SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE Special Meeting Board of Directors AGENDA NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING (6:00 P.M.) Monday March 12, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER…………………………………………………………………….(6:00) 2. ROLL CALL/PLEDGE of ALLEGIANCE…………………………………………..(6:01) 3. PUBLIC COMMENT / ORAL COMMUNICATION………………………………...(6:02) 4. CLOSED SESSION…………………………………………………………………..(6:05) A. Conference with Labor Negotiator – Government Code Section 54957.6 – Designated Representative: Manager or Austris Rungis (IEDA) – Employee Organization – IUOE, Stationary Engineers, Local 39 5. OLD BUSINESS………………………………………………………………………(6:30) A. Discussion and Possible Action with Respect to the Replacement of the IPS Across Coronado Street, including the Retention of a Consulting Engineer To Provide Needed Engineering Services 6. ADJOURNMENT……………………………………………………………………..(6:55) RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION AND ADJOURN TO CONVENE FOR BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING BUDGET WORKSHOP 7:00 P.M. Monday March 12, 2012 SAM Administration Building 1000 N. Cabrillo Highway Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 1. CALL TO ORDER…………………………………………………………………….(7:00) 2. ROLL CALL/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE…………………………………………(7:01)
89
Embed
AGENDA NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING (6:00 P.M.) Monday …1307B359-C05A-436D-AC1… · Velocity Review 4.Conduct Grit Survey 5.Develop and Conduct an IPS Sampling Program 6.Install Three
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE Special Meeting
Board of Directors
AGENDA
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING (6:00 P.M.)
Monday March 12, 2012
______________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER…………………………………………………………………….(6:00) 2. ROLL CALL/PLEDGE of ALLEGIANCE…………………………………………..(6:01) 3. PUBLIC COMMENT / ORAL COMMUNICATION………………………………...(6:02) 4. CLOSED SESSION…………………………………………………………………..(6:05) A. Conference with Labor Negotiator – Government Code Section 54957.6 –
Designated Representative: Manager or Austris Rungis (IEDA) – Employee Organization – IUOE, Stationary Engineers, Local 39
5. OLD BUSINESS………………………………………………………………………(6:30)
A. Discussion and Possible Action with Respect to the Replacement of the IPS Across Coronado Street, including the Retention of a Consulting Engineer To Provide Needed Engineering Services
6. ADJOURNMENT……………………………………………………………………..(6:55)
RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION AND ADJOURN TO CONVENE FOR BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING
BUDGET WORKSHOP
7:00 P.M.
Monday March 12, 2012 SAM Administration Building
1000 N. Cabrillo Highway Half Moon Bay, CA 94019
1. CALL TO ORDER…………………………………………………………………….(7:00) 2. ROLL CALL/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE…………………………………………(7:01)
Page 2 of 2 SAM Bd Mtg – March 12, 2012
3. PUBLIC COMMENT / ORAL COMMUNICATION………………………………..(7:01) 4. BUDGET WORKSHOP………………………………………………………………(7:05) A. SAM Comprehensive Budget Fiscal Year 2012-13 a. Administration and Treatment i. General (Operating) Budget and Project (Capital) Budget b. Collection System i. Operating Budget, and ii. Capital Budget c. NDWSCP i. Operating Budget B. Conclusion/Next Steps 5. ADJOURNMENT……………………………………………………………………...(7:30)
NEXT: Regular Board Meeting: Monday March 26, 2012
Meeting Date: March 12 , 2012
Agenda Item No: 5A
SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE
Staff Report
Subject / Title
Discussion and Possible Action with Respect to the Replacement of the IPS Across Coronado
Street, including the Retention of a Consulting Engineer to provide needed Engineering Services
Staff Recommendation:
Authorize GM to negotiate an Engineering Agreement for IPS Crossing Design at Coronado
Street, El Granada
Fiscal Impact:
Cost not to exceed $56,400
Discussion/Report:
At the February 27, 2012 SAM meeting staff requested the Board to authorize the General
Manager to accept the attached Scope of Services from SRT to design the replacement crossing
for the IPS force main at Coronado Street in El Granada.
