Capacity Report 2020

2020 CAPACITY REPORTS

FLOWS & LOADINGS I&I/FLOW MONITORING CAPACITY ASSESSMENT 2020 CAPACITY REPORTS

FLOWS & LOADINGS I&I/FLOW MONITORING CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

PREFACE

The Flows and Loadings Report is one of three related documents that are part of the annual process to monitor and evaluate capacity in the entire LOTT system. The intent, under LOTT’s Wastewater Resource Management Plan (also known as the Highly Managed Plan), is to assure that needed new capacity is brought on-line “just in time” to meet system needs. Capacity needs evaluated include wastewater treatment, Budd Inlet discharge, reclaimed water use/recharge, and conveyance capacity in the entire LOTT system. These three reports are prepared annually and are used to help identify capital projects for inclusion in the annual Capital Improvements Plan.

Flows and Loadings Report – analyzes residential and employment population projections within the Urban Growth Area and estimates the impact on wastewater flows and loadings within the LOTT wastewater system.

Inflow and Infiltration Report – uses dry and wet weather sewer flow monitoring results to quantify the amount of unwanted surface (inflow) and subsurface (infiltration) water entering the sewer system and to prioritize sewer line rehabilitation projects.

Capacity Assessment Report – uses flows and loadings data and inflow and infiltration evaluation results to analyze system components (i.e. conveyance, treatment, and discharge), determine when limitations will occur, and provide a timeline for new system components and upgrades.

As each report is published, it will be posted in the Library on LOTT’s website – www.lottcleanwater.org.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report i

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... iii 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Purpose ...... 1 1.2 Data Elements ...... 1 1.3 Modeling Software ...... 1 1.4 Changes from Previous Reports ...... 1 2. Study Area ...... 2 2.1 Service Area ...... 2 2.2 Current Sewered Area ...... 3 2.3 Future Sewered Area ...... 4 2.4 On-site Septic Systems ...... 7 3. Population and Employment Forecast ...... 8 3.1 Projections ...... 8 3.2 Equivalent Residential Units ...... 9 3.3 New Connections ...... 10 4. Flows and Loadings ...... 12 4.1 Permit Requirements ...... 12 4.2 Drinking Water Analysis ...... 12 4.3 Base Sanitary Flow ...... 14 4.4 Comparison with Historical Wastewater Generation Rates ...... 16 4.5 Flow Projections ...... 17 4.6 Inflow and Infiltration Projections...... 17 4.7 Loading Projections ...... 19 4.8 Projections Analysis ...... 22 5. Summary ...... 26

2019 Flows and Loadings Report ii

Executive Summary

In accordance with the Wastewater Resource Management Plan, also known as the Highly Managed Plan, LOTT is continuously planning to ensure it maintains adequate operational capacity to meet the community needs. The primary goal of the annual Flows and Loadings Report is to define the current and projected wastewater characteristics of the LOTT service area in terms of both wastewater flows and pollutant constituents (loads). The information in this report was used to develop the 2019 Capacity Assessment Report and the 2021-2022 Capital Improvements Plan.

The Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) updates its population and employment projections every five years. The latest update was published in 2018. These projections were used to develop the flows and loadings included in this report. Additional data included flow monitoring data collected as part of LOTT’s inflow and infiltration evaluation program, timelines for sewering of non-sewered areas provided by each of the partner jurisdictions (Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater), and updated current sewered areas.

This report also includes a drinking water evaluation using 2018-2019 drinking water consumption data obtained from the jurisdictions. This analysis was used to recalibrate wastewater generation rate profiles for each of the jurisdictions.

Generally, the projected flows and loadings are slightly reduced from the previous year. The reduction reflects year to year variability in the drinking water assessment, as well as refining the currently sewered area map.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report iii

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose Accurate projections of future wastewater flows and loadings are essential in planning for new treatment capacity. In accordance with the Highly Managed Plan, LOTT is continuously monitoring and planning to assure that adequate new wastewater treatment capacity is available “just in time.” The primary goal of the annual Flows and Loadings Report is to define the current and projected wastewater characteristics of the LOTT service area in terms of both wastewater flows and pollutant constituents (loads). Flows and loadings projections cover the 31-year planning cycle (2019-2050) and will be used to evaluate the existing LOTT Capital Improvements Plan and develop recommendations for the timing of capacity related projects.

1.2 Data Elements Data used for the development of this report included wastewater flow monitoring data, sewered and non-sewered population projections, existing sewer lines, estimated timelines for sewering of non-sewered areas within the overall Urban Growth Area (UGA), and 2018-2019 drinking water consumption data. Flow data was collected at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant and at various flow monitoring locations throughout the collection system. Population projections, updated in 2018, were obtained from the Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) in the form of projected residential and employment populations per parcel. The estimated sewering timelines, drinking water consumption data, and existing collection system piping information were obtained from each of the partner jurisdictions (Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater).

1.3 Modeling Software To develop the flows and loadings projections, the drinking water data was combined in Excel and then uploaded to a map of the parcels in Thurston County in a geographic information system (GIS) database. The drinking water data was allocated to its specific parcel, which contained population data and projections provided by TRPC. This combined data was exported and extrapolated in Excel.

1.4 Changes from Previous Reports This year’s projections were developed similarly to those developed in the 2018 Flow and Loadings Report. Drinking water data was collected from each of the partner jurisdictions, along with parcel identification numbers, rate classes, and units per parcel. This drinking water data was sorted, organized, and assigned to their respective parcels in GIS. The GIS map held other pertinent data for each parcel, including its physical location, drinking water basin, sewer basin, future sewer basin, and population projection data from TRPC. The raw drinking water data from the jurisdictions, along with the population projections from TRPC, were used to project future wastewater and loading production rates.

In 2018, TRPC published population projections in the form of a GIS parcel file and included projected residential population for the years 2018, 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, and 2040. This analysis used previous TRPC projections for employment and maximum density estimate (build out state) that were originally published in 2013. Population projections are discussed further in Section 3.1.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 1

2. Study Area

2.1 Service Area The LOTT service area includes the urban growth areas (UGAs) for the cities of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater. The current combined UGA encompasses approximately 52,276 acres, with a current estimated residential population of 175,487, and an employment population of 115,190. These residential projections are slightly lower than the projections presented in the 2018 Flow and Loadings Report (residential population of 178,620). This reduction appears to be related to the TRPC projection file, which was not fully incorporated into the 2018 report, but has been fully incorporated into this report. Employment projections remained consistent with previous years’ analyses.

Figure 2-1. LOTT Service Area by Jurisdiction

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 2

2.2 Current Sewered Area Within the LOTT service area, approximately 16,516 acres are sewered, serving an estimated residential population of 115,660 and an employment population of 93,110. The currently sewered parcels, shown in yellow on Figure 2-2, indicate parcels that had drinking water consumption data in the 2018-19 period and that were identified by LOTT’s partners as currently active customers.

Parcels shown in purple on Figure 2-2 depict manually sewered parcels for which drinking water consumption data was either not received or was zero, but were physically surrounded by sewered parcels, or were otherwise known to be sewered. Some of the parcels may be vacant and others may simply be gaps in the customer database. Inactive parcels have been modeled to become active within the next five years.

Figure 2-2. Currently Sewered Area

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 3

2.3 Future Sewered Area In order to properly project future flows and loadings, future sewered areas must be accounted for. This includes accounting for existing development served by the sewer system, future development served by the sewer system, and development that will be converting from on-site septic systems to the sewer system in the future. The service area has been divided into sewer basins to estimate the rate and timing of sewer connections and future flows and loadings.

In 2014, the three cities – Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater – provided information on when sewer basins in their service area are expected to begin connecting to the sewer system and when the conversions would be complete. Figure 2-3 illustrates the future sewered areas, and Table 2.1 illustrates expected timeline for conversion from septic to sewer.

