Project 149 - Series Report #1 - 1998-12-01 PSIR`
COSTA MESA AN/L� : tc, DISTRICT
/ A
• OI'—.r s-In
V ISL+,��i' 4 y
Costa Mesa Recycles y'-. t �> DIRECTORS
a� CO,i; l James Ferryman
Arthur Perry
Arlene Schafer
Dan Worthington
Nate Reade
Sinking Fund for Future Sewer Replacement
Project #149
SERIES REPORT #1
• DECEMBER 1998
(e7oFESS/041 v� 2 > B 84-3V<\<<\� 2-'
N0. N
0 Nt 1720 m
9TFCF CA�IFO4�
Robin B. Hamers
Manager/District Engineer
•
FAX(714)432-1436
P.O. BOX 1200, COSTA MESA,CALIFORNIA 92628-1200 77 FAIR DRIVE (714)754-5043
S
Table of Contents
Page
I. Purpose of Study 1
II. Overview of District's System. 2
III. History and Benefits of using Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) 4
IV Overview of Systems throughout the United States 6
V Ongoing Televising, Maintenance, and Rehabilitation Programs 10
VI. Trenchless or 'No-Dig Technology 12
VII. Financial Considerations 13
• VIII. Necessity For a Sinking Fund. 14
IX. Recommendations. 15
Exhibit A Sewer Inventory Recap 1952 1998
Exhibit `B' Old Clay Pipe Sewer Installations Still in Service
Exhibit 'C' Sinking Fund Calculation Table
•
•
I. Purpose of Study
The Costa Mesa Sanitary District serves a population of approximately 107 000 people throughout
a territory that includes the entire City of Costa Mesa, portions of Newport Beach, and portions of
unincorporated areas of Orange County The major component of the District's sewer facilities is
the gravity sewer system that serves each and every residence and business within the District's
boundaries.
Current industry thinking places a 100 year life expectancy on the type of gravity sewer system
used by the District. Since the District owns a total of 325 miles of sewer lines primarily
consisting of gravity sewers, it is prudent to establish a long range plan for sewer rehabilitation and
replacement.
• This study will focus on the following areas:
• researching the life expectancy of sewers, including southern California and throughout the
United States and other parts of the world
• researching other agencies plans for long term sewer replacements
• charting out the District s sewer system by year of construction
• reviewing the District's current program of televising and maintenance of sewer lines
• investigating and reporting on the various methods of pipeline rehabilitation other than
excavate and replace, including slip-lining, insituform, swegelining, link-pipe, etc.
reviewing the financial implications of establishing an adequate sinking fund
• determining a replacement schedule
•
1
I
II. Overview of District's System
The Sanitary District has a sewer system consisting of 20 pumping stations and 325 miles of sewer
lines made up of gravity sewers, pressurized sewers, and manholes. The largest portion of the
system are the gravity sewers which are virtually all vitrified clay pipe(VCP). The only instances
where a different pipe material was used for a gravity sewer was where structural considerations
necessitated a stronger pipe material such as ductile iron pipe be used. This generally occurs
where another utility is crossing the sewer line or the sewer is very shallow
In addition to the gravity sewers, each of the District s 20 pumping stations has a pressurized
sewer main (force main)that transmits the sewage uphill to the nearest high point where it can
again flow by gravity The force mains are of various materials with the currently preferred
material being ductile iron pipe(DIP). Vitrified clay pipe is not available for force main use. Due
to the continuing pressurized flow in the force mains,their life expectancy is much less than VCP •
gravity sewers. Consequently force mains and pumping stations are monitored continuously for
wear and tear The rate at which a force main wears out is dependent on a number of factors, the
biggest being the type of pipe material and the rate of flow through the pipe. The District has
24 813 feet of force mains ranging from a 4' diameter flowing at 100 gallons per minute to an 18'
diameter flowing at 3,500 gallons per minute. Several of the force mains have been replaced due to
wear and tear and the majority of the pumping stations have either been rehabilitated or upgraded.
Of the District s 20 pumping stations,the majority are submersible stations with the remainder
being wet well-dry well. The District converted most of the older wet well-dry well stations to
submersible as they began to deteriorate to standardize them with the newer submersible stations.
The standardized submersible stations provide excellent worker safety since the daily maintenance
is done at street level rather than underground at the bottom of the station. The standardized
station also allows easier compliance with OSHA requirements for work in confined spaces.
I
2
• The other major component of the system are the 4,522 sewer manholes. Older manholes were
constructed of brick until precast concrete manhole sections were developed. Since then, all
manholes have been constructed from precast manhole sections. The condition of the manholes is
monitored regularly since the cleaning crews use the manholes as access to clean the sewer lines.
