Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District. Interceptor Sequencing Study. Technical Memorandum 5 Unit Costs for Interceptor Pipe.

Similar documents
Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Interceptor System Master Plan. Executive Summary Reconciliation Report

PROVING THAT BLADDER SURGE TANKS CURED EXCESSIVE SURGE CONDITIONS IN A 30 FORCE MAIN

current supply and what is needed for future conditions; this is not the total water demand for these utilities.

Sacramento Association of REALTORS Resale Housing Information by ZIP Code 2005 August Note: "Last Year" column includes Condo's

Sacramento Association of REALTORS Resale Housing Information by ZIP Code 2005 December Note: "Last Year" column includes Condo's

Memorandum. Dr. Wilbert Odem, Dr. Paul Trotta, and Mr. Justin Ramsey. From: Timothy Mahon, Patrick Belsheim, and Ali Alrayyes.

3. How many kilograms of air is in the room?

Regional Alternatives Analysis. Downtown Corridor Tier 2 Evaluation

Buoyancy Control Calculated Cost Allowance for 1 Year Study Cost Estimate

Lab 3: Pumps in Series & Pumps in Parallel

Asheville s Fairview Water System Improvements: from Modeling to Contract Documents. April 19, 2016 Meg Roberts, PE

PROPERTY EVALUATION AND RESERVE FUND STUDY ~UPDATE~

REQUEST FOR BIDS For Intake Tunnel Project Bid Notice

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

Dugout Sizing Worksheet. Joe Agricola Example

How to Optimize the Disposal System With Staggered Analysis Using BLOWDOWN Technology. Jump Start Guide

Director, Purchasing and Materials Management

Hazard Operability Analysis

The City of Lynnwood. Centrifuge or Screw Press? To Incinerate or not to Incinerate a Best Practice Review

Infrared Thermal Imaging, Inc.

East Downtown Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) No. 15 Infrastructure Assessment Study

Homeostasis and Negative Feedback Concepts and Breathing Experiments 1

YORKSHIRE WATER PROTECTION OF MAINS AND SERVICES

Director, Purchasing and Materials Management

OARS. Flow Diversion Structures

Specifications for Synchronized Sensor Pipe Condition Assessment (AS PROVIDED BY REDZONE ROBOTICS)

Development and Evolution of an Asset Management Organization

Consult with manufacturers concerning permeation of the pipe walls, jointing materials, valve seats, etc.

CIPP For Large-Diameter Pressure Pipes. Andrew Costa Aegion Corporation

Traffic Impact Study. Westlake Elementary School Westlake, Ohio. TMS Engineers, Inc. June 5, 2017

SITE TESTING STANDARDS FOR METHANE

Public Transport Asset Management

APPENDIX A1 - Drilling and completion work programme

Milking center performance and cost

PROFILE OF SACRAMENTO RIVER, FREEPORT TO VERONA, CALIFORNIA,

Reality Flow Monitoring:

BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM

OREGON HEALTH. Systems Public Water Supply Systems Community Water Supply Systems Source Water Protection

Active Community Design: Why Here? Why Now?

PQI Model 301 & 300Test Block Procedure

Index. Batch processing 56 Branching xiii 52 62

APPENDIX F GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOGS

YORKSHIRE WATER PROTECTION OF MAINS AND SERVICES

Walnut Street Trunk Sewer Replacement - Route Evaluation Final Technical Memorandum. June 2018

Third time s a charm for installing gravity sewer in tough Georgia rock

Water & Sewer Rate Study

Practice Test FOR GAS POSITIONS APTITUDE BATTERY

INTERMEDIATE CASING SELECTION FOR COLLAPSE, BURST AND AXIAL DESIGN FACTOR LOADS EXERCISE

Student Population Projections By Residence. School Year 2016/2017 Report Projections 2017/ /27. Prepared by:

Project Update May 2018

Evaluating Surge Potential in CSO Tunnels

Horizontal Directional Drilling and Impact Moling

MTA CAPITAL PROGRAM: Tri-State Transportation Campaign

CLEANING, INSPECTION, AND TESTING OF SEWERS

2026 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Bid Book Overview

ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE (ZOCO DRAFT ): ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES AND DETERMINATIONS RELATED TO BULK, COVERAGE AND PLACEMENT

*A Certificate of Survey for the property may be on file at City Hall if the house was built after 1984.

ITEM 2.3 South of Fraser Rapid Transit Surrey-Langley technology decision. That the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation receive this report.