The build out state, currently projected to occur in 2050 based on a linear regression analysis, is when all parcels within the UGA will have been developed. It should be noted that the build out state does not assume that all parcels will be connected to the sewer system by 2050. It is assumed that a certain percentage of new development within the UGA will include on-site septic systems. The development density is projected by TRPC based on the current zoning and the previous development density corresponding to that zoning.

Sewer connections were prioritized based on data generated by the Inter-jurisdictional Regional Septic Work Group. This data was obtained from the Thurston Geodata Center in the form of a GIS parcel file. The file included an inventory of septic systems and associated risk scores based on environmental and health concerns. Basins with high environmental risk were projected to be connected earlier than those with lower risk.

For this year’s analysis, four separate sewering rate scenarios were developed: 1) low rate, 2) expected rate, 3) aggressive rate, and 4) full sewering.

1) The low rate of sewering assumes the majority of sewer basins containing undeveloped parcels with no existing septic tank would begin the connection process by 2020, and that by 2050, about 40% of these parcels would be connected to the sewer system. For the parcels that currently have a septic tank, the start date for the connection process would begin between 2025 and 2030, and only about 23% of the parcels would be connected to the sewer system by 2050.

2) The expected rate assumes that the undeveloped parcels with no existing septic tanks that began connection to the sewer system before 2020 would be 100% converted to sewer by 2050. The expected rate also assumes that the majority of parcels with an existing septic tank would begin sewer connection in 2030 and would be about 35% converted to sewer by 2050.

3) The aggressive projection rate assumes that all of the undeveloped parcels with no existing septic tanks, regardless of sewer basin, will be fully sewered by 2050. The parcels with an existing septic tank would be roughly 30-58% sewered by 2050 (depending on environmental risk).

4) The full sewering rate assumes that by 2050 all parcels, those with and without septic tanks, regardless of sewer basin, will be connected to the sewer system. The latest start date for any sewer basin is 2030. End sewering dates are all 2050 (build out) for every

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 4

sewer basin. This reflects the assumption made in previous LOTT flows and loadings projections.

In developing the future sewering rates, it was expected that the rate of connection is to occur at a faster rate in the next 10 years than is expected to occur in the following 20 to 30 years. The rate of septic conversion is assumed to follow a more linear trend.

The majority of the projections discussed in this report assume the expected sewering rate. Other projections are occasionally shown for comparison.

Figure 2-3. Future Sewer Basins

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 5

Table 2-1. Expected Future Sewering Schedule Parcels with no existing Parcels with existing septic tank septic tank Current Septic % Sewer Conversion Existing Coverage Priority % Parcels Septics (0-5, (1-3, Connected Converted ID Name 5=Full) 3 = High) Start End at 2050 Start End at 2050 Thompson 1 Place E 0 3 2050 2300 0% 2050 2300 0% 2 Hawks Prairie 3 3 2020 2050 100% 2030 2125 21% Thompson 3 Place W 2 3 2020 2075 55% 2030 2125 21% Woodland 4 Creek 1 3 2020 2050 100% 2025 2075 50% 5 Lilly Road 1 3 2020 2050 100% 2020 2075 55% 6 South Bay 3 3 2020 2050 100% 2030 2125 21% 7 Ridgeview 1 3 2020 2080 50% 2030 2125 21% 8 Tanglewilde 1 3 2020 2100 38% 2030 2125 21% 9 Meadows 0 1 2020 2060 75% 2025 2060 71% 10 Central Lacey 2 1 2020 2060 75% 2020 2075 55% 11 Lake Forest 3 1 2020 2050 100% 2020 2075 55% 12 SE Lacey 2 2 2020 2080 50% 2030 2100 29% 13 Horizon 1 2 2020 2080 50% 2030 2100 29% 14 Carpenter Road 4 1 2020 2040 100% 2030 2075 44% 15 Hwy 99 2 1 2020 2050 100% 2030 2075 44% 16 Trails End 2 3 2021 2075 54% 2030 2125 21% 17 S Tumwater 2 3 2020 2075 55% 2030 2125 21% 18 SW Little Rock 2 3 2020 2075 55% 2030 2125 21% 19 Black Hills 0 1 2025 2060 71% 2025 2075 50% 20 Trosper 2 3 2021 2075 54% 2030 2125 21% Central 21 Tumwater 0 3 2020 2080 50% 2030 2125 21% 22 Pioneer 4 2 2020 2040 100% 2030 2100 29% 23 Black Lake 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 24 N Black Lake 0 2 2020 2080 50% 2030 2100 29% 25 Mottman 0 1 2020 2060 75% 2030 2075 44% 26 Ken Lake 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 27 West Side 4 1 2020 2040 100% 2025 2075 50% 28 Green Cove 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 29 West Bay 2 3 2020 2075 55% 2030 2125 21% 30 East Bay 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 31 E Olympia 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 32 Indian Creek 5 3 2020 2025 100% 2030 2125 21% W Chambers 33 Prairie 4 3 2020 2040 100% 2030 2125 21% 34 SE Olympia 0 2 2022 2080 48% 2030 2100 29% 35 Wilderness 2 3 2020 2075 55% 2030 2125 21% Chambers 36 Prairie 3 3 2020 2050 100% 2030 2125 21% Downtown 37 Olympia 4 1 2020 2040 100% 2030 2075 44%

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 6

2.4 On-site Septic Systems As discussed in the previous section, future sewering considers extension of sewer to new developments, as well as conversion of existing on-site septic systems. Figure 2-4 illustrates the locations of the parcels with septic systems.

The 16,814 existing septic parcels represent a base flow of approximately 3.6 million gallons per day (mgd). The current projection assumes sewering of 34% of existing septics (5,789) by 2050, which would add a base flow of approximately 1.2 mgd to the system.

Figure 2-4. Existing Parcels with Septic Systems

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 7

3. Population and Employment Forecast

3.1 Projections In 2018, TRPC published population projections in the form of a GIS parcel file and included projected residential population for the years 2018, 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, and 2040. The build out residential population projections were not updated in 2018. This analysis used previous TRPC projections for employment and maximum density estimate (build out state) that were published in 2013. Employment projections included the years 2010 and 2035 and build out projections expected to occur in 2050 based on a linear regression analysis.

For each parcel location, the following attributes were assigned: jurisdiction, drinking water basin, sewer basin, future sewer basin, drinking water consumption, whether the parcel was sewered or septic, and whether the parcel was predominately residential or commercial.

The parcel data and associated attributes were exported from the GIS file into an Access database for grouping of the attributes. A total of 2,443 unique groups were formed. Each parcel in each group was located in the same drinking water, sewer, and future sewer basin, and jurisdiction; their drinking water consumption data was summed per group, as well as all of the population prediction data. These groups were then exported from the Access database into Excel to perform the forecasting calculations.

The future projections, shown in Table 3-1, were calculated through a linear extrapolation of the data provided by TRPC and the projected rate at which the sewered areas would expand. The residential and employment populations include all persons and employees within the UGA. The sewered residential population and sewered employment population include only those contained within the sewered areas. Future expansion of the sewered areas is accounted for in the projections throughout the forecast period. Figure 3-1 displays the projected population and employment forecasts for the 2019-2050 planning period.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 8

Table 3-1. Population and Employment Projections Year Residential Employee Sewered Residential Sewered Employee Population Population Population Population 2020 179,410 116,832 116,645 96,429 2025 197,623 125,041 127,020 107,957 2030 211,972 133,249 137,371 116,147 2035 224,774 141,458 150,326 125,088 2040 236,059 144,911 164,854 129,778 2045 238,648 148,365 173,447 134,214 2050 241,237 151,818 182,283 138,854 Full 241,237 151,818 241,228 151,818 Sewering

Figure 3-1. Population and Employment Projections (2019-2050) 300,000

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

Population 50,000

- 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052

Population Employment Sewered Population Sewered Employment

3.2 Equivalent Residential Units For billing purposes, each customer connection to the sewer system is measured in terms of equivalent residential units (ERUs). One ERU is the amount of wastewater presumed to come from an average single-family household. For multi-family housing (i.e. apartments), each living unit is counted as 7/10 of an ERU. Commercial and industrial dischargers are billed on a volume basis using water consumption data, which is mathematically converted to ERUs.