The engineering effort was a follow on item to leaks on the Granada Force Main in January
2012. The site of the leak was very problematic for a number of reasons. The leak site spills
immediately onto Surfer’s Beach in Half Moon Bay. The pipeline crosses under a PG&E gas
main and closely parallels an eight inch high pressure gas main. Finally, it is located in the
middle of Coronado Street, one of two entrances to the town of El Granada. The leak site’s
proximity to Highway 1 caused significant traffic problems during the emergency leak repair.
SAM’s experience with other clamped leaks on the IPS suggests that we should anticipate other
leaks in this location in the relatively near future.
Staff has concluded that the entire section of pipe crossing Coronado Street should be replaced to
prevent future service and traffic disruptions from pipeline leaks. To this end, staff purchased
replacement pipe to be able to act if the situation dictated replacement under emergency
circumstances. Additionally, staff asked SRT Engineers to develop a scope of service to design
a permanent fix for this street crossing. The plan is important to ensure that the traffic is
minimally interrupted and that the flows in the pipe can be managed to insure a quick and
effective tie in of the new pipe. The shutdown for a tie in can only last 3-4 hours since there is
only one pipeline that takes all of the IPS flow from MWSD and GSD. A simple and precision
pipe replacement effort must be planned in detail in advance. The planning will also allow SAM
to secure required permits and to develop plans that will minimize the effects on traffic in the
area.
The Board considered the staff’s request to authorize the General Manager to accept the SRT
design proposal. The item failed to pass. In further discussion, the Chair said he would like to
discuss the merits of the SRT proposal with the Half Moon Bay staff. He asked that the matter
was to be brought back to the Board at the March 12th
Special Meeting for reconsideration.
The HMB Director of Public Works reviewed the SRT proposal and communicated to the Chair
a number of comments on the proposal. He concluded that the cost was too high for the work
proposed. The Chair relayed those comments to the General Manager.
Staff recommends the SRT Proposal (attached) for reconsideration.
Because of the concerns expressed by the Chair, and the emergency nature of this work, staff
asked EKI Consulting Engineers and Whitley Burchett to look at the site and provide SAM with
an expression in their interests in performing the services and, if so, their preliminary design
proposals in case the Board chooses to entertain further engineering input. Staff has reviewed
those preliminary documents and if directed by the Board, is prepared to work with the
proposers to secure formal proposals for the engineering services and to move the construction
forward expeditiously.
Staff is requesting direction from the Board on the crossing design including a dollar limit for the
work and the authority for the General Manager to negotiate an agreement within that dollar
limit for the engineering and construction support for the pipe replacement.
The monies are available in the SAM FY 2011-12 Budget.
February 22, 2012
Steve Leonard, General ManagerSewer Authority Mid-Coastside1000 N. Cabrillo HighwayHalf Moon Bay, CA 94109
RE: Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideGranada Force Main Repair – SRT Consultants Proposal
Dear Mr. Leonard,
SRT Consultants is pleased to present this proposal for the Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside (SAM) Granada Force Main repair.
The work performed by SRT Consultants will result in an engineered plan for the repair of a section of the existing 14-inch force main located at Coronado Street and Obispo Road, El Granada, California.
BackgroundThe Intertie Pipieline System (IPS), of which the Granada Force Main (FM) is integral part, is a network of force mains, gravity interceptors, and pump stations delivering raw sewage to SAM's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) for treatment and ocean outfall discharge. SAM member agencies include Montara Water and Sanitary District (MWSD), Granada Sanitary District (GSD), and the City of Half Moon Bay (HMB). While the IPS is owned and operated by SAM, each member agency owns and operates their respective collection systems located upstream of the IPS1.
Sewage from MWSD enters the northernmost portion of the IPS system at the Montara Pump Station (PS) and the Vallemar PS. Sewage from GSD enters the mid-portion of the system via the Princeton PS and the Portola PS. Sewage from
1 SAM currently operates member agencies' lift stations under contract
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 2 of 11
the City of Half Moon Bay enters the IPS at the very end of the system, flowing directly into the SAM WWTP's headworks.
The IPS includes three force main segments: Montara, Princeton, and Granada, constructed in 1979 of ductile iron pipe (DIP). The pipelines vary in diameter from 8 to 14 inches. Montara, Vallemar and Princeton pump stations all discharge into the Montara Force Main (FM), while only the Portola PS discharges into the Granada FM. Figure 1 presents the IPS schematic.