LAKE BLUFF PARK DISTRICT BLAIR PARK SWIMMING POOL Questions and Answers OVERVIEW

Building Great Neighbourhoods BONNIE DOON

Town of Tupper Lake Water and Sewer District Consolidation Study

County of Orange Resources and Development Management Department Harbors, Beaches and Parks. Strategic Plan. HBP Strategic Plan Workshop 1.

THE WAY THE VENTURI AND ORIFICES WORK

586, ,057 78, N/A $ 781,657 $ 586,243 $ - $ 40 N/A $ 16,307,537 $ 3,261,507 $ - $ 3,261,507

Boston s Pilot Project to Measure CSO Flows Relies on New Technology and Scattergraphs to Detect Overflows

Pumping Systems for Landscaping Pumps, Controls and Accessories. Mark Snyder, PE

PARKING REVENUE MODEL AN INFORMATIONAL REPORT. Nitin P. Deshpande Jacobs. Errol K. Stevens Regional Transport District - Denver

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 002 EMORANNO. 001

APPENDIX W OFF-MODEL ADJUSTMENTS

Confined Space Entry Written Program

TECHNICAL DATA. Q= Cv S

Wood County Economic Development

Application of Value Engineering The Crosstown Project

I-20 East Transit Initiative. Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting September 9, :00-6:00 PM

Unit 3 Day 7. Exponential Growth & Decay

CENTER PIVOT EVALUATION AND DESIGN

Interim Transit Ridership Forecast Results Technical Memorandum

Assateague Island National Seashore North End Restoration Project Timeline

TOWN OF WINDSOR LOCKS WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2014

Two-port valves, male threaded, PN25

Shared Resource Conservation Manager Program Report Washington State University Energy Program, March 2013

South Portland City Council Position Paper of the City Manager

Personnel Benchmarking Author: Ed Rehkopf

APPENDIX G: DETAILED COST ESTIMATES

Turf Fields Feasibility Committee

TOTALIZATOR ACT 1997 RULES OF BETTING

SPECIFICATIONS - DETAILED PROVISIONS Section Butterfly Valves C O N T E N T S

LESSONS FROM THE GREEN LANES: EVALUATING PROTECTED BIKE LANES IN THE U.S.

Appendix G. Alternative Solutions Details. Krosno Creek Flood Reduction Project PROJECT FILE REPORT CITY OF PICKERING

Audit Report. Department of the Interior Office of Inspector General

FOR WASTEWATER APPLICATIONS

Program Update. Relationship: RP, RTIP, Budget, POF. Board of Directors Item 16 February 22, Board of Directors Item 16 Feb 22,

Stonehouse Skate Park. Stonehouse Town Council. Stonehouse, Gloucestershire. Skateboarding, BMX, In- line skating. 50,000 (43% of total)

Acknowledgement: Author is indebted to Dr. Jennifer Kaplan, Dr. Parthanil Roy and Dr Ashoke Sinha for allowing him to use/edit many of their slides.

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study

ADVANCED TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MODELING

New two-lane bridge to replace the existing structure spanning the Maple River just south of the Village s central business district

Assistant Lecturer Anees Kadhum AL Saadi

Agile Manager widget descriptions

W I L D W E L L C O N T R O L PRESSURE BASICS AND CONCEPTS

Transcription:

Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Interceptor Sequencing Study Technical Memorandum 5 Unit Costs for Interceptor Pipe January 2010 Costs for Interceptor Pipe.docx

Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Interceptor Sequencing Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 5 Unit Costs for Interceptor Pipe TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 53 2.0 INTERCEPTOR PIPE... 53 3.0 PAST PROJECT COSTS... 53 4.0 INTERCEPTOR PIPE UNIT COST ANALYSIS... 54 5.0 PUMP STATIONS... 55 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS... 57 6.1 Recommended Multipliers... 58 Appendix A Appendix B SRCSD Past Projects OpenCut Unit Costs SRCSD Past Projects Trenchless Unit Costs DRAFT July 12, 2010 i

LIST OF TABLES Table 5.1 SRCSD Sewer Pipe Capital Projects... 53 Table 5.2 Interceptor Pipe Unit Cost Analysis (Installed OpenCut < 35 Feet Deep)... 54 Table 5.3 Interceptor Pipe Unit Cost Analysis (Installed Trenchless > 35 Feet Deep).. 55 Table 5.4 SRCSD Pump Station Costs... 56 Table 5.5 Recommended Interceptor Pipe Unit Costs... 57 Table 5.6 Pump Station Capital Costs from Figure 5.1... 58 Table 5.7 Recommended Capital Cost Additions... 58 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 5.1 Pump Station Costs vs. Capacity... 56 DRAFT July 12, 2010 ii