Established in 1976 as part of the original LOTT Interlocal Agreement, LOTT has defined an ERU as 900 cubic feet of wastewater volume per month (224 gallons per day). Since that time, residential wastewater generation rates have decreased as a result of water conservation efforts. LOTT is currently developing an updated ERU estimate. Estimates of current residents and employees per ERU are provided in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2. Jurisdiction ERU Summary 2019 Jurisdiction Residents/ERU Employees/ERU Lacey 2.43 7.87 Olympia 2.32 8.15 Tumwater 2.04 7.35 Weighted Average 2.32 7.87

Table 3-3 displays the annual average number of ERUs for each of the jurisdictions over the last 20 years.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 9

Table 3-3. ERU Totals 20-Year Comparison Year Lacey Olympia Tumwater Total 2000 13,356 22,398 6,625 42,379 2001 12,362 23,062 6,582 42,006 2002 13,493 23,142 6,667 43,302 2003 13,689 23,445 6,999 44,133 2004 14,206 23,552 7,161 44,919 2005 14,543 23,939 7,572 46,054 2006 15,326 24,575 7,808 47,709 2007 17,647 24,453 8,127 50,227 2008 18,497 24,522 8,441 51,460 2009 19,092 24,333 8,622 52,047 2010 19,463 24,220 8,819 52,502 2011 20,376 24,452 9,131 53,959 2012 20,372 24,324 9,464 54,160 2013 20,789 25,161 10,136 56,086 2014 21,000 25,100 9,600 55,700 2015 21,895 26,502 10,319 58,716 2016 22,545 26,295 10,706 59,546 2017 23,139 27,150 10,761 61,050 2018 23,760 27,452 10,979 62,191 2019 24,407 27,354 10,876 62,637

3.3 New Connections New connections to the system are billed a one-time connection fee, called a Capacity Development Charge (CDC). One CDC is assessed for each ERU connected to the system. Table 3-4 lists the number of CDCs collected over the last 21 years. Table 3-5 lists the projected new connections over the planning period.

Table 3-4. New Connections 20-Year Comparison Year Lacey Olympia Tumwater Total 2000 316 301 144 761 2001 498 306 164 968 2002 489 410 130 1,029 2003 541 296 273 1,110 2004 750 580 414 1,744 2005 942 392 368 1,702 2006 1,888 488 208 2,584 2007 1,129 219 400 1,748 2008 688 201 288 1,178 2009 510 247 119 875 2010 436 346 192 974 2011 462 429 176 1,066 2012 385 336 187 908 2013 384 399 187 970 2014 398 421 163 982 2015 667 332 142 1,141 2016 986 642 243 1,871 2017 455 586 224 1,265 2018 905 266 155 1,326 2019 24,407 27,354 10,876 62,637

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 10

Future ERUs were projected based upon current ERU estimates and may be used to project future connections to the sewer system. These projections are summarized in Table 3-5.

Table 3-5. New Connection Projections Through the Year 2050 Year Lacey Olympia Tumwater Total 2020 147 282 198 627 2021 784 749 269 1,802 2022 644 657 210 1,511 2023 457 302 70 830 2024 463 294 66 823 2025 472 300 66 838 2026 340 437 265 1,042 2027 347 444 269 1,060 2028 354 452 275 1,081 2029 362 459 280 1,102 2030 370 467 286 1,123 2031 614 417 245 1,276 2032 628 424 251 1,303 2033 643 431 257 1,331 2034 657 439 263 1,358 2035 671 446 269 1,386 2036 648 403 267 1,318 2037 657 407 274 1,339 2038 666 412 281 1,360 2039 676 417 288 1,381 2040 685 421 296 1,402 2041 573 165 136 874 2042 577 166 137 880 2043 581 167 138 886 2044 585 168 140 893 2045 589 169 141 900 2046 594 171 142 906 2047 598 172 144 913 2048 602 173 145 920 2049 607 174 146 927 2050 611 176 148 934

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 11

4. Flows and Loadings

4.1 Permit Requirements The Department of Ecology issued the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, number WA0037061, on February 16, 2018, and it became effective on April 1, 2018. Permit compliance is based primarily on loadings of biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), and total inorganic nitrogen (TIN). Table 4-1 lists the loadings-based permit limitations.

Table 4-1. NPDES Permit Limitations for BITP Summer Shoulder Winter Parameter (Jun–Sep) (Apr, May, Oct) (Nov–Mar) 7 mg/L 8 mg/L 30 mg/L BOD 671 lb/d 900 lb/d 5,640 lb/d 85% removal 85% removal 85% removal 30 mg/L TSS 5,265 lb/d 85% removal 3 mg/L 3 mg/L TIN No limit 288 lb/d 338 lb/d pH 6–9 200/100 ml (monthly) Fecal coliform bacteria 400/100 ml (weekly) 26 mg/L (monthly) Ammonia-N 36 mg/L (maximum day) Additional limits for Fiddlehead Outfall 22 mg/L (monthly) Ammonia-N 31 mg/L (maximum day) Total recoverable 6 µg/L (monthly) copper 7.5 µg/L (maximum day) µg/L = micrograms per liter mg/L = milligrams per liter ml = milliliter TIN = total inorganic nitrogen

4.2 Drinking Water Analysis For this report, drinking water consumption data for 2019 was collected from each of the jurisdictions. Drinking water consumption was reported monthly for each parcel. In order to determine the baseline drinking water consumption rate, and to minimize the effect of irrigation, only winter (November, December, January, and February) drinking water consumption data were used for sewered customers. The total consumption was divided by the total number of days to determine the gallons per day per parcel. The wastewater generation rates were then updated using the population and employment data provided by TRPC. The TRPC population predictions were lower this year than previous years, but drinking water rates remained similar, resulting in higher estimated per capita generation rates in 2019. On average, residential per capita usage increased by 5.9 gallons per person per day, and employment usage increased by 4.4 gallons per person per day.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 12

The drinking water basins were created by consolidating sewer basins with similar consumption characteristics into larger basins. Figure 4-1 illustrates the drinking water basins included in this analysis. The wastewater generation rates are organized by drinking water basin in Table 4-2. The variance in drinking water consumption (and therefore, wastewater generation) between basins may be attributed to a number of contributing factors, including the predominant type of residential units in the basin (single-family, multi-family, senior housing, etc.), the predominant era of home construction, the average age of the residents, and the various commercial, industrial, or public-sector employers present in each basin.