The IPS is over 30 years old and has been experiencing an increasing number of failure episodes. Due to the lack of redundancy in the pipeline system, opportunities for pipeline inspections, physical condition assessment, and preventive maintenance are extremely limited. SAM requires a short- and long-term plan for the IPS rehabilitation to achieve its goals of:
(1) Minimizing potential for IPS failure-related reportable sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) events that are subject to fines, and
(2) Extending the IPS service life in the most cost-effective and efficient manner.
The work conducted by SAM in the past four (4) years, identified the following probable root causes of the IPS force mains' condition and resulting failures:
• IPS age coupled with low flow velocities resulting in internal pipeline corrosion;
• Lack of redundancy preventing SAM staff from conducting preventative maintenance;
• Corroded air/vacuum valves not operating properly further contributing to corrosion.
The 2009 IPS Report focused on the pressurized pipelines in the system, identified the following alternatives for the IPS repair and rehabilitation:
Alternative 1: Replace All IPS Force Mains Alternative 2: Slip-line All IPS Force MainsAlternative 3: No Project – O&M Activities
It is important to note that every IPS rehabilitation alternative included installing bypass stations to create redundancy in the system and develop opportunities for periodic inspections, preventative maintenance and repairs. Installing bypass stations on the IPS force main would allow SAM replacing the current emergency-driven approach to proactive asset management approach. The bypass stations with flexible hose connections can provide the most efficient and cost-effective approach to the IPS force main rehabilitation. No permanent underground bypasses were included in this approach.
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 3 of 11
Figure 1 IPS Schematic
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 4 of 11
Table 1 below summarizes alternatives developed in the 2009 IPS Report for the IPS force main rehabilitation and provides estimated 20-year present-worth costs for each alternative. Table 2 summarizes the IPS Rehabilitation Plan recommended in 2009. Short-term cash flow projections for Phase I, Short-Term Activities, over the first five years of the IPS Rehabilitation Plan implementation are included in Table 3.
Table 1 IPS Rehabilitation – Summary of Alternatives
DescriptionProbable Total 20-year Present Worth Project
Costs
A. Capital Improvement Alternatives
Alternative 1: Replace All IPS Force Mains $25 M - $35 M
Alternative 2: Rehabilitate All IPS Force Mains through rigid slip-lining
$15 M - $22 M
B. Alternative 3 - Operational and Maintenance Activities over 20 years
Phase I – Short-Term Activities FY 2011 - FY 2015
1.Replace existing 18 Air/Vac Valves2.Install Bypass Stations – 2 stations3.Conduct Pump Station Flow Adjustment and FM Velocity Review4.Conduct Grit Survey5.Develop and Conduct an IPS Sampling Program6.Install Three New Isolation Valves7.Purchase Composite Wrap or Similar Equipment8.Inspect high-risk force main segments9.Conduct Hydraulic Surge Analysis10.Conduct another IPS Review in 2 to 5 years
$1.2 M - $1.6 M
Phase II – Long-Term Activities FY 2016 - FY 2020
•Install additional 12 bypass stations•Install 6 new flow control valves•Disconnect Montara Pump Station hydraulically from the IPS•Slip-line high risk segments
$2.5 M - $3.5 M
Phase III – Long-Term Activities FY 2021 - FY 2031
•Slip-line remaining pipeline segments $5.0 M - $8.0 M
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 5 of 11
Table 2 2009 Recommended IPS Rehabilitation Plan
Plan ComponentsFunding Level
Required, Dollars
Phase I – Short-Term Activities FY 2011 - FY
2015
• Replace existing 18 Air/Vac Valves• Install Bypass Stations – 2 stations• Conduct Pump Station Flow Adjustment and FM
Velocity Review• Conduct Grit Survey• Develop and Conduct an IPS Sampling Program• Install Three New Isolation Valves• Purchase Composite Wrap or Similar Equipment• Inspect high-risk force main segments• Conduct Hydraulic Surge Analysis• Conduct another IPS Review in 2 to 5 years
$1.2 M - $1.6 M
Phase II – Long-Term Activities FY 2016 - FY
2020
• Install additional 12 bypass stations• Install 6 new flow control valves• Disconnect Montara Pump Station hydraulically from
the IPS• Slip-line high risk segments
$2.5 M - $3.5 M
Phase III – Long-Term ActivitiesFY 2021 - FY
2031
• Slip-line remaining pipeline segments $5.0 M - $8.0 M
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 6 of 11
Recent IPS Failure EventsOn December 6, 2008, SAM staff received a report of a possible sewer leak on Vallemar Avenue in Moss Beach. Staff discovered a leak in the 12-inch-diameter ductile-iron IPS sewer force main between the Montara PS and the Vallemar PS. To facilitate repairs, the flow was diverted via “The Strand” utilizing a bypass at Vallemar PS to gravity feed sewage back to the Niagara Lift Station and pump it back to the Montara Wet Weather Storage Tank (Montara Tank). Temporary repair clamps were placed on the 12-inch DIP (see Figure 2) until the leaky pipe segment was replaced with C900 PVC pipe on December 8, 2008.