Technical Memorandum No. 5 UNIT COSTS FOR INTERCEPTOR PIPE 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (SRCSD) is carrying out a highlevel study to determine alternatives that would provide buildout regional sewer service for future developments. This technical memorandum (TM) addresses the unit pipe and pump station capital costs of this planning effort. Practical interceptor and pump station alternatives are being chosen through a screening process. This TM will recommend unit costs for interceptor pipes and pump stations that can be used provide rough estimates of their capital costs. Developing these unit costs will be undertaken by using unit costs from bids collected from previous SRCSD projects and adjusting them to currentday dollars. Because of the highlevel nature of the ISS, allowances for details such as pipe depth are very limited. Two unit prices will be recommended for each interceptor pipe size, one for opencut construction (less than 35feet in depth) and one for trenchless construction (greater than 35feet in depth). This TM does not include costs for environmental mitigation, rightofway purchase, operation and maintenance, public impacts and risk. 2.0 INTERCEPTOR PIPE SRCSD has completed many capital investment projects with large diameter sewer pipe and these have been collected according to their specific pipe sizes and the unit prices from their project bid tabs. These unit costs are escalated to 2009 dollars and compared to each other. They are also compared to a unit cost list prepared by the Interceptor Engineering (IE) group in 2009 and then a logical bestfit unit cost is assigned to each interceptor pipe size for both opencut and trenchless construction methods. 3.0 PAST PROJECT COSTS The following SRCSD interceptor sewer pipe projects were researched in this exercise: Table 5.1 SRCSD Sewer Pipe Capital Projects Arden Parallel Force Main Natomas Force Main Bradshaw 5B Sacramento Force Main Bradshaw 6A Southport Gravity Sewer Bradshaw 6B UNWI 5&6 Bradshaw 7A UNWI 7 Bradshaw 7B UNWI 8 Bradshaw 8 West Sacramento Force Main Folsom East 1B Yolo Force Main Laguna Interceptor Extension DRAFT July 12, 2010 53

4.0 INTERCEPTOR PIPE UNIT COST ANALYSIS The collective unit costs of the projects in Table 5.1 have been escalated to 2009 dollars using a 3% escalation rate and are shown as an average in Table 5.2 and 5.3 below. Next to these average unit costs are shown unit costs from a 2009 cost list compiled by IE. For a full spreadsheet of past project unit costs, please see attached Appendix A and B. Table 5.2 Pipe Type Pipe Diameter (inches) Interceptor Pipe Unit Cost Analysis (Installed OpenCut < 35 Feet Deep) Past Project Unit Prices (In 2009 Dollars) Avg. Past Project Unit Price (2009) Current IE Baseline Costs Table (2009) Best Fit Unit Costs (2009) RCP 27 $420 $420 RCP 30 $470 $470 RCP 33 $470 $525 RCP 36 $567 $567 $600 $580 RCP 42 $650 $650 RCP 48 $836 $568 $832 $745 $700 $720 RCP 54 $799 $966 $883 $1,200 $900 RCP 60 $777 $777 $1,250 $960 RCP 66 $707 $707 $1,300 $1,020 RCP 72 $1,188 $984 $1,086 $1,400 $1,080 RCP 78 $1,500 $1,140 RCP 84 $1,063 $974 $939 $992 $1,200 RCP 90 $1,280 $1,113 $1,196 $1,260 RCP 108 $1,344 $1,101 $1,180 $3,014* $1,660 $1,440 RCP 120 $1,380 $1,380 $1,560 FM 15 $220 $220 FM 18 $250 $250 FM 21 $320 $320 FM 24 $355 $355 FM 27 $390 $390 FM 32 $657 $657 $500 FM 36 $325 $325 $525 $550 FM 60 $667 $667 $650 FM Duel 66 $1,136 $1,045 $1,090 $1,100 *Anomaly not included in analysis. DRAFT July 12, 2010 54