Figure 4-1. 2012 Drinking Water Basins

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 13

Table 4-2. Wastewater Generation Rates by Drinking Water Basin Adjusted Wastewater Population Drinking Water Consumption1 Generation Rate

Sewered Sewered Residential Employee Residential Employee Basin Residential Employee Total gpd gpd gpd gpcd2 gpcd3 1 12,240 12,047 1,423,439 761,890 661,549 60.3 53.2 2 6,959 675 565,253 484,892 80,361 67.5 115.4 3 23,959 4,730 1,680,797 1,450,808 229,990 58.7 47.1 4 6,413 9,320 520,305 371,551 148,755 56.1 15.5 5 3,962 9,099 350,514 202,389 148,125 69.0 22.0 6 3,738 631 222,815 196,964 25,851 71.1 55.3 7 9,918 2,870 641,510 515,428 126,082 70.1 59.3 8 10,425 5,948 641,820 515,694 126,126 66.8 28.6 9 9,991 9,184 817,143 567,357 249,786 76.7 36.7 10 3,421 3,161 365,504 202,476 163,028 61.8 53.9 11 10,672 10,426 872,029 607,819 264,210 59.5 26.5 12 2,949 5,785 311,351 155,338 156,014 55.0 28.2 13 1,971 2,570 127,036 93,949 33,087 64.3 17.4 14 5,384 849 271,003 257,217 13,786 64.5 21.9 15 1,290 5,642 234,188 46,995 187,193 49.2 44.8 16 842 8,975 125,080 38,070 87,010 61.0 13.1 17 1,481 1,137 84,216 72,800 11,415 66.3 13.5 Total 115,656 93,110 9,257,486 6,543,263 2,714,223 63.8 32.9

1 Raw data, only a portion of total parcels accounted for. Data not adjusted for sewer base flows. 2 Gallons per capita per day 3 Gallons per employee per day 4 Averages

4.3 Base Sanitary Flow In order to accurately forecast flows based on population changes within the service area, a base sanitary flow (BSF) must be established to calibrate residential and employee wastewater generation rates. The BSF is defined as the minimum average flow generated in the entire collection system registered over a seven-day period in each year, and assumed to have little to no influence from inflow and infiltration.

The BSF is measured at the influent of the BITP. Reclaimed water produced by the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant, which is diverted to the Hawks Prairie and Woodland Creek infiltration basins, is added to the flow measured at BITP to ensure that flows of the entire system are accounted for. The BSF, measured in million gallons per day (mgd), from 2001 to 2018, are provided in Table 4-3.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 14

Table 4-3. Base Sanitary Flow in LOTT Service Area Base Sanitary Flow Year (mgd)1 2001 7.94 2002 7.92 2003 8.12 2004 8.79 2005 8.77 2006 8.50 2007 8.40 2008 8.68 2009 8.77 2010 9.29 2011 9.21 2012 8.77 2013 8.94 2014 9.22 2015 9.52 2016 10.06 2017 10.20 2018 10.96 1Equals the raw degritted sewage flow at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, minus brewery flow, plus flow treated at the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant

The current NPDES permit requires that the LOTT Clean Water Alliance conduct an annual infiltration and inflow evaluation, such that the entire collection system is evaluated once every seven years. LOTT currently has a total of 11 permanent flow monitors. This, along with flows recorded during previous years, allows for a more detailed analysis of each jurisdiction’s base flows. The BSF for each of the jurisdictions is provided in Table 4-4. A more detailed analysis is included in the 2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report (March 2020).

Table 4-4. Base Sanitary Flow by Jurisdiction (mgd) Point Sources Year Lacey Olympia Tumwater (TESC1, etc.) Total 2006 2.63 4.31 1.73 0.05 8.27 2007 2.63 4.32 1.21 0.1 8.26 2008 2.94 4.02 1.14 0.48 8.58 2009 3.09 3.42 1.41 0.54 8.47 2010 3.14 3.56 1.19 0.45 8.34 2012 2 3.28 4.11 1.37 0.42 9.18 2013 3.10 4.14 1.23 0.41 8.88 2014 3.16 4.31 1.21 0.54 9.22 2015 3.18 4.25 1.54 0.53 9.52 2016 3.56 4.52 1.43 0.58 10.06 2017 3.75 4.34 1.52 0.58 10.20 2018 4.06 4.75 1.61 0.53 10.97 1 The Evergreen State College (TESC), artesian wells, and Pepsi Bottling Company 2 June 2011 – May 2012 Average

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 15

Figure 4-2 presents the base sanitary flow projections and compares them with those published in the 2018 LOTT Flows and Loadings Report, as well as historical observations since 1997. This year’s projections show a decreased rate of growth between 2040 and 2050, similar to the 2018 report.

Figure 4-2. Base Sanitary Flow Projections 18.0

16.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

8.0

Base Base Flow(mgd) 6.0 Current Projection 4.0 2019 Report 2.0 Historical 0.0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

4.4 Comparison with Historical Wastewater Generation Rates Historically, wastewater generation rates were developed for each city based upon flow monitoring data. Beginning in 2007, drinking water consumption data has been obtained directly from each of the jurisdictions, enabling a more precise estimation of the wastewater generation rate profiles as shown in Table 4-2. The rate profiles have been organized into city-specific profiles for comparison with previous estimates. Table 4-5 summarizes the historical rate profiles, along with the corresponding values developed in this report.

Table 4-5. Wastewater Generation Rate Gallons Per Capita Per Day (gpcd) Source Lacey Olympia Tumwater Employment 1995-2002 CIP 66 85 73 40 2003 CIP 64 81 69 39 Budd Inlet Master Plan (2004) 64 75 69 35 2005 CIP 68 62 65 35 2006 Flows and Loadings 71 64 61 34 2007 Flows and Loadings 69 67 74 22 2008 Flows and Loadings 62 66 82 26 2009 Flows and Loadings 66 67 73 20 2010 Flows and Loadings 66 69 69 25 2012 Flows and Loadings 63 67 66 18 2013 Flows and Loadings 66 75 72 20 2014 Flows and Loadings 57 64 58 19 2015 Flows and Loadings 58 58 51 23 2016 Flows and Loadings 57 64 80 24 2017 Flows and Loadings 58 70 61 25 2018 Flows and Loadings 53 63 57 29 2019 Flows and Loadings 60 69 59 33

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 16

The values in Table 4-5 were derived from the values in Table 4-2, although they were not used in the model and are only presented for the sake of comparison to previous years’ profiles. Per capita generation rates increased in 2019, due in part to the decreased population projections, while drinking water rates remained consistent with previous years.

4.5 Flow Projections Flow projections were calculated by multiplying the projected sewered populations by the wastewater generation rate. The per capita generation rates are drinking water basin specific. The projected sewered population projections are dependent on whether the parcel is currently sewered, on a septic system, or not sewered and not on septic. The model assumes that these generation rates are constant throughout the 2018-2050 simulation period. Each year, these wastewater generation rates will be recalibrated based on ongoing flow monitoring and population estimates. Figure 4-3 displays the projected base flow, annual average, compliance period (winter, summer, shoulder), and peak flows through the year 2050.

Figure 4-3. Flow Projections 90

40 Flow(mgd) 30

- 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

Avg Annual Peak Day Peak Hour Peak Month Shoulder Summer Winter

4.6 Inflow and Infiltration Projections The impact of inflow and infiltration (I&I) on projected flows was also modeled using the projected I&I rates, as documented in the 2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report. Projections were developed for the following risk-based I&I scenarios: 1) annual average; 2) 10-year peak day; 3) 10-year peak hour; 4) 10-year peak month; 5) summer (June-September); 6) shoulder (April, May, and October); and 7) winter (November- March) time period flows. Flow projections are displayed in Figure 4-3 and listed in Table 4-6.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 17