When manholes need rehabilitation a capital project is proposed and the appropriate work
completed.
Since pumping stations, force mains, and manholes are monitored, rehabilitated, repaired, or
replaced on a regular basis they are not the focus of this study Rather, the life expectancy and
long term plans for the 320 mile vitrified clay pipe gravity system the largest asset owned by the
District is considered as the basis for the study
Attached as Exhibit A is a sewer inventory recap showing the year by year quantity of sewer
facilities installed in the District.
•
•
3
•
III. History and Benefits of using Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP)
Of the many different pipe materials available, vitrified clay pipe stands out as possibly the best
choice for use in a gravity sewer system. Vitrified clay pipe is manufactured from clays and
shales, natural end products occurring from the weathering of the earth. Clay pipe s most
important features are its longevity and its ability to withstand corrosion and abrasion. Vitrified
clay is an inert material and therefore naturally resistant to corrosion. Only extreme concentrations
of acids at high temperatures conditions not associated with normal sewer use will cause any
harm.
Clay pipe was used as far back as the Romans who used it for constructing aqueducts and public
baths. A number of these pipelines are still in good condition today In the United States at least
50 cities have vitrified clay pipe lines that are over 150 years old and still in operation. As part of
this study 11 of those municipalities were contacted to ascertain information relating to their
•
experience with clay pipe
In 1988 the U.S Army Corps of Engineers published Technical Report GL-88-2, Life Cycle Cost
for Drainage Structures. The report made reference to a 1982 National Clay Pipe Institute list of
over 50 clay pipe systems which were still functioning after up to 170 years, which support a 150
year service life. However, since most of these systems are just over 100 years old, and in light of
the uncertainty in long term land use,the Corps chose to use a design service life of vitrified clay
pipe of 100 years. Attached as Exhibit `B' is the reference list of municipalities with extended life
VCP sewer systems.
Clay pipe has the following benefits:
• long term life expectancy
• natural resistance to corrosion
• good flow characteristics
• high resistance to abrasion
•
4
S
The District was fortunate to have begun sewer installation in the early to mid 1950's when
compression joints the interlocking of two sewer sections together by the installation of a spigot
end pipe into a bell end pipe with a seal were first introduced. Over the years compression joints
have been improved, however, it is still the most reliable joint for clay pipe. Prior to compression
jointing, cement mortar or hot-pour compounds were used to seal two sections of plain end pipe.
Very few instances of cement mortar or hot-pour joints have been found in the Costa Mesa
Sanitary District, and when they are uncovered they are usually replaced with a new joint.
Although there are various other pipe materials available for use in gravity sewers, engineers are
very comfortable selecting vitrified clay pipe since it has proven itself at least as good, if not better
than any other material.
•
•
5
IV Overview of Systems throughout the United States •
As part of the study contacts have been made with cities and agencies where sewer lines have been
in service for over 100 years. The list of cities includes Boston, Chicago, Clinton, Dallas, Denver,
Henderson, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Portland, and Washington D C.
The District is also fortunate to have begun its sewer installation in an era when separate sanitary
sewer lines were constructed. The previous era used combined storm water/sanitary sewer lines
that captured both sewer flows and storm water flows. The method of treatment consisted of
diluting the sewage with storm water then letting this flow into the nearest waterway or ocean.
Many municipalities with old sewer installations, such as San Francisco, still have combined
sewers. San Francisco is particularly troubled since increased development has caused the sewage
flow to match the capacity of the pipe lines, thereby leaving no room for storm water When rains
from even a five-year storm occur the lines overflow causing a significant health hazard. Since the
treatment plants can only handle the sewage flow plus a small amount of rain water, when a large
storm occurs the effluent flows untreated into the bay or ocean. Additionally some of their large
•
older lines are constructed from brick and mortar and frequently fall into disrepair The city has a
backlog of structurally damaged sewers needing immediate attention. Consequently San Francisco
is constantly faced with emergency situations and their focus is trying to upgrade their system to a
level where basic health and safety are achieved.
City of Boston
Boston Water & Sewer Commission
The sewer system consists of 1,350 miles of sewer lines (75%-clay pipes, 20%-concrete, 5%-
PVC). The sewer lines are televised and repaired during street reconstruction projects. 90%of all
pipe problems are related to construction practices. The agency s main goal is to separate sewer
and storm drain water A rehabilitation program includes insituform ($90-100/1.f.) and
microtunneling, and to a less degree removal and reconstruction because of prohibitive costs
($200/11.). •
6
• City of Chicago
The sewer system consists of 4,300 miles of sewer lines. The majority of the sewer system
consists of VCP lines less then 24' diameter The City has televised 200 miles of sewer lines and
assumes a 100 year life. The City does not have any special replacement programs.