Figure 2 December 2008 Temporary Repairs
On November 1, 2009, a leak occurred on the Granada FM located near Santiago Avenue and Highway 1 in El Granada. The leak was described as a sharp hole approximately the size of a coin that occurred at the pipe invert. SRT staff and a Winzler & Kelly corrosion engineer visited the site shortly after the leak was discovered and immediately conducted an investigation of probable mechanisms of corrosion. It was determined that external corrosion by means of low resistivity, aggressive soil or an induced stray current, were not likely contributors to the failure. The investigation concluded that the perforation was caused by an internal degradation mechanism, most likely sediment impingement or scouring.
According to SAM records, other sizable corrosion-related leaks previously occurred on December 24, 2003 on Vallemar Street in Moss Beach (Montara
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 7 of 11
Force Main) and on February 21, 2006 at Highway 1 and Alto Avenue in El Granada (Granada Force Main). In addition, the Granada FM has experienced two most recent failure episodes.
Following the December 8, 2008 IPS failure, once the leaky pipe segment was removed, SAM hired SRT to conduct a corrosion investigation conduct (see photographs on Figure 3). The exposed pipeline exterior and surrounding soils were investigated for the possibility of external corrosion, uniform electrolytic corrosion or stray current discharge. No symptoms of external corrosion were found and external corrosion was discarded as a potential contributing factor of the December 2008 pipe failure. Graphitization was also ruled out by the corrosion engineer as the potential cause of failure.
Figure 3 2008 IPS Force Main Failure
The removed IPS pipeline segment was further reviewed for internal corrosion possibilities. Metallographic analysis of the effected pipe section indicated deposit attack as the primary cause of the pipe wall rupture further exacerbated by sediment impingement (“scour” or erosion corrosion), which removes the protective layers of the pipe lining and wall making it more susceptible to deposit attack. The 2008 SRT Memorandum prepared by SRT with assistance of the corrosion engineer from Winzler and Kelly, subconsultant to SRT, indicated that microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) may also be causing pipe damage, however, to a lesser extent than the deposit attack.
2009 SRT MemorandumOn November 1, 2009, a leak occurred on the Granada FM located near Santiago Avenue and Highway 1 in El Granada (see Figure 4). The leak was described as a sharp hole approximately the size of a coin that occurred at the pipe invert. SRT staff and a Winzler & Kelly corrosion engineer visited the site shortly after the leak was discovered, and immediately conducted an investigation of probable mechanisms of corrosion. It was concluded in the
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 8 of 11
Technical Memorandum that external corrosion by means of low resistivity, aggressive soil or an induced stray current, were not likely contributors to the failure. The investigation concluded that the perforation was likely caused by an internal degradation mechanism, most likely sediment impingement or scouring.
Figure 4 2009 IPS Failure
Portola Pump StationThe Portola PS operates three large pumps and one small pump. Two of the larger pumps are equipped with VFDs and operate in a lead-lag mode. The third large pump is a constant-speed pump and is utilized only during the wet weather flow as lag-lag. The small pump is a lead-lead Clow pump running an average of 16 hours per day during dry weather conditions.
Table 4 provides a summary of information for the Portola PS, its pumping equipment and respective rated capacities.
