 m
• Current operating budget allocation to reserves $1.1 m

Gap of $0.9 million

2011 budget recommends $50,000 increase in reserve allocation to fund gap.

Key Drivers - Infrastructure

$4,773,002 capital budget for 2011

• 52% of total 2011 Capital request of $9.1 million
• Excludes $150,000 Warren/Lewis Service

Improvement as it requires $257,000 storm component to be approved with General Levy budget

• 65% for Garrison Road Sanitary Sewers to

support growth and environmental benefits

24

Garrison Rd Growth Benefit

Approximately $10 million in residential and commercial Development Charges

26

Garrison Rd Environmental Benefit

Key Drivers – Financial

Significant Regulatory Compliance PSAB compliant reporting

 O.Reg. 284/09-amortization not included in 2011 budget but long term strategy is in place.  Reduce reliance on reserves funding jobs moved from capital budget to operating budget.

O.Reg. 453/07 - Financial Sustainability

 Water License Financial Plan – CS-30-10 approved September 20, 2010 and filed with MAH  Infrastructure reserve funding strategy moves toward capital asset full cost recovery.  Continuation of 0.5% of revenues ($70,000) allocation to Rate Stabilization Reserve recommended for 2011

27

2011 Town Revenue and Expenses – 1.14%

• Elimination of Regional grants for extraneous flows
• Reduced reliance on reserve funding for “pre-PSAB” capital

projects offset with savings from bi-monthly meter reading

• Debt charges for 2010 Crescent Pk water debt of $713,000
• Water Emergency Relief Fund (WERF)
• launched 2008 with $15,000/yr.; for low income families to avoid

interruption of services

• Senior Utility Relief Fund (SURF)
• launched in 2010 with $21,000; $100 account rebate for low income

seniors

28

29

WATER 2008* 2009 2010 2011 Town $6,485 $7,246 $7,257 $7,374 BMA Avg. $9,627

Distribution Cost Benchmarks

Distribution cost per km of watermain WASTEWATER 2008* 2009 2010 2011 Town $7,215 $6,474 $5,963 $8,047 BMA Avg. $6,495 Distribution cost per km of sanitary sewer

*Changes in 2009 PSAB reporting requirements have changed the method of reporting

• perating costs therefore 2008 is not consistent with 2009 onwards.

Town breaks per 100 km of watermain for 2008 5 BMA study average for 2008 8.9

2011 Regional Treatment Costs – 1.47%

• 58% of Town’s budget
• Region’s draft budget (to be approved Feb17)
• $18.9 m of Region’s 2011 Water & Wastewater

Capital Budget is for TOFE projects

• 53% of Sewer budget allocated to TOFE (Anger and CB

WWTP)

• No change in Region’s billing formula
• Region is considering an additional 2% allocation to

reserve but recommended for deferral until 2012.

30

2011 Supplementary Requests – 0.82%

1. Senior’s Utility Relief Fund (SURF)

• Continuation of program requires sustainable operating

budget funding rather than Water Infrastructure Reserves used 2010

• $21,000 at level of 2010 requirement

2. Infrastructure Reserves

• long term strategy for full cost recovery as required by

legislation.

• $100,000 split $50,000 to each of water and sewer

31

2011 Consumption Volume Change – 0.48%

• Continued decline in trend of three year average

approximately 5%

• Staff continue to monitor and recommend a more

moderate 2% decline for 2011.

• Gap between budget estimate and actual consumption

continues to narrow thereby reducing financial risk.

• 50% of Water revenues tied to consumption
• 40% of Wastewater revenues tied to consumption

32

Monthly Cost of Water & Wastewater

(based on 16m3 monthly household consumption) Town revenues & expense 1.22% Regional treatment costs 1.47% Supplementary 0.82% Volume changes 0.48% Total 3.98%

Total increase in $ $3.61/mo 2010 monthly avg. $90.91 2011 monthly avg. $94.52

33

$3.10 per day for average household

Summary

2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 3.98% 6.34%* 4.94% 3.89% 10.9%

Forecast 2012-2016

– 3.3% average increase forecast for 5 years

Risks

 Consumption volumes (weather) affect on revenues  Regional budget, consumption estimates and reserve requirements (not yet approved)  Leakage/Watermain breaks

34

*as amended by CS-19-10 based on Region’s final approved budget

 By-law to be considered on February 28, 2011

• Rates are effective with March

utility billing (to coincide with date

• f Region’s rate changes)
• Delay in approval will increase rates

 Questions

35

Summary