City of Clinton, Iowa
The population of Clinton is approximately 29,000 people. The sewer system consists of 170 miles
of sewer lines and 47 miles of storm drain lines. Although the vitrified clay pipe system was
installed as early as 1850 the City has no special programs and repairs the lines on an as-needed
basis.
City of Dallas
• The sewer system consists of 4,000 miles of sewer lines. The city does have a capital improvement
fund but will rely on bonds if the cost of the required improvements exceeds the available funds.
City of Denver
The sewer system consists of 1,500 miles of sewer lines, the major portion of which is 8'clay lines.
The city does not have any special long term capital replacement programs.
City of Henderson, NV
The city s sewer system is approximately 50 years old, consisting of 400 miles of sewer lines. The
majority of the lines are polyvinyl chloride(PVC), with some reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). The
maintenance program includes televising the sewer lines and annual cleaning but no sinking fund.
•
7
City of Los Angeles •
The sewer system consists of 6,500 miles of sewer lines of which 130 miles are cement pipes. The
city regularly uses FEMA funds to replace sewer lines but has no sinking fund.
City of Philadelphia
The sewer system consists of 2,950 miles of sewer lines. The majority of the system consists
of brick pipes, however, there are some VCP and RCP lines. The city replaces the sewer lines
concurrently with street repair projects.
City of Portland, OR
The majority of the sewer lines are over 100 years old. The system consists of 2,200 miles of
lines, the majority of which are concrete pipes. Most of the problems are occurring in old brick
pipes (4-8' dia.). The repairs are done based on the results of a televising program A capital
replacement fund is in place and was created based on the average replacement cost for the lines. •
City of San Francisco
The sewer system consists of 730 miles of sewer lines, averaging 75 years old. Most of the old
lines are clay pipes. The city continues to visually inspect and televise their system as part of their
on-going maintenance program. The city has a three year moratorium on cutting through new
pavement which necessitates concurrent repair of deteriorating sewers. The city s current
replacement program consists of 4 to 6 miles per year The city allocates approximately$7 million
per year for future repair and replacement. Their priorities are providing additional capacity in
their combined sewer/storm drain system which cannot handle simultaneous sewer and storm water
flows plus repairing a significant amount of structurally damaged sewers. The city uses bonds as a
financing method.
•
8
• City of Washington, DC
The sewer system consists of 2,400 miles of sewer lines the major part being clay pipe. The
smaller size lines are mostly clay and the larger size are mostly brick or concrete. The majority of
the small size pipes (8' 10' dia.) are in good condition. The city has no special replacement
programs nor funds established for this purpose.
•
9
•
V Ongoing Televising, Maintenance, and Rehabilitation Programs
In 1989 the District began a concentrated effort to step up its regular maintenance and
rehabilitation program for the gravity sewer system. Up until that time, the Capital Improvement
Program was centered around two other areas: As the older pumping stations began requiring
major work they were converted from wet well dry well to submersible to standardize them with
newer stations, and secondly providing additional sewer capacity in various areas in the District
where new or increased development occurred or was expected.
The District has historically cleaned its gravity sewer lines once per year, as is common practice
with other agencies and considered the industry standard. However, without the benefit of actually
viewing the inside of the sewer lines, no information was available regarding the condition of the
system. Therefore, it was decided to begin a televising program where a remote, self propelled,
video camera would travel through the lines and televise the interior
•
The first portion of the televising program began in 1989 and consisted of four yearly televising
projects, each put out to bid, where a total of one million feet of sewer main line was televised.
The contractor was required to provide both a written report and a video tape of each line.
Included in the written reports was a severity rating schedule where each type of problem such as
cracked pipe, missing pipe, light, medium, or heavy roots, cracked joints, offset joints, hole in pipe,
collapsed pipe, sags, etc. were given an arbitrary number that reflected how severe the problem
was. Another report was then generated for the lines with the highest total severity ratings to
identify which lines required immediate attention.
The four yearly televising programs were followed by small yearly programs that provided for
rechecking areas and to have a televising contractor on call in the case of an emergency or in the
event a homeowner claims the main line, rather than their lateral, was causing a backup.