Table 4 Portola Pump Station Summary
Pump Model Power Rating,
HP1
Flow Rating, GPM2
Speed Rating, RPM3
Head Rating,
FT4
#1 Clow 4315 20 700 1145 71
#2 Clow 6315 75 1250/800 1774 122/72
#3 Clow 6315 60 1250 1770 122
#4 Clow 6315 60 1250 1770 1221HP – horsepower2GPM – gallons per minute3RPM – revolutions per minute4FT – feet
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 9 of 11
Granada Force MainThe Granada FM, a 14-inch-diameter DIP, extends from the Portola PS for approximately 8,950 feet to Junction Structure #2. Following Junction Structure #2, a 24-inch-diameter VCP empties the entire IPS effluent by gravity into the SAM WWTP. Elevations fluctuate between 10 feet and 65 feet above mean sea level, with the pump being lower in elevation than Junction #2, and a very large peak existing between the pump and discharge point. Table 5 presents a summary of the Granada FM information. Figure 6 presents its profile.
No other pump station discharges into the Granada FM. Although this force main carries all flow from the northern portion of the IPS, it has no redundancy and no ability to isolate shorter pipeline segments. Any leak on this FM would require that the entire pipeline be taken out of service until it can be repaired. It should be noted that design and installation of additional storage at the Portola PS is currently underway, which will certainly help provide additional repair time during a downstream force main failure, however, it cannot be relied upon during wet weather.
Table 5 Granada Force Main Summary
LegLength, FEET
Pipe Material
Diameter, INCHES
Number of Air Valves1
Number of Blowoffs1
Portola PS to Junction Structure #2
8,760Ductile Iron
14 4 5
1 From 1979 MAC “Project Unit 1 – Intertie Pipeline” Design Drawings
Figure 6 Granada FM Profile
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
STA
Ele
vati
on
, FT
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 10 of 11
Table 6 summarizes the IPS pump station flow data provided by SAM staff. All flow data is in million gallons per day (MGD).
1Estimated from 2008 10-hour flow data provided by SAM
Sanitary Sewer Overflows – Regulatory ImplicationsSanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) is a violation of SAM’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. In 1995, SAM had been fined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), received a warning letter and a cease-and-desist order for its WWTP in 1996, underwent a federal investigation in 2003, and was once threatened with a $212-million-dollar fine by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Any future SSOs will likely expose SAM and its member agencies to high risk of fines and litigation due to potential public health impacts. Recently, the City of Pacifica was fined $2.3M by the RWQCB for the 6.9-million-gallon (MG) SSO in 2008.
Scope of Services
Task 1 Prepare Bid Documents for Granada Force Main RepairSRT will prepare plans, details, and specifications for the repair of a section of the existing 14-inch force main that experienced leaks in the past two years. The length of replacement is anticipated to be approximately 300 linear feet. The replacement will be across Coronado Road and extend approximately 100 linear feet on both sides, north and south. Task 2 Shutdown and Construction Phasing PlanSRT will prepare a Shutdown and Construction Phasing Plan for the installation of the pipe repair. This will include interim plumbing to allow the of existing service to continue, construction phasing across Coronado Street, and a traffic control plan. SRT will work closely with SAM staff to facilitate efficient shutdown and switch-over prior to repairs being implemented and post implementation.
Task 3 Engineering Services During Bidding and Construction This task includes a total of 40 hours of engineering support during public bidding and construction. No construction management services are included.
Proposal to Sewer Authority Mid-CoastsideFebruary 22, 2012Page 11 of 11
Estimated Fee
The estimated level of effort for the services outlined in the Scope of Services is $56,400. The Scope of Services and Fee Estimate are based on the following assumptions:
1. Bid documents will be limited to details and pipe specifications. No surveying is included as part of the services.
2. Repair contract will be awarded by SAM through public bidding.3. Construction management services are not included as part of this
proposal.
We are pleased to be of service to SAM and hope that this proposal meets your approval. We’ll be ready to proceed with the work upon receiving authorization. Please contact me at 415-776-5800, Ext. 301 with any questions.
Sincerely,
Tatyana T. Yurovsky, P.E.PrincipalSRT Consultants
Meeting Date: March 12 , 2012
Agenda Item No: 4A
SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE
Staff Report
Subject / Title
Review SAM Comprehensive Proposed FY 2012-13 Budgets
Staff Recommendation:
Review and Comment on SAM FY 2012-13 Budget Proposals
Fiscal Impact:
To Be Determined
Discussion/Report:
Board will review the first draft of the proposed FY 2012-13 SAM budgets and provide direction
to staff. The schedule for the FY 2012-13 SAM Budget adoption is as follows:
March - SAM Board reviews and approves budgets for submission to SAM Member
Agencies
April – May 2012 – SAM Member Agencies review, provide comments, and adopt the
SAM budgets by resolutions (one resolution for SAM Comprehensive Budget, and one
resolution for SAM Collection Systems Maintenance and Operation Services)
May-June 2012 – SAM Board adopts both the SAM Comprehensive, and Collection
Systems Maintenance and Operations Services Budgets by adoption of two separate
SAM Resolutions.