Table 4-6. Flow Projections (mgd) Peak Peak Base Hour Day Peak Sanitary Annual (10- (10- Month Year Flow Average year) year) (10-year) Shoulder1 Summer2 Winter3 2019 11.08 14.47 68.43 45.26 20.69 13.98 12.32 16.49 2020 11.15 14.55 68.71 45.43 20.79 14.06 12.39 16.58 2021 11.49 14.91 69.33 45.91 21.18 14.41 12.73 16.94 2022 11.77 15.20 69.89 46.33 21.51 14.70 13.02 17.25 2023 11.93 15.37 70.23 46.58 21.70 14.87 13.18 17.42 2024 12.09 15.54 70.58 46.83 21.89 15.03 13.33 17.59 2025 12.25 15.71 70.93 47.08 22.08 15.20 13.49 17.77 2026 12.43 15.90 71.20 47.31 22.29 15.39 13.68 17.96 2027 12.62 16.09 71.49 47.55 22.49 15.59 13.87 18.16 2028 12.82 16.29 71.79 47.79 22.70 15.78 14.07 18.36 2029 13.01 16.49 72.12 48.05 22.92 15.99 14.26 18.57 2030 13.21 16.70 72.49 48.34 23.15 16.20 14.47 18.78 2031 13.44 16.94 72.92 48.67 23.42 16.43 14.70 19.03 2032 13.67 17.19 73.36 49.00 23.68 16.68 14.93 19.28 2033 13.91 17.44 73.81 49.34 23.96 16.92 15.17 19.53 2034 14.15 17.69 74.27 49.69 24.24 17.17 15.41 19.80 2035 14.39 17.95 74.74 50.05 24.52 17.43 15.66 20.06 2036 14.61 18.19 75.19 50.38 24.79 17.67 15.89 20.31 2037 14.84 18.43 75.65 50.72 25.06 17.91 16.12 20.55 2038 15.07 18.67 76.11 51.07 25.33 18.15 16.35 20.81 2039 15.30 18.92 76.58 51.42 25.61 18.40 16.59 21.06 2040 15.54 19.17 77.06 51.78 25.89 18.65 16.83 21.32 2041 15.69 19.34 77.36 52.01 26.07 18.81 16.99 21.49 2042 15.84 19.51 77.67 52.24 26.25 18.98 17.15 21.66 2043 16.00 19.67 78.00 52.48 26.44 19.15 17.31 21.84 2044 16.15 19.85 78.34 52.73 26.64 19.32 17.48 22.01 2045 16.31 20.02 78.68 52.98 26.83 19.49 17.64 22.19 2046 16.46 20.19 79.03 53.24 27.03 19.66 17.81 22.37 2047 16.62 20.37 79.38 53.49 27.23 19.84 17.98 22.55 2048 16.78 20.55 79.73 53.75 27.42 20.01 18.14 22.74 2049 16.94 20.73 80.08 54.01 27.63 20.19 18.32 22.92 2050 17.10 20.91 80.44 54.27 27.83 20.37 18.49 23.11 Full Sewering 21.53 25.68 89.82 61.18 33.19 25.11 23.04 28.03

1. April, May, and October 2. June, July, August, and September 3. November, December, January, February, and March

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 18

4.7 Loading Projections Loading projections are updated each year based upon observed BOD and TSS loadings at the BITP. In 2018, the average monthly BOD and TSS loads to the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant were 25,644 lbs/d and 25,420 lbs/d, respectively. Load removal at the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant is taken into account when estimating ERU generation rate profiles. In 2018, it is estimated that the MWRWP removed approximately 1,323 lbs/d of BOD and 900 lbs/d of TSS.

Projected BOD and TSS loadings for this report are based on a correlation of loadings from 2003-2018, with the 2007 through 2018 values corrected to account for loadings removal at the MWRWP. These values are broken down into blanket residential and employment generation rates based upon the latest population and employment projections. These rates are provided in Table 4-7.

Table 4-7. Wastewater Load Generation Rate Profiles (lbs per capita/employee day) Residential Employment BOD TSS BOD TSS 0.127 0.124 0.127 0.124

Figure 4-4 displays the historical influent loading characteristics at the BITP to include monthly averages for BOD and TSS. After a period of stagnant loadings from 2005 through 2013, loadings increased in 2014 and have generally stayed in that range over the past five years.

Figure 4-4. BITP Historical Primary Influent Loads (Monthly Average)

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

Load (lb/d) 15,000

10,000 BOD 5,000 TSS

0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 19

Figure 4-5 and Table 4-8 present the projected BOD and TSS loadings in the LOTT service area through 2050. These loading rates are calculated by multiplying the projected sewer populations by the per capita loading rates detailed in Table 4-7.

Figure 4-5. Projected BOD and TSS Loadings 45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000 Loading (lbs/d)

10,000

5,000 BOD TSS - 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 20

Table 4-8. Projected BOD and TSS Loadings Average Day Average Day TSS Year BOD (lbs/day) (lbs/day) 2019 28,126 27,322 2020 28,399 27,587 2021 29,302 28,464 2022 30,051 29,192 2023 30,468 29,597 2024 30,878 29,995 2025 31,290 30,396 2026 31,768 30,859 2027 32,251 31,328 2028 32,740 31,803 2029 33,235 32,285 2030 33,738 32,773 2031 34,297 33,316 2032 34,866 33,869 2033 35,444 34,430 2034 36,032 35,001 2035 36,629 35,581 2036 37,122 36,060 2037 37,623 36,546 2038 38,130 37,039 2039 38,645 37,539 2040 39,166 38,045 2041 39,506 38,375 2042 39,848 38,707 2043 40,192 39,041 2044 40,538 39,378 2045 40,886 39,716 2046 41,237 40,057 2047 41,590 40,400 2048 41,946 40,746 2049 42,305 41,094 42,665 41,444 2050 52,159 50,666 Full Sewering

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 21

4.8 Projections Analysis The following plots compare the projections summarized in this report with historical trends. The annual recalibration is intended to ensure that projections remain consistent with both projected development within the service area, and with historical trends. The plots present the four sets of projections that were defined in Section 2.3.

To reiterate, the low rate of sewering assumes that 40% of the undeveloped parcels and 23% of existing septic tank would be connected to the sewer system by 2050. The aggressive rate assumes all undeveloped parcels and 30-58% of existing septic tank would be connected to the sewer system by 2050. The full sewering projection assumes full sewering and septic conversion by 2050. The expected rate assumes that all currently undeveloped parcels and that 35% of existing septics would be connected by 2050.

Figure 4-6. Comparison of Historical Base Flow and Base Flow Projected from Four Different Projection Models 25 Full Sewering Aggressive Rate 20 Expected Rate Low Rate Historical Linear (Historical) 15

Flow(mgd) 10

0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 22

Figure 4-7. Comparison of Historical BOD Loadings and BOD Projected from Four Different Projection Models 60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000 Full Sewering

Load (lbs/d) Aggressive Rate 20,000 Expected Rate

Low Rate 10,000 Historical

Linear (Historical) 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Figure 4-8. Comparison of Historical TSS Loadings and TSS Projected from Four Different Projection Models 60,000

50,000

40,000

Full Sewering 30,000 Aggressive Rate Load (lbs/d)

20,000 Expected Rate Low Rate

10,000 Historical

Linear (Historical) 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 23

Figure 4-9. Comparison of Historical Average Daily Flow and Average Daily Flow Projected from Four Different Projection Models 30

15 Full Sewering Flow(mgd) Aggressive Rate 10 Expected Rate

Low Rate 5 Historical

Linear (Historical) 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

In general, the updated projections show a slight decrease in loadings and a slight increase in flows.

Figure 4-10 shows the difference in projected 2050 base flow in the LOTT sewer basins between the expected sewering projection and the full sewering projection. Areas with a large difference (dark brown) are those that are most impacted by the rate of sewering. The areas concentrated in southeastern Lacey, are relatively far from the existing sewer network, and have a high proportion of parcels with septic tanks. More aggressive sewering and septic conversion rates would result in higher sewer flows originating in these areas, with impacts to the LOTT Martin Way sewer interceptors, the Indian Creek Interceptor, the Martin Way Pump Station, and the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 24

Figure 4-10. Difference in Flow (Full Sewering – Expected Sewering, 2050)

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 25

5. Summary This year’s projections are generally similar to previous years. The slightly higher flow projections are largely a result of the higher base flows measured during the past year, which increased the average per capita wastewater generation rate. The lower loadings reflect a trend of stagnant to reduced loadings of BOD and TSS measured at the BITP over the past five years.

The information in this report was used to develop the 2019 Capacity Assessment Report and the 2021-2022 Capital Improvements Plan.