•
10
•
One of the results of the televising program was to begin a root treatment program. The incidence
of roots in the main lines was small compared to the size of the total system, however enough
`heavy root' areas were found to warrant attention. In addition to root cutting, the District also
contracted out a foaming project whereby a root killing agent was flooded into the lines. The agent
kills the roots protruding into the main line as well as the roots protruding from a homeowner s
lateral into the main line. The District also has a project scheduled to review video tapes in order to
notify residents that roots in their laterals can be seen from the main line.
The District's yearly Capital Improvement Program typically includes a small televising project, a
joint or main line rehabilitation project, a pump station andlor force main rehabilitation project,
and periodically a manhole rehabilitation project.
•
•
11
VI. Trenchless or "No-Dig' Technology •
No-dig technology refers to pipe rehabilitation done without excavating the ground surface to
access the pipe line. The rehabilitation is done by inserting into the line through a manhole a liner
that will adhere itself to the inside of the pipe essentially creating a pipe within a pipe. Many of the
methods are now included in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction(Green
Book).
The inserted liner bonds itself to the inside pipe wall and can act both structurally and to prevent
infiltration and exfiltration. Existing lateral connections to the main line can be re-opened using a
robotic cutter and camera.
The cost of using a no-dig method depends on the size and length of the line,the number of existing
lateral connections, and the selected no-dig method. The benefits of no-dig begin to outweigh the
conventional excavate and replace method when circumstances such as disruption of major traffic
patterns, very deep sewers, expensive surface improvements or limited access are present. •
The Costa Mesa Sanitary District completed one project where two no-dig methods were bid as
alternatives. The cost for the excavate and replace method was the lowest since the line was
located in a parkway under the grass strip.
Many local agencies have completed trial no-dig projects along with monitoring and observing no-
dig projects in other areas. Agencies faced with high excavation costs readily look to the no-dig
alternative.
•
12
• VII. Financial Considerations
As a financial analysis was being conceptualized, many unanswerable questions arose:
• How long will the existing system last? 100 yrs.? 150 yrs.? 200 yrs.?
• When the system does need repair, will it be the joints, the inside pipe wall,the outside pipe
wall, or some other component that wears out first?
• How much of the system will need rehabilitating at one time? Consider that 89%of the
gravity system was constructed in a 20 year period from 1952 1972.
• What will be the accepted and lowest cost rehabilitation method when the rehabilitation period
begins?
• What will be the cost in future dollars to perform the rehabilitation?
Nevertheless, a standard financial analysis has been prepared and attached as Exhibit `C' that
attempts to calculate the required yearly deposit needed to establish a sinking fund to accumulate
the replacement value of the sewer system assuming a 100 year service life. The table was
prepared assuming replacement of the existing sewer mains and without the laterals or manholes.
Maintenance of the laterals is the property owner s responsibility
As can be seen from the financial calculations, a yearly deposit of$1,836,535 would be required to
provide full replacement value.
•
13
•
VIII. Necessity for a Sinking Fund
Results of the investigation into the life of vitrfied clay pipe gravity sewers do not provide a
definitive life expectancy Rather, factors such as the original installation methods, type of jointing
system used, and monitoring and care of the system, outweigh the life expectancy of the pipe
material itself. Since vitrified clay is inert and previous installations show very little signs of wear,
the life of the clay pipe may not be the controlling factor
An example of poor construction methods is evidenced when sections of District line have been
found to have continuous cracking,which indicates uneven and improper trench backfill
compaction methods. Pipe lines in this condition either have to be replaced through excavation or
repaired from inside the line using a no-dig rehabilitation method.
Many of the agencies contacted do not have a dedicated fund for long term sewer rehabilitation. •
There are generally two schools of thought, the first being a pay as you go plan where problems
are fixed as they occur In the future when large portions of the system need rehabilitation the
agency will issue bonds to fund the improvements. Probably because the life expectancy of sewers
is long enough that it doesn't present an immediate problem to the public officials during their
tenure, there is no urgency in planning for future sewer improvements.
Other agencies believe prudent long term planning includes funding for major infrastructure
improvements to avoid large capital costs through special assessments or issuing debt instruments.
When this project was first proposed in 1995-96, a sinking fund with an initial deposit of$100,000
was established. Since then yearly deposits each in the amount of$200,000 have been made for
fiscal years 96-97 97-98, and 98-99 making a total capital deposit of$700,000 The Board of
Directors believe that creating a sinking fund is sound fiscal policy and part of their responsibility
to the rate payers.
•
14
• IX. Recommendations
An overall analysis of the system suggests that the following factors play a part in planning for
long term sewer service in the District:
• The District's sewer system is approximately 50 years old. The life expectancy of the
pipelines is at least 100 years. Therefore, no replacement, other than for damaged pipe, is
warranted at this time.
