salt river study - 60 percent presentation (3)

8/10/2019 Salt River Study - 60 Percent Presentation (3)

1/26


2/26

Presentation Agenda

Scope of Project to 30% Review Alternatives Selected Public Comments Scope of Project to 60%

Impact of Future Regulations Capital Cost Opinion of Each Alternative Funding Options

Next Steps


3/26

Scope of Project to 30%

Compile information from Workgroup

Organize and lead individual meetings with Workgroupparticipants to review information

Summarize current population and population projections in2020, 2030, and 2040

Analyze flows to Workgroups treatment plants and projectfuture flows

Prepare a draft 30% progress report summarizing these

results

Work with group to identify 3 alternatives for furtherinvestigation


4/26

Regionalization Alternative 1 Existing Plan23 Package Plants &8 Regional Plants


5/26

Regionalization Alternative 2 Six Regional WWTPs


6/26

Regionalization Alternative 3 Two Regional WWTPs


7/26


8/26

Public Comments - Jefferson Co. Meeting (9/30/14)

Concern about level of public involvement- suggested additionalmeetings and more open forum

Concerns that scope is too narrow and should consider allimpacts to the watershed like tree clearing, storm water, etc.

Concern that study will be used to open watershed todevelopment

Question over the population and flow numbers from JeffersonCounty we addressed populations used, flow numbers

remained the same

Consider small local solutions to address needs

Consider contaminants of emerging concern


9/26

Public Comments - Oldham Co. Meeting (10/16/14)

Questions about how the new OCEA Hite Creek plant affectsalternatives

Confirmation that the long-term goal of this effort is to improvewater quality

Request to integrate future regulations Correction regarding missing package plants

Concern raised over inadequate advertisement of meeting

Concern that while fewer facilities may improve efficiency, dontdiscount that fewer facilities mean more risk of failure

Remove Crestwood from MSD Hite Creek Planning Area


10/26

Scope of Project to 60%

Evaluate impact of future regulations

Develop cost opinions for the selected alternatives includinglife cycle analysis

Review potential funding sources

Conduct outreach to public

Recommend alternative based on environmental, social, andcost-effectiveness

Conduct outreach to elected officials

Deliver report


11/26

Impact of Future Regulations

Discussion with KDOW and professional judgment used toforecast future permit limits

More stringent limits are coming for all dischargers

Nutrient limits will be included for future permits TMDLs will drive limits


12/26

Impact of Future Regulations (Existing Plants)

Owner/WWTPFuture

CapacityPotential

BODPotential

TSSPotential

AmmoniaPotentialTotal P

PotentialNitrogen

OCEA/KSR 1.0 10 30 2/5 NA NA

OCEA/OhioRiver

1.0 30 30 20/20 NA NA

OCEA/NewPlant

1.25 10 30 2/5 1 NA

MSD/HiteCreek

9.0 10 30 2/5 1 NA

MSD/FloydsFork

9.75 4 30 1/3 0.5 NA

MSD/Cedar

Creek

10.25 10 30 4/10 1 NA

BCSD/PioneerVillage

1.0 15 30 4/10 NA NA

Mt. Washington 3.5 25 30 4/10 NA NA

Shepherdsville 7.5 25 30 4/10 NA NA

Capacity in mgd, Limits in mg/L, Ammonia limits presented as summer/winter


13/26

Impact of Future Regulations (Regional Plants)

Owner/WWTP FutureCapacity PotentialBOD PotentialTSS PotentialAmmonia PotentialTotal P PotentialNitrogen

Mt. Washington 7.0 25 30 4/10 NA NA

Shepherdsville 7.5 25 30 4/10 NA NA

MSD/OCEA/Hite

Creek

12 10 30 2/5 0.5 NA

Salt RiverCommission

20 25 30 4/10 NA NA

Salt RiverCommission

40 10 30 2/5 1 NA

Capacity in mgdLimits in mg/L

Ammonia limits presented as summer/winter


14/26

Future Regulatory Unknowns

Regulatory revisions for Nutrient standards

TMDLs

Pollutants of Emerging Concern


15/26

Flow Projection in 2040

Alternative Regions

Projected ADF

in 2040(mgd)

Projected PDF

in 2040(mgd)

One Existing 12 Regions Previously reported in 30%

Two Ohio River Area 12.0 22.8

Salt River Area 20.3 49.9

Floyds Fork Area 10.1 20.7

Cedar Creek Area 9.1 19.0

Three Ohio River Area 11.3 23.0

Salt River Area 40.2 67.0


16/26

Alternative 1 Preliminary Cost Opinion of CapitalImprovements

Workgroup Member

Capital Costof Planned

Improvements*

BCSD $11,500,000

MSD $51,350,000

Mt. Washington $0

OCEA $18,100,000

Shepherdsville $6,950,000

Total $87,900,000

*Costs opinions taken from existing planning documents


17/26

Alternative 2


18/26


Improvements

CapitalImprovementCosts

Gravity Sewer $24,800,000

Force Main $36,750,000

Pump Stations $17,700,000MSD Hite Creek WQTC Expansion $20,400,000

MSD Floyds Fork WQTC Expansion $16,500,000

MSD Cedar Creek WQTC Expansion $11,700,000

Mt. Washington WWTP Expansion $8,200,000

Shepherdsville WWTP Expansion $6,950,000

New BCSD WWTP $13,500,000

Contingency (35%) $55,500,000

Total $212,000,000


19/26

Alternative 3


20/26


Improvements Capital CostGravity Sewer $49,700,000

Force Main $155,750,000

Pump Stations $33,100,000

MSD Hite Creek WQTC Expansion $20,400,000

Salt River Regional WWTP $164,500,000

Contingency (35%) $148,200,000

Total $571,650,000


21/26

Funding Source Awareness Maximizes Grant/LoanOpportunities


22/26

Eligibility is Key to Funding Sources

State:KDOWKIASRF

Legislation

Federal:RDCDBG

EPAEDA

Bonds:Tax ExemptPrivate ActivityTIF

Organizations:KACOKLCKRWA

Private:Bank LoansMarket Companies


23/26

The Mechanics of Federal Funding Opportunities

AddMatch

Local orOther Funds


24/26

SRF is Emerging as a Competitive Funding Source

Project profile

Project application

Regional points

KDOW Rankings

Intended Use Plan

Invitation

Terms:

20 yr (30 yr possible)

0.75, 1.75 or 2.75%

Principal forgiveness

KIA Board Approval


25/26

SRF Mechanism Involves Bonds


26/26

Next Steps

Complete present worth evaluation and consider non-

monetary factors

Recommend alternative

One community outreach meeting to review 60% findings

Present findings to local and state officials in one meeting atKIPDAs office

Prepare a 90% report incorporating comments from theWorkgroup and public

Provide a digital copy of deliverable to each member of the

Workgroup

salt river study - 60 percent presentation (3)

Documents