1 / 23

Best for the Buck: Using Asset Management for Project Design at Highline Water District

Best for the Buck: Using Asset Management for Project Design at Highline Water District. Matthew J. Maring, P.E. April 30, 2008. Initial Project Design Concept. Transmission Capacity Improvements 4600’ 16” Diameter Mains $1.8M Estimated Capital Cost Dead-End Main Looping Improvements

penn
Download Presentation

Best for the Buck: Using Asset Management for Project Design at Highline Water District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Best for the Buck:Using Asset Management for Project Design atHighline Water District Matthew J. Maring, P.E. April 30, 2008

  2. Initial Project Design Concept • Transmission Capacity Improvements • 4600’ 16” Diameter Mains • $1.8M Estimated Capital Cost • Dead-End Main Looping Improvements • 6500’ 8” Diameter Mains • $2.1M Estimated Capital Cost • New Pressure Zone Creation • 7 PRVs and 12 Isolation Valves • $0.8M Estimated Capital Cost • $4.7M Total Estimated Capital Cost

  3. Project Approach • Asset Management Predesign Review • Business Case Evaluation • Hydraulic Modeling Analysis • Alternative Design Approaches • Identify, Optimize, Assess, Compare • Identify Preferred Design Alternatives • Detailed Design • Construction

  4. Business Case Evaluation Process • Form Expert Team – Highline and BC Staff • Problem and Level of Service Definition • Data Collection, Problem Characterization • Alternative Development Brainstorming • Alternative Performance Evaluations • Hydraulic Modeling Analysis • Alternative Performance, Cost, and Risk Comparison • Preferred Solutions  Detailed Design

  5. Business Case Difference • Lifecycle Cost – A dollar is a dollar • Capital, O&M, R&R, Risk Costs • Triple Bottom Line Costing • Financial • Community/Social • Environmental • Preferred Solution = Lowest Lifecycle Cost that Meets Level of Service • Decisions • Documented, Defensible, Transparent

  6. Problem Definition • Low Pressures • Limited Fire Flow Availability • Dead-End Mains • Water Circulation and Turn Over • Low Pressures, Limited Fire Flow • High Pressures • Frequent Main Breaks

  7. Level of Service • Peak Hour Demand Pressures > 30-40 psi • Max Day Demand + Fire Flow > 20 psi • Dead-End Mains • Address Pressures and Fire Flows • Correct where Financially Preferable • High Pressures and Main Breaks • Distribution Leakage Standards • Correct where Financially Preferable • Goal: Max Static Pressures < 100 psi

  8. Data Collection and Problem Characterization • Hydraulic Model System Performance • Minimum Pressures, Fire Flows • Water Main Breaks • 3 to 4 Times More Frequent in High Pressure Areas • $6K+ Average Cost per Break • Repair Labor, Materials, Equipment • Lost Water, Insurance Claims/Deductibles • Reduce High Pressure Breaks to “Normal” Levels = $18K Annual Savings • Dead-End Main Flushing is “Cheap”

  9. Existing System: Future Model Scenario Pressure and Fire Flow Performance

  10. High Pressure Area Main Breaks

  11. High Pressure Area Main Breaks

  12. Main Breaks: High Pressures or Acidic Soils?

  13. Alternative Development • Low Pressures and Fire Flow Availability • Pipe and Pump Improvements • Various Sizes and Combinations • Dead-End Mains • Looping • Alternating and Continuous • High Pressures • New Pressure Zone • PRV Quantity and Locations • Isolation Valve Quantity and Locations

  14. Alternative Performanceand Hydraulic Modeling

  15. Alternative Performanceand Hydraulic Modeling

  16. Alternative Performance New Zone Area Pressures, Before and After

  17. Lifecycle NPV Cost Comparison • Lifecycle Net Present Value (NPV) Analysis • Capital, O&M, R&R, Risk Costs • Amount Invested Today to Fund All Current and Future Asset Costs

  18. Risk Cost Considerations • Risk Cost = (Probability) x (Consequence) • Example A:(Annual Number of Main Breaks) x (Average Break Repair Cost) • Example B:(Likelihood of Insurance Claim) x (Insurance Deductible + Staff Costs) • Benefit Cost = (Probability) x (Avoided Consequence) • Example C:(Avoided Number of Main Breaks) x (Average Break Repair Cost)

  19. Preferred Solution for Detailed Design • Transmission Capacity Improvements • 1800’ 12” Diameter Mains • Pump Station Upgrades • $1.1M Estimated Capital Cost • Dead-End Main Looping Improvements • 2700’ 8” Diameter Mains (Alternating) • $0.9M Estimated Capital Cost • New Pressure Zone Creation • 3 PRVs, 50 psi Pressure Reduction • $0.3M Estimated Capital Cost • $2.3M Total Estimated Capital Cost

  20. Preferred Solution Delivers Optimal Performance and Cost Savings

  21. Avoided Risk Costs Demonstrate Project Value • High Pressure Areas Main Breaks • $0.5M Lifecycle NPV Repair Cost • New Pressure Zone Creation • $0.4M Lifecycle NPV Cost • $0.5M Lifecycle NPV Avoided Repairs • $0.1M Savings Over Status Quo

  22. Asset Management Approach Successful Business Case Evaluation and Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Approach Results: • Cost Savings • $2.6M Capital Costs = 53% • $2.3M Lifecycle Costs = 45% • Higher Overall Level of Service • Takes Advantage of Existing Assets • Pump Station Upgrades vs. New Water Mains • New Pressure Zone Pays for Itself • $0.4M Lifecycle Cost vs. • $0.5M Avoided Lifecycle Main Break Repair Costs

  23. Questions?

More Related