• The District's on-going commitment to proper cleaning, televising, repair of problem areas,
and aggressive maintenance will maximize the useful life of the system.
• Establishment of the sinking fund and continued yearly contributions thereto will keep the
District in an advantageous position to handle future maintenance or replacement. This is
clearly a better position than those municipalities who are taking no action until their system
fails and then Incurring debt to fund the rehabilitation. Funding of the District s sinking fund
has been accomplished without an increase in sewer rates which is attractive to the Board and
the rate payers.
• • The financial analysis suggests a yearly contribution of$1,836,535 however, this number is
unrealistically high and does not account for the strong possibly that a less expensive method
of pipe line rehabilitation will be available. Therefore, it is recommended that yearly deposits
be made, in amounts that will not cause an increase in sewer rates, until at least$5 million is
in the fund. At that time, a review of the fund can be the basis for the next report in this
series
• Rehabilitation of sewer lines from within, known as no-dig or trenchless technology is quickly
evolving with new methods continuously being developed and introduced. In the next 50 years
additional significant discoveries may be made that vastly simplify and lower costs for sewer
rehabilitation. A District program of continued research, monitoring, and observation of
existing and new trenchless technologies will keep the District in position to utilize all possible
alternatives for rehabilitation now and in the future.
•
15
• Due to the above described dynamics of the situation, rather than making a definitive •
statement as to what scenario will actually present itself 50 years from now and what ultimate
level of funding is needed, a more flexible position that can readily adapt to new developments
is warranted. The District s sewer system is in excellent shape, has a lengthy remaining life
expectancy there is an established sinking fund,there is an aggressive yearly maintenance and
repair program, all of which give the District the most flexibility when looking forward.
• This report is titled Series Report#1 since for such an ever changing situation future reports
at appropriate intervals should be completed that incorporate and analyze new information.
• Therefore, a continuous monitoring, updating, and reporting position is recommended along
with deposits into the sinking fund.
•
•
16
^ _ g R 8 - 8 8 8 g N R : 4 s q R -^ e g A : A A
e i R k a k A A A A ^ « « 4 ! ^ « l a p p a a A N N N N R N
.a a A 3 R ' A. 11 1 a a A A N A 4 4 4 A 4 4 4 A a E. _
0 - _ _ _ . 2 2 . N ^ . ^ 2 2 2 ^ A N 2 ^ N R .. .. ., .. ..
, A A m a a A e o R R A R $ p g 3 I ; R s k E = : 1 1 1 1
o a E R A R 4 R R s R l ! R . R R R E n E E E R a R a A 1 1
ZY AA ° A ° R ° R ° R ° p ° R ° A °A ° R ^ R ^ p° R ° R
A :
V
- mo m ° . ° •° ° o .o . o. oe ° . o . o. o . aso -
RR ° AoA °AoR ° 2013 ° R ° 2 ° 2o2 °2020R'02102 ° 2oRogoRo8
RR ° R° R ° R ° R ° R ° R° R ° R ° R° R
. . . : . ` 8° 8 ° 8 ° 8° 8 ° 8 ° 8 °8 ° 8° 8 ° 8 ° 8 ° 8
RR ° ^ ^ ° R ° R ° R ° R ° A ° R° R °A4gRE ° A ° A ° E ° A ° A ° A ° E
X
l IE1ARA1 9 "e4° l4RA'a °ISE° � arrrrrrE
ssRl : l5! 0 !° ! 0 0eS 6ggF101010I °I ° I ° 1° IR3 ° ? ° ?
rim
r . ss ° s ° sos °s ° s ° s ° sos ° s . sos ° s ° ! ° = ° s ° s ° s
• _ _ _ _ ^ _ -. . ° R ° R° ^ °R° R ' ^ ^ «` N =° « « =R ° R ° ..