DRAFT COMBINED BUDGETS FISCAL YEAR 2012-13
1 of 70 3/9/2012
Member Agency assessments in proposed budgets total: 4,701,628$ This represents an increase over the FY2012-13 Budget of: (463,862)$
Total collection Budge 766,114$ 826,851$ 864,265$ 4.5% 37,414$
Total All Budgets 3,565,398$ 5,264,707$ 4,809,243$ -8.7% (455,464)$
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is fundedentirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
Total Project Budge -$ 1,334,812$ 618,000$ -53.7% (716,812)$
Total All Budgets 3,565,398$ 5,264,707$ 4,809,243$ -8.7% (455,464)$
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is funded entirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
Total 877,772$ 1,470,252$ 1,119,818$ (350,434)$ -23.8%Monthly Total 73,148$ 122,521$ 93,318$ (29,203)$ -23.8%
Total 3,589,250$ 5,165,490$ 4,701,628$ (463,862)$ -9.0%
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is fundedentirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
City of Half Moon BayChange
Granada Sanitary DistrictChange
Montara Water and Sanitary DistrictChange
SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE
FY 2012-13
Member Agency Total Assessment Comparison
8 of 70 3/9/2012
Actual Current ProposedFY2010-11 FY2011-12 FY2012-13 $ %
Total 877,772$ 936,332$ 987,566$ 51,234$ 5.5%Monthly Total 73,148$ 78,028$ 82,297$ 4,269$ 5.5%
Total 3,589,250$ 3,830,678$ 4,083,628$ 252,950$ 6.6%
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is funded entirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
Change
SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE
FY2012-13
Member Angency Operations and Maintenance Assessment Comparison
City of Half Moon BayChange
Granada Sanitary DistrictChange
Montara Water and Sanitary District
10 of 70 3/9/2012
Actual Current ProposedFY2009-10 FY2010-11 FY2011-12 $ %
Total Project Budgets -$ 1,334,812$ 618,000$ -53.7% (716,812)$
Total All JPA Budget $2,799,284 $4,437,856 $3,944,977 -11.1% ($492,879)
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is funded entirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
Budget Comparison
Expenditure Comparison by Budget Program Type, JPA
Total 593,330$ 617,454$ 688,990$ 71,536 11.6%Monthly Total 49,444$ 51,455$ 57,416$ 5,961 11.6%
Total 2,823,137$ 3,003,827$ 3,219,362$
* Non-Domestic Waste Source Control Program (NDWSCP) costs are not included inassessment allocations because, except for some admistrative costs, this program is fundedentirely by commercial users and not the member agencies.
Granada Sanitary District
Montara Water and Sanitary District
City of Half Moon BayChange
Member Angency Operations and Maintenance Assessment Comparison, JPA
Income Accounts4011001 Operating Fund Admin Operating HMB4011002 Operating Fund Admin Operating GSD4011003 Operating Fund Admin Operating MWSDTotal Assessments
Collection General Total 318,903$ 246,786$ 298,576$ 864,265$
General Monthly Assessment 26,575$ 20,565$ 24,881$ 72,022$
Collection Project Total -$ -$ -$ -$
Project Monthly Assessment -$ -$ -$ -$
Total Collection Budget 318,903$ 246,786$ 298,576$ 864,265$
Total Collection Monthly Assessment 26,575$ 20,565$ 24,881$ 72,022$
The Collection General Budget is distributed based on average employee hours.
Insurance costs are costs for individual liability insurance for all three member agencies tocover sewage overflows, especially into homes. Insurance costs also include liabilityinsurance for MWSD's water system. Because these costs are not subject to assessmentbased on average employee hours, they are fixed costs.
The fixed insurance cost is subtracted fro the total Collection General Budget. The differenceis distributed amongst the member agencies based on average employee hours.
FY2012-13 Collection System Budget Assessment, Collections