2019 Flows and Loadings Report 26

2020 CAPACITY REPORTS

FLOWS & LOADINGS I&I/FLOW MONITORING CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

PREFACE

As each report is published, it will be posted in the Library on LOTT’s website – www.lottcleanwater.org.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report i

Table of Contents PREFACE ...... i 1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Overview ...... 2 2.1 Program History ...... 2 2.2 Flow Measurement Methodology ...... 4 2.3 Basin Summary ...... 5 2.4 Flow Monitoring Site Summary ...... 6 2.5 Flow Monitoring Data ...... 6 2.6 Inflow and Infiltration Analysis ...... 7 3. Flow Data Analysis ...... 9 3.1 Summary of I&I Statistics for All Flow Monitoring Sites ...... 9 3.2 Analysis of Inflow and Infiltration ...... 10 3.3 Site Assessments ...... 11 3.3.1 Site D6 ...... 11 3.3.2 Site D11 ...... 11 3.3.3 Site L6 ...... 12 3.3.4 Site L7 ...... 12 3.3.5 Site OL25 ...... 13 3.3.6 Site OL27 ...... 13 3.3.7 Site OL33 ...... 14 3.3.8 System-Wide ...... 14 3.3.9 Updated I&I Model ...... 15 3.3.10 I&I Benchmarks and Basin Ranking ...... 18 3.3.11 Comparison of Base Flow and I&I from 2018 to 2019 ...... 19 4. Conclusions & Recommendations ...... 25

2019 Inflow and Infiltration Report ii

1. Introduction

The LOTT Clean Water Alliance flow monitoring program was initiated in 2003. In accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit WA0037061, an inflow and infiltration (I&I) evaluation for all sub-basins within the LOTT system is required such that the entire system is evaluated once every seven years. The purpose of this program is to ensure permit compliance, characterize flows within the collection system, identify areas of concern for I&I, and aid in the prioritization of rehabilitation projects to reduce I&I. The program is also intended to fulfill requirements of the Intergovernmental Contract for Inflow and Infiltration Management and New Capacity Planning, originally dated March 27, 1995, as presented in Exhibit J to the LOTT Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Wastewater Management by the LOTT Wastewater Alliance. The report includes an overview of the LOTT I&I program as well as the results and analysis of the monitoring program for the 2018/2019 monitoring period. The monitoring program has been in place for sixteen years.

Brown and Caldwell provides data quality assurance and control, and assists in annual I&I analyses. LOTT has contracted with SFE Global NW to install and maintain flow monitors throughout the system (Table 1-1) and collect monitoring data. For 2018/2019, flow monitors include seven permanent monitoring sites and four pump station monitors.

This report covers the monitoring year 2018 through December 2019. The report is arranged as follows:

 Section 2 provides an overview of the program, including a summary monitoring program, and an inventory and assessment of the flow monitoring sites, equipment, and technology  Section 3 presents the results of the inflow and infiltration analyses  Section 4 summarizes the data collected in the new program and provides recommendations for the flow monitoring program

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 1

2. Overview

Inflow is defined as surface water entering the sewer via manholes, flooded sewer vents, illicitly connected storm drains, basement drains, and by means other than groundwater. Inflow is usually the result of rain and/or snowmelt events. Infiltration is defined as groundwater that enters the sewer, usually through leaky sewer pipe joints, manholes, and service connections.

2.1 Program History

When the program was instituted in 2003, information on system-wide I&I was limited. I&I modeling was conducted on flows recorded at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant (BITP) and then allocated across the system based upon assumptions involving the age of the pipe and a subjective assessment of flows measured at pump stations. A major goal of this program was to more accurately define the spatial distribution of I&I within the LOTT collection system. This approach would assist LOTT with capacity planning for both its collection and treatment systems.

Another goal of this program was to monitor changes in I&I over time and identify areas of concern, facilitating the prioritization of rehabilitation efforts by LOTT’s partner jurisdictions.

The first 15 years of this program featured rotating flow monitoring stations. Typically, a rotating flow monitoring station was set up for one calendar year, allowing for assessment of base flow during the summer, and I&I during the winter. As part of the program, a total of 73 sites were monitored. Some of these sites were less useful than others as the data they provided were limited, either due to low flows, pump station impacts, or geometrical oddities which compromised the flow measurement. Others were monitored by LOTT partners for specific, short-term purposes. A total of 54 sites, plus the three LOTT pump stations and the Tumwater Hixon Street flow monitoring site are incorporated into LOTT’s system-wide I&I model.

Starting in 2018, the program shifted to monitoring 11 permanent locations. The rotating flow monitoring sites served their purpose, allowing for detailed allocation of I&I across the 88 sewer basins. Presently, a smaller number of permanent sites allows for long-term tracking of I&I. Periodically, temporary monitoring will be performed at certain locations which have shown marked deterioration over the course of this program, or where the permanent meters suggest that upstream assessment is warranted.

Figure 2-1 shows the locations of the eleven current flow meters, and Figure 2-2 shows their connectivity. Table 2-1 lists the flow monitoring sites included in this program and the associated tributary sewer basins measured by each site.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 2

Figure 2-1. Location of the Permanent Flow Monitoring Sites

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 3

Figure 2-2. Connectivity of the LOTT Flow Monitoring Stations

Flows for each city were calculated using the seven permanent sites and four pump station sites as follows:  Olympia = BITP – (OL27 + CLPS + L6 + L7) + OL25  Tumwater = OL27 + CLPS – OL25  Lacey = L6 + L7

Table 2-1. Flow Monitoring Sites, with Tributary Basins Pipe Name Manhole Diameter Location Basins Served OL25 MH70-246 30" Private Drive off of Deschutes Parkway 54,55,57,58,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,TESC OL33 SSMH9 24" 4th Avenue Bridge 56,59,60,61,62,63, L6 MH70-200 30" 8468 Martin Way E (Jack in the Box) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,10,11,13,14,15,16,17 L7 MH70-205 24" 8503 Martin Way E (Arco Station) 8,9,12 OL27 MH70-290 18" Access Road East of Mottman Rd 69,70,71 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19, D6 MH70-064 36" 1109 Plum St SE 20,21,22,23,24,25,26,28 D11 MH70-041 36" Plum and Union Parking Lot 27,42 MWPS Martin Way Pump Station 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,10,11,13,15,16,17 54,57,58,64,65,66,67,68,69,71,72,73,74,75,76,7 CLPS Capitol Lake Pump Station 8,79,80,81,82,83,85,86,TESC KRPS Kaiser Road Pump Station 54,TESC WWTP Budd Inlet Treatment Plant 1-22,24-54,56-69,71-76,78-83,85,86,TESC

2.2 Flow Measurement Methodology

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 4

The sewer flow monitoring sites installed by SFE Global consist of SFE Custom Compound Weirs or area-velocity meters. The SFE Weir is a variant of the V-notch type weir. Permanent flow monitoring sites feature a Lexan-bodied weir, while the rotating temporary sites contain weirs constructed of ¾-inch thick plywood. Flow was calculated by measuring the depth of water flowing over the weir, and then applying a rating curve, which was developed individually for each weir during installation and calibration. SFE Global maintains the sites on a monthly basis, during which time data is downloaded from on-site data logging equipment.

LOTT’s Budd Inlet Treatment Plant (BITP) has both influent and effluent flow meters. The Martin Way Pump Station (MWPS), Capitol Lake Pump Station (CLPS), and the Kaiser Road Pump Station (KRPS) have Doppler Ultrasonic strap-on flow meters installed on the discharge piping. These monitoring locations were integrated into the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system in January 2005 and are now included in the I&I evaluation program.