• 2 " 8 ^ 8 ° 4 - 4 - 4 ^4 ^ 2 ° 404 ' 4 °4E/1 °4 °R ° 4 ° N ° N °/1 ° N = _ _
RB IVE 'n EN _ 48 ARUTRR4AI - : %4 A = UMI ^ A ° 414 /18 ^-g ° g ' g « a ° E - .R
' ER 'A ° °EOM . n ° E ° E ° ^ . ° E ° 77° 77°E ° E ° : ° °n ° ° E° E
A ° a ° a ° o : ° R ° RAN ° U = 4 ° 4 ° 4 ° g ° 4 °g ° 4 ° 4 ° 4 °g ° E°A. ° A. ° 4 ° 4° R° R ° g.° R
m A ° 8 ° R ° R " 8 ° R ° A ° 4 ° A ° A ° 4s l ° A ° l ° A ° l ° l ° l° A ° l ° l ° l ° l ° l °A ° ! ° l
a, -
U ry
Ha
o <
as : : . : : : . : ss °& . g ° � ° g°a ° A ° ! °A ° e ° $° a
r
a 2 a
F .10
• OF 44 ° A ° p oq op ° yop ° ! ° p ° p ° goyoQ° pop ° yopoy ° p ° pop
a �I 11 !i dl !1 I. .S M M Y. F M Ii M M i5 M I� tl !1 It
K w >
w LU 21
W
< mt A ! k °k ° ° a° i° i ° ? ° °s ° 2 ° Q° IAr! ° R° $°l°!.° !° f ° ! ° R° 6°R A:° : ° ^
O• 0 .
22° 2 ^ 2 ^ 2 °2 ° 2° R ° 2 °8° 2 ^ 8 ° p° 11 ° 8
A
EAr ni AilkfAEl2AR °A° R°R° R°A° A ° A ° A° A° A
aa H ° A ° N ° A : : ° ? ° ; ;! ° ! ° R° IRRn ^ a ° ! ° ! ° 8 °8 ° Q ° 84 ° A ° A ° a
E 4 ° 4 ' 114= °- ° T ER 's
RE °E ° F° ° '4.771- R
I ° Re° eRR' Rcoex s..: 4 R !
. .- ^ 2 - 2 ° 8 A ^ ^ R 2 - 2 ^ . A A ^ « ^ « N N N - a A s.
-
RaR°l lan : lR° R° e ! R° AR`-t $! a! ° RxlE,R ° „° RRgR1 °R° R° R ° 1° 2112
° °418.a - - « ^ -f. ' R A A=A ,. .. N ^ R N N q N R R
0! r 2E ° E : ' gc - g ° 5 ° g °7 ° 4 : laRil ' 0 ° R °0441! ° ! ° ! ° ! R« - « 1
A ° R R N . ° 7 1 g R Z i - Y s '3 . - . -s Y s Y
8 : ! EMEE : = 'x."AR.ARRRSa2E4E5E 4kEkElERR�4lRx?ER= 7 !` ° : -.•! $ 77 ° 77 !0
2992 ° ! ' I VAnF E "! ! =77 ' 77 : E -E : =: =R - EA 4 -! ^4
AFRE A lEEETEAAEA44 !"RgRAAAR RARAnAAEWA EAAAAEA 4.ERR° R
^ A - A4A4I • A ^ A A a a - A a A a ! a A a R A -I a s
^ : : A "No ^N ° .s ° A. ° e ° a ° R° l° A ° A ° ! ° A.° .g °s^ ° l ° ! ° A ° R° A ° .
.;A 1 . 11111M111 : 11 E
R 8 V 4 A a e ° R - e ° S a ^ C = R
e • R D A A F 8 s s ^ a U A R % A
" g A g A ER R R i 3 ' R R
92 R9 eW R RE Rk 919999§ 99999199=94999999°R
x"� h an an ¢RAesRRgscaAR_ : An-_ esee
•
eeoe ° oo °ooe °° eooe °oe° oeeo
o ° e e o 0 °000° oe °° ee° o° oe° ooe°° o °o
oe° oeeoeeoee^ oe°oe ° o° o ° oe
°I o ° ° o ° ° e °° ooeo° e° aeeoo° °oeeoee° oe
o o e e a e° ° oo ° °° e ° oo° oeie°oeeoeeoo
e e o 0 0 0 ° e° ooe° eeoe° ooeeoe ° oe° ° olo°
e o o ° ° e el eeooeooeooe °o ° 000 ° ° eeooeo
° o ° °1 ° oe 0 01 ee ° °e ° _• AA °M ° A °A °A °A ° rn
LL� bI ° ° eoe °° ° ° p9°9°9 R R R°9° 9°9
5 • e o ° ° ° e °
= !I a R° 6 :a ^8 '8 ' 8 ^_' • ° R _ _ annee
9
° 0 ¢ 88 r0 I. 9 999999. 99999999. 999=g === 9,99 = 9919 = 933,A^ „ 9 ^ : 933,
0 0 ° ° °oo °o ° ° ° °°° oe ° o °° ° e°°° e °o
o° e o ° ° 000000 ° °00 ° 00 ° o°o00000060
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o ° eo ° 0000o00000e ° °° ° °z
1- ••• 0 ° 0000 ° ° RflOF
O
1- • • ° ° RR R p AA °A ° R A
R °A °RA °R° R ° RgR
N
❑
ar > ° o ° ° ° _ _ ° °A R
m < O ° ° 0 ° °I °
N F ° °° o °e °oe°oe ° °o ° °
t < z °°
X w W
w
`w Z
° ° 22. ' 2°2 ° 9 °= ° 9 °9 ° .9 °E °0 °999. °9
I- W A .