Table 5.3 Pipe Type Interceptor Pipe Unit Cost Analysis (Installed Trenchless > 35 Feet Deep) Current IE Avg. Past Baseline Best Fit Pipe Project Costs Unit Diameter Past Project Unit Prices (In Unit Price Table Costs (inches) 2009 Dollars) (2009) (2009) (2009) RCP 27 $700 RCP 30 $800 RCP 33 $900 RCP 36 $1,050 $1,000 RCP 42 $1,100 RCP 48 $1,507 $806 $1,731 $1,348 $1,200 $1,300 RCP 54 $2,100 $1,525 RCP 60 $2,150 $1,750 RCP 66 $1,791 $1,791 $1,975 RCP 72 $1,915 $2,460 $2,187 $2,200 RCP 78 $2,250 RCP 84 $2,319 $2,319 $2,300 RCP 90 $2,400 RCP 108 $1,229 $20,867* $3,478 $8,525 $2,500 RCP 120 $2,600 *Anomaly Not included in analysis. The last column (named Best Fit Unit Costs ) is produced by comparing the unit costs in the previous columns and making a judgment on a cost that makes sense. There are different reasons for why past unit costs are so different than the IE costs (varying depths, short tunnel reaches, different subsurface conditions etc) and these can sometimes be taken into account. With those numbers considered more reliable for one pipe size, others were then filled in using a reasonably spaced scale. As indicated by the tables, two data entries were ignored as being anomalies. 5.0 PUMP STATIONS Similarly, SRCSD have constructed a number of pump stations and Table 5.4 below lists these projects as well as their bid dates, capacities and costs. DRAFT July 12, 2010 55

Table 5.4 Facility SRCSD Pump Station Costs Bid Date Capacity (MGD) Original Cost Today's Cost (2009) Iron Point Pump Station 2000 10.3 $4,800,000 $6,262,911 Northborough LS 2001 4 $1,129,000 $1,430,183 Parkway Green LS 2002 2.3 $483,960 $595,210 Anatolia LS 2004 3.6 $1,111,037 $1,287,996 Fruitridge Center Pump Station 2004 9.7 $4,483,880 $5,198,046 Power Inn Pump Station 2004 22.3 $5,719,423 $6,630,379 New Natomas Pump Station 2004 195 $61,983,500 $71,855,865 South River Pump Station 2004 195 $61,983,500 $71,855,865 Natomas Central LS 2006 1.15 $1,576,000 $1,722,138 Metro Air Park LS 2006 4.33 $3,965,000 $4,332,663 Laguna Ridge N LS 2006 5 $3,848,500 $4,205,360 SunCreek 1 (Proposed OPC) 2010 2.26 $1,000,000 $970,874 SunCreek 2 (Proposed OPC) 2010 9.91 $8,000,000 $7,766,990 By graphing the capacities against the 2009 costs we get the following: Figure 5.1 $80,000,000 Pump Station Costs vs. Capacity Pump Station Costs $70,000,000 Pump Station Cost (2009 $) $60,000,000 $50,000,000 $40,000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000 $10,000,000 $0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Pump Station Capacity (MGD) The red line in Figure 5.1 is a trend line for this data. Although there is obviously an absence of data between the capacities of approximately 22 MGD and 195 MGD it is DRAFT July 12, 2010 56

determined that, for the purposes of the highlevel nature of the ISS, this trend line is sufficient to estimate the costs of various sized pump stations. 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the information obtained from this exercise, the following recommendations are made: Table 5.5 Pipe Type Recommended Interceptor Pipe Unit Costs Pipe Diameter Unit Cost for OpenCut (inches) ($/ft <35 feet deep) Unit Cost for Trenchless ($/ft >35 feet deep) RCP 27 $420 $700 RCP 30 $470 $800 RCP 33 $525 $900 RCP 36 $580 $1,000 RCP 42 $650 $1,100 RCP 48 $720 $1,300 RCP 54 $900 $1,525 RCP 60 $960 $1,750 RCP 66 $1,020 $1,975 RCP 72 $1,080 $2,200 RCP 78 $1,140 $2,250 RCP 84 $1,200 $2,300 RCP 90 $1,260 $2,400 RCP 108 $1,440 $2,500 RCP 120 $1,560 $2,600 FM 15 $220 FM 18 $250 FM 21 $320 FM 24 $355 FM 27 $390 FM 32 $500 FM 36 $550 FM 60 $650 DRAFT July 12, 2010 57

Table 5.6 Pump Station Capital Costs from Figure 5.1 PS Capacity (MGD) Cost ($million in 2009) PS Capacity (MGD) Cost ($million in 2009) 10 $5.0 110 $41.0 20 $8.0 120 $44.5 30 $12.0 130 $48.0 40 $16.0 140 $52.0 50 $19.0 150 $55.5 60 $23.0 160 $59.0 70 $26.0 170 $62.5 80 $30.0 180 $66.0 90 $34.0 190 $70.0 100 $37.0 200 $73.5 6.1 Recommended Multipliers From previous SRCSD projects (especially the LNWI projects) the following table shows the additional engineering capital costs that should be added to a cost estimate in order to reach the total approximate capital cost for a project. Table 5.7 Recommended Capital Cost Additions Construction AddOns Percentage of Probable Construction SubTotal Mobilization/Demobilization 10.0% Contingencies 30.0% Engineering Costs Percentage of Total Probable Construction Cost Engineering/Admin/Legal/Environmental/RoW 43.0% DRAFT July 12, 2010 58