2.3 Basin Summary

The 88 LOTT sewer basins were redefined as part of the 2014 Flows and Loadings Report based upon sewer maps and basin realignments provided by the cities of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater. Seven basins are currently unsewered. Previously, of the sewered 81 basins, 27 were monitored with a single flow monitor located at a point downstream from all inputs into the basin, 32 were monitored by a flow monitor that gathers data from a group of several basins, and six were monitored individually with data gathered on the upstream and downstream ends of the basins, allowing for flow assessment by difference. I&I in the remaining basins was estimated through a system-wide regression model, which incorporated data from 58 temporary flow monitors and the four permanent flow monitors at the pump stations.

The current set of flow monitors is intended to track base flow and I&I in major interceptors. I&I in individual basins is estimated based on system connectivity and observations from the first 15 years of the flow monitoring program.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 5

2.4 Flow Monitoring Site Summary

Table 2-2 lists attributes for the area served by each site monitored including the LOTT pump stations.

The equivalent residential units (ERU) values shown in Table 2-2 are based on 2018-2019 data and the inch-diameter-mile (IDM) values are based on 2019 data.

Table 2-2. Flow Meter Basin Summary Sewered Sewered Flow Monitor Residents Employees ERU1 IDM2 Acres % Sewered D6 67,517 40,331 33,918 3,057 27,743 67% D11 1,500 1,915 1,050 248 389 87% OL25 16,700 16,118 9,138 842 5,817 89% OL27 4,135 3,354 2,153 172 2,047 85% OL33 8,276 2,742 3,871 269 1,475 90% L6 43,310 18,674 20,807 1,870 19,315 61% L7 7,168 7,888 4,006 243 1,141 96% CLPS 30,329 32,416 16,925 1,501 13,852 82% KRPS 1,807 157 769 37 294 85% WWTP 118,446 95,398 62,714 5,743 45,225 76% MWPS 42,694 17,950 20,456 1,837 18,157 62%

1. ERU: Equivalent Residential Unit (see Flow and Loadings Report for more details) 2. IDM: Inch-diameter-mile of sewer pipe (includes gravity and STEP sewers)

2.5 Flow Monitoring Data

SFE Global’s contracted data quality objectives were met over 93% of the time during the 2018- 2019 monitoring period. Figure 2-3 summarizes the flow monitoring reliability by showing the portion of flow data that was available and passed quality assurance checks each month.

Figure 2-3. Flow Monitoring Data Quality (All SFE Monitored Sites Combined) 200 100% 180 90% 160 80% 140 70% 120 60% 100 50% 80 40% Days Days Lost 60 30% Days Lost

40 20% % Passing QA/QC Check

20 % Passing 10% 0 0% Apr-18 Jul-18 Oct-18 Jan-19 Apr-19

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 6

2.6 Inflow and Infiltration Analysis

An I&I analysis was performed using the Capacity Assessment and Planning Environment (CAPE) modeling software, a wastewater forecasting and management tool provided by Brown and Caldwell. The record of observed flow data was plotted alongside a concurrent record of rainfall data. The model calculates flow based upon rainfall using a variety of hydrologic parameters. These parameters were calibrated until the model flows matched the observed flows over the period of record. Once calibrated, the model was applied to a long-term historical precipitation record (in this case, rainfall observed at the Olympia Regional Airport from 1955 to 2019). The long-term simulation produced risk-based I&I flow estimates over the full range of weather conditions contained in the historical rainfall record.

An example of a CAPE calibration plot is presented on Figure 2-4. This plot depicts flow monitored at the BITP (blue), rainfall (green), and modeled flow at the BITP (red). The model has been calibrated such that the modeled and observed flows match very closely. The BITP model was extended through December 2019 to capture a large storm that occurred.

Figure 2-4. CAPE Model Calibration for the BITP

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 7

Figure 2-5 presents the model calibration from Figure 2-4 applied to the long-term precipitation record.

Figure 2-5. Long-Term I&I Projection for the BITP

The data in Figure 2-4 are used to calculate risk-based I&I. LOTT uses a 10-year return period as the basis of its peak flow projections. A 10-year peak flow carries a 10% risk of being surpassed in any given year.

The CAPE model was used to calculate risk-based I&I for each of the flow monitoring sites and combinations presented in Table 3-1. These data are presented and analyzed in the next section.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 8

3. Flow Data Analysis

This section describes the results of the analysis conducted using the flow data collected during the 2018/2019 monitoring season.

3.1 Summary of I&I Statistics for All Flow Monitoring Sites The I&I summary results for each of the flow monitoring sites is provided in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. 2018-19 Flow Monitoring Sites Inflow and Infiltration Summary (Total Flow, mgd) Base 10-Year 10-Year 10-Year Flow Sanitary Average Peak Peak Peak Monitor Flow Annual Month Day Hour Summer Shoulder Winter D6 4.63 0.55 1.57 2.56 3.61 0.19 0.46 0.88 D11 0.19 0.04 0.10 0.32 0.66 0.02 0.04 0.06 L6 2.66 0.74 1.38 1.70 2.19 0.59 0.73 0.87 L7 0.48 0.16 0.40 0.64 1.00 0.07 0.14 0.24 OL25 1.50 0.52 1.47 3.17 3.86 0.19 0.44 0.83 OL27 0.61 0.15 0.40 1.11 1.43 0.06 0.14 0.24 OL33 0.41 1.00 2.83 8.62 11.21 0.42 0.88 1.54 CLPS 2.53 0.84 2.39 5.13 6.37 0.30 0.71 1.35 KRPS 0.07 0.05 0.12 0.28 0.30 0.02 0.04 0.07 MWPS 3.60 0.42 1.11 1.67 2.06 0.16 0.37 0.65 WWTP 10.05 3.39 9.61 34.21 57.35 1.24 2.89 5.41

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 9

3.2 Analysis of Inflow and Infiltration

There are a number of ways to assess the quality and integrity of the sewer system. Some of the most commonly used methods involve a calculation of I&I per inch-diameter-mile (IDM) of pipe, I&I per ERU, and the ratio of the peak hour flow to the base flow. The pipeline IDM calculations were updated this year with new geodata information received from the cities. Sewer extensions add new sewer lengths which result in an overall decrease in benchmark values because new pipeline is added to the system. Table 3-2 summarizes these statistics for each of the flow monitors. These may be compared with benchmark values, established in the 2007 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report and listed at the bottom of the table.

Table 3-2. Summary of I&I Statistics Annual Peak Peak Average Peak Peak Peak Hour Average Day Hour Annual Day Hour Flow/Base Flow I&I/ERU I&I/ERU I&I/ERU I&I/IDM I&I/IDM I&I/IDM Flow Benchmark Monitor (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (mgd) Ratio1 D6 16 75 106 178 837 1,180 0.8 0.7 D11 43 363 747 156 1,303 2,679 3.5 1.6 L6 36 81 104 398 911 1,170 0.8 1.0 L7 38 158 245 644 2,653 4,116 2.1 1.9 OL25 56 344 419 615 3,765 4,583 2.6 2.4 OL27 70 503 652 898 6,440 8,336 2.4 3.4 OL33 257 2,209 2,874 3,734 32,051 41,697 27.5 15.9 CLPS 49 299 372 560 3,415 4,244 2.5 2.2 KRPS 58 347 380 1,259 7,491 8,208 4.2 3.7 MWPS 20 81 100 227 910 1,121 0.6 0.7 WWTP 54 543 911 590 5,956 9,985 5.7 3.3 Benchmark2 20 150 250 200 1,500 2,400 2.5 1.0 1. The benchmark ratio is the average value of seven ratios, corresponding to the first seven columns of the table (starting with average annual I&I/ERU and ending with the peak hour flow/base flow). The value in this table is divided by the benchmark. For example, the benchmark ratio at site OL25 is the average of the following values: {56/20; 344/150; 419/250; 615/200; 3,765/1,500; 4,583/2,400; 2.6/2.5} = 2.4. 2. I&I benchmarks established in the 2007 LOTT Inflow and Infiltration Report.