O W ”
O N
° ° ° ° e ° ° °° eeo ° °° e ° ° oe ° ° ee° °e ° e °°
F
0 e o ° ° e e e0 0o °0oeeoe0o 0000 00 95 ° 909
>I °nog ° SRR 1 RI S° A8R° a ^a °a °a ° RergkR'IIR8
I �
5 °13 xRaA ° Re •R A°A ° x09R $As°999° 9=-
re
°I a 9U- c §8115 6° 6 °9°9 °6 ° 6399 : : A3 ° 411
- ° 9 AR 66 9993 99° 91999 ° 999°9° 991 °109° 9=9
-
A R A AA-A A A•A R A A A
i9/ „318$`R41! ! !!! scA6n ?Y6IEAU R99PRIIR
y °R sa aA Rg s ,R -ayag :ER A
AReR _ a e H '6 ° 9 -9
tt RR- - @a e_, 6R „i R " R 9RR RnHc3E; RR'16gRaR®,RSRRRR
r ^ A AR 2 6 A .A _ RERR •? ^ 8 °- C °R • gerno n
R R ^ g R E^ 909 °E °RS � ' °6 °6 ° 6 °6 LRC
2 ■
-
EXHIBIT B
Old Clay Pipe Installations
• Still in Service*
Date Date
City Installed City Installed
1 Washington DC 1815 27 Baltimore Md 1875
2 Philadelphia Pa 1829 28 Portland Maine 1875
3 Boston Mass 1829 29 San Francisco Calif 1876
4 Sydney N S Wales 1832 30 Jacksonville Fla 1876
5 Manchester England 1845 31 Albany Ga 1876
6 Liverpool England 1846 32 St Joseph Mo 1876
7 London England 1848 33 Davenport Iowa 1877
8 Clinton Iowa 1850 34 Kansas City Mo 1877
9 Edinburgh Scotland 1850 35 New Bedford Mass 1877
10 Rigby England 1851 36 Bucyrus Ohio 1877
11 Croydon England 1851 37 Omaha Nebr 1878
12 Darlington England 1852 38 Camden N J 1879
13 Chicago Ill 1856 39 Memphis Tenn 1879
14 Cleveland Ohio 1861 40 Parkersburg W Va 1879
III15 New York N Y 1866 41 Providence R I 1879
16 Erie Pa 1868 42 Nashville Tenn 1879
17 Grand Rapids Mich 1869 43 Rome Ga 1880
18 St Louis Mo 1869 44 Rockford Ill 1880
19 Hartford Conn 1870 45 Terre Haute Ind 1880
20 Indianapolis Ind 1872 46 Sioux City Iowa 1880
21 Los Angeles Calif 1873 47 Red Wing Minn 1880
22 New Haven Conn 1873 48 Reno Nev 1880
23 St Paul Minn 1873 49 Fargo N Dak 1880
24 Portland Oreg 1873 50 Dallas Tex 1880
25 Raleigh N C 1873 51 Denver Colo 1880
26 Lawrence Kans 1874
* From National Clay Pipe Institute 1982
•
EXHIBIT `C'
SINKING FUND CALCULATION TABLE •
Table assumes today's replacement values are needed in full, as increased by the annual
inflation rate, at the time the sewer reaches its life expectancy Depreciation is not
included. Negative values indicate sewer lines were removed from service. Deposits are
assumed to receive 5% interest per year
Assumptions:
Annual Inflation Rate = 3%
Annual Interest Rate= 5%
Life Expectancy= 100 years.
Annual deposit calculated assuming today's replacement values are as follows:
8' VCP $100/1.f. 18' VCP $170/1.f.
10' VCP $110/1.f. 21 VCP $200/l.f.
12' VCP $120/1.£ 24' VCP $220/1.£
15' VCP $140/1.f 30' VCP $260/1.f.
Annual deposit calculated using standard compound amount formula and sinking fund
formula
A= P*i * (1+j) ^n /((1+i)^n-1),
•
where A -annual deposit, P -present cost of replacement,j -inflation rate, i interest rate,
n- years before replacement needed.