Appendix A SRCSD PAST PROJECTS OPENCUT UNIT COSTS

Appendix A SRCSD Past Projects Unit Prices OpenCut Laguna North & Southport West Arden Bradshaw Bradshaw Bradshaw Bradshaw Bradshaw Folsom East Interceptor South Sac Sacramento Gravity Sacramento Project Contract # Parallel FM 3709 5B 3115 6A 3564 6B 3641 7A 3764 7B 3765 Bradshaw 8 3749 1B 3701 Extension 3695 Natomas FM 3792 River Cross 3793 FM 3799 Sewer 3795 UNWI 5&6 3639 UNWI 7 3646 UNWI 8 3609 FM 3794 Yolo FM 3797 Year Bid 2004 1999 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2002 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 Avg. Depth (ft) 15 30 2530 3035 3035 2530 3540 30 2030 Under River <16 35 2530 1520 1520 2025 Escalation Rate 3.0% 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 Pipe Type Pipe Size (in) Pipe Depth (ft) 2009 Dollar s Gravity RCP 36 2630 $475 $567 Gravity RCP 36 3135 Gravity RCP 48 1620 $700 $836 Gravity RCP 48 2125 Gravity RCP 48 2630 $490 $568 $697 $832 Gravity RCP 54 2630 $650 $799 $809 $966 Gravity RCP 60 2125 $670 $777 Gravity RCP 66 2630 $610 $707 Gravity RCP 72 2630 $1,025 $1,188 $800 $984 Gravity RCP 78 4145 Gravity RCP 84 2630 $810 $939 Gravity RCP 84 3035 $917 $1,063 $840 $974 Gravity RCP 90 30 $1,104 $1,280 $960 $1,113 Gravity RCP 108 30 $1,000 $1,344 $950 $1,101 $2,600 $3,014 Gravity RCP 108 3035 $1,018 $1,180 Gravity RCP 120 3035 $1,190 $1,380 FM 32 <16 $550 $657 FM 36 <16 $280 $325 FM 60 <16 $724 $839 $593 $687 $575 $667 FM 66 <16 $980 $1,136 $901 $1,045

Appendix B SRCSD PAST PROJECTS TRENCHLESS UNIT COSTS

Arden Bradshaw Bradshaw Bradshaw Bradshaw Folsom East Natomas Sacramento Project Contract # Parallel FM 3709 5B 3115 6A 3564 Bradshaw 6B 3641 7A 3764 7B 3765 Bradshaw 8 3749 1B 3701 Extension 3695 FM 3792 River Cross 3793 FM 3799 Sewer 3795 UNWI 5&6 3639 UNWI 7 3646 UNWI 8 3609 FM 3794 Yolo FM 3797 Year Bid 2004 1999 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2002 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 Avg. Depth (ft) 15 30 2530 3035 3035 2530 3540 30 2030 Under River 30 35 2530 1520 1520 2025 Escalation Rate 3.0% 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 Pipe Type Pipe Size (in) Pipe Depth (ft) Dollar s Gravity RCP 48 1620 $675 $806 Gravity RCP 48 2125 Gravity RCP 48 2630 $1,300 $1,507 $1,450 $1,731 Gravity RCP 66 2630 $1,500 $1,791 Gravity RCP 72 2630 $2,000 $2,460 Gravity RCP 72 3135 Gravity RCP 72 3640 $1,652 $1,915 Gravity RCP 84 2630 $2,000 $2,319 Gravity RCP 108 30 $1,060 $1,229 $18,000 $20,867 $3,000 $3,478 FM 15 <16 FM 18 <16 FM 21 <16 FM 24 <16 FM 27 <16 FM 32 <16 $1,450 $1,731 $1,585 $1,893 FM 36 <16 FM 60 <16 FM 60 80 $2,131 $2,470 Appendix B SRCSD Past Projects Unit Prices TRENCHLESS Laguna Interceptor North & South Sac FM 66 2030 $1,800 $2,087 Southport Gravity West Sacramento