Results of table show annual contribution to sinking fund under this assumption to be:
$1,681,551+$154,984=$1,836,535 per year
•
EXHIBIT 'C'
SINKING FUND TABLE ANNUAL DEPOSITS BEGINNING 1999
• FOR SEWER INSTALLED IN 1952-1971
8' VCP 10' VCP 12' VCP 15' VCP 18' VCP 21 VCP 24' VCP 30' VCP TOTAL
PRICE/L. 100 110 120 140 170 200 220 260
1952 $2,912 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,912
1953 $374,925 $33,258 $11 ,678 $21,232 $5,167 $0 $0 $0 $446,259
1954 $33 417 $0 $0 $0 $4,026 $0 $0 $0 $37 443
1955 $72,929 $6,732 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $79 661
1956 $332,055 $17,202 $14,534 $5,755 $10,908 $0 $0 $0 $380 454
1957 $58,606 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,606
1958 $119,982 $5,911 $7 764 $3,779 $10,622 $0 $0 $0 $148,059
1959 $106,985 $513 $1 131 $0 $5,099 $0 $0 $0 $113,728
1960 $68,821 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $68,821
1961 $77108 $275 $0 $0 $159 $0 $0 $0 $77,542
1962 $61 066 $1,346 $0 $8,636 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,047
1963 $38,280 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,280
1964 $14,803 $2,106 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,909
1965 $32,563 $0 $89 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,653
ag 966 $8,017 $0 $2,911 $1,854 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,782
967 $13,494 $2,478 $0 $4,579 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,551
1968 $6,595 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,595
1969 $21,916 $1 015 $79 $4,090 $3,808 $0 $5 484 $0 $36,391
1970 $11,850 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11 ,850
1971 $19,279 $46 $1,289 $30 $365 $0 $0 $0 $21 009
TOTAL
$1,681,551
•
EXHIBIT 'C' •
SINKING FUND TABLE-ANNUAL DEPOSITS BEGINNING 1999
FOR SEWER INSTALLED IN 1972-1998
8' VCP 10' VCP 12' VCP 15' VCP 18' VCP 21 VCP 24' VCP 30' VCP TOTAL
PRICE/L. 100 110 120 140 170 200 220 260
1972 $16,066 $3,305 $1 659 $0 $0 '.• $0 $0 $21 030
1973 • 694 $22 $0 $2,298 $0 '.• $0 $0 $23,014
1974 $12,093 $0 $3,018 $0 $0 '.• $0 $0 $15,110
1975 $15,208 $2,336 $3,301 $0 $12 '•• $0 $0 $20,857
1976 $9,256 $1,634 $973 $1 717 $0 '.• $0 $0 $13,580
1977 $0 $0 $0 $0 '.• $0 $0 $11 132
1978 $0 $0 $0 $0 '•• $0 $0 $4 415
1979 $16,780 $557 $3,219 $1 784 $0 '.• $0 $0 $22,340
1980 $5,313 $0 $0 $0 $0 '•• $0 $0 $5,313
1981 $0 $2,011 $0 $1,905 ' • $0 $0 $8,315
1982 $8,714 $0 $29 $0 $0 '.• $0 $0 $8 743
1983 $0 ($16) $97 $0 '•• $0 $0 ($211)
1984 $405 ($1 ,894) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($12,73
1985 $1 ,200 $406 $993 $2,014 $760 $1 ,239 $625 $56 $7,29
1986 $1 366 $0 ($38) $482 $1,012 $0 $0 $2,229
1987 $8 $42 $0 $1 473 ' • $0 $0 $1 ,643
1988 : $0 ($1,552) $74 $13 8 $0 $0 $1 ,082
1989 •. $0 $0 $0 $0 ',• $0 $0 $706
1990 $1 424 $0 $2,162 $0 ' • $0 $0 $2,421
1991 ' • ($480) $76 $14 $0 ',• $0 $0 ($1,302)
1992 $0 $2,694 $96 $0 ',• $0 $0 $4,545
1993 :• $0 $0 $712 $0 ',• $0 $0 ($569)
1994 '.• $0 $0 $0 $0 ',• $0 $0 $0
1995 '.. • $687 $0 $0 $59 ',• $36 $0 $144
1996 $2,330 $0 $0 $1,388 $0 ',• $0 $0 $3,719
1997 '.• $0 $0 $0 $0 '•• $0 $0 $0
1998 $159 $6 $0 $0 '.• $0 $0 $6
TOTAL $107748 $10,984 $11,860 $10,121 $4,644 $8,946 $625 $56 $154,984
•