Table 3-3. Summary of I&I Statistics (Cities) Annual Peak Peak Average Peak Peak Peak Hour Average Day Hour Annual Day Hour Flow/Base I&I/ERU I&I/ERU I&I/ERU I&I/IDM I&I/IDM I&I/IDM Flow Benchmark City (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (gpd) (mgd) Ratio1 Olympia 72 1,036 1,806 718 10,286 17,937 9.5 5.4 Tumwater 47 303 390 575 3,686 4,748 2.4 2.2 Lacey 36 94 127 427 1,111 1,509 1.0 1.1 System 54 543 911 590 5,956 9,985 5.7 3.3 Benchmark 20 150 250 200 1,500 2,400 2.5 1.0

For existing pipe, the amount of I&I will vary widely depending on the age of pipe, local maintenance standards, and most importantly, the degree of sewer separation (i.e. whether downspouts are strictly disconnected or whether any sewer to storm pipe cross-connections exist) during the original design of the collection system.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 10

3.3 Site Assessments

The following sections discuss the flow records and I&I model results at each site.

3.3.1 Site D6

Site D6 measures flow generated in Lacey and southeast Olympia (Basins 1 through 28). The flow monitor is located on Plum Street south of downtown Olympia. The flow monitor measures flow through the Cherry Street Interceptor.

Figure 3-1. Flow Meter D6

3.3.2 Site D11

Site D11 measures flow generated in Basins 27 and 42 in Olympia. This meter is located on Plum Street and Union Avenue south of downtown Olympia. D11 was installed in 2014 to measure the flow breakdown between the Plum Street and Cherry Street Interceptors in downtown Olympia.

Figure 3-2. Flow Meter D11

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 11

3.3.3 Site L6

The flow monitor at site L6 measures flows generated in east Lacey. This site’s benchmark ratio is 1.0, indicating a tight sewer system with low I&I.

Figure 3-3. Flow Meter L6

3.3.4 Site L7

The flow monitor at site L7 measures flow generated in south Lacey. The benchmark ratio for this site is 1.9, higher than L6 but still relatively low compared to the system average of 3.3.

Figure 3-4. Flow Meter L7

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 12

3.3.5 Site OL25

Site OL25 monitors flow generated in west Olympia and northern Tumwater. The flow monitor is located on the Percival Creek Interceptor downstream of the Capitol Lake Pump Station. The benchmark ratio decreased at this site from 3.3 to 2.4.

Figure 3-5. Flow Meter OL25

3.3.6 Site OL27

OL27 measures flow from Tumwater on the downstream end of the Mottman Road Interceptor. Site OL27’s benchmark ratio of 3.4 is lower than the 2011 benchmark ratio of 6.2. Given that this site monitors flow generated in the Mottman industrial area, it is likely that much of what is being classified as I&I is actually point source flow from local industry. Seasonal contributions from South Puget Sound Community College also complicate the I&I calculation in this basin. The benchmark reduction may be related to recent repair work on the interceptor in this area. Grease fouled the monitor for two weeks in March.

Figure 3-6. Flow Meter OL27

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 13

3.3.7 Site OL33

The OL33 flow meter is located at the 4th Avenue Bridge and measures flow from northwest Olympia. The benchmark ratio at this site did not change from last year and remained 15.9. This site historically has recorded high levels of I&I related to older pipes in west Olympia.

Figure 3-7. Flow Meter OL33

3.3.8 System-Wide

The system-wide I&I is largely a known quantity. Projections tend to vary slightly from year to year, which reflects some of the sensitivity of the model to variables such as groundwater, which fluctuates from I&I independently or at least on a larger time scale. In the big picture, system-wide I&I appears to be trending slightly upward, which can be expected as the service area expands and infrastructure ages. Figures 3-8 and 3-9 plot the system-wide I&I over the last 16 years.

Figure 3-8. System-Wide I&I Trends 6

2 I&I I&I (mgd)

0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Average annual Summer (Jun-Sept) Shoulder (Apr,May,Oct) Winter (Nov-Mar)

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 14

Figure 3-9. System-Wide I&I Trends 70

I&I I&I (mgd) 20

0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

10-year peak month 10-year peak day 10-year peak hour

3.3.9 Updated I&I Model

The previous 15 years of rotating flow meters established a breakdown of how much I&I each sewer basin contributed to the whole city. The current position of flow meters strategically measures flow from each city. Using the previous modeling efforts and I&I approximations, individual basin I&I can be estimated from the total city I&I. Inflow and infiltration estimates for each flow meter are translated to basin I&I estimates by first calculating the percentage of I&I each basin contributes to each city. This percentage is then applied to this year’s flow measurements resulting in an estimate of I&I from each basin. Table 3-4 summarizes the basin I&I statistics.

Table 3-4. Basin I&I (gpd) Summer (Jun, Shoulder Winter Average Peak Peak Peak Jul, Aug, (Apr, (Nov- Basin City Location Annual Month Day Hour Sept) May, Oct) Mar) 1 L Hawks Prairie 237,945 450,907 652,996 739,689 185,847 268,134 312,907 2 L Meridian 42,619 100,486 132,838 172,451 43,932 57,948 61,049 3 L Meadows 26,985 28,002 23,432 39,148 8,982 17,327 25,060 4 L Lacey STEP 26,985 26,038 23,432 39,148 14,222 26,078 25,060 5 L SE Corner 26,985 25,903 23,432 39,148 7,984 9,801 23,359 6 L Horizon View 6,673 48,268 102,762 258,863 11,137 9,529 13,324 7 L Ruddell 6,673 66,474 102,762 166,392 9,379 14,598 13,324 S Chambers 8 L Lake 36,580 119,945 180,706 267,290 18,065 26,719 49,812 N Chambers 9 L Lake 62,811 104,530 152,287 267,750 48,555 55,835 68,563 10 L Lacey Blvd 33,916 77,527 196,175 290,170 21,770 29,953 41,139 Lacey 11 L Confluence 44,888 89,074 85,169 124,530 34,146 42,862 51,244

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 15

Summer (Jun, Shoulder Winter Average Peak Peak Peak Jul, Aug, (Apr, (Nov- Basin City Location Annual Month Day Hour Sept) May, Oct) Mar) South Sound 12 L Center 207,701 425,954 358,541 386,248 150,481 182,083 253,921 13 L St. Martins 26,985 28,232 23,432 39,148 19,461 25,903 25,060 14 L Chinook 24,106 23,981 21,424 33,220 21,069 19,023 18,333 15 L Britton Pkwy 29,898 70,890 89,557 103,893 28,070 37,332 43,457 16 L N Tanglewilde 29,898 48,504 89,557 96,761 17,274 17,919 43,457 17 L S Tanglewilde 29,898 50,324 89,557 123,829 15,114 36,337 43,457 18 O Motel 8 15,570 47,909 78,549 122,583 2,746 11,755 29,202 19 O Lilly Rd 15,570 47,909 78,549 122,583 2,746 11,755 29,202 20 O South Bay Rd 749 1,071 1,400 1,594 509 974 1,064 21 O Fones 71,869 226,599 562,652 765,515 16,976 64,730 135,827 22 O Boulevard 17,642 54,782 85,846 96,843 6,183 21,381 39,279 23 O Wiggins 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 O Indian Summer 7,587 17,294 102,411 194,184 2,409 7,431 13,942

25 O S Boulevard 16,647 50,431 92,464 132,743 4,350 15,303 31,070 26 O Henderson 7,587 29,097 102,411 161,984 1,752 7,069 13,942 27 O North St 23,957 75,625 374,972 731,657 5,664 21,303 44,556 28 O Indian Creek 7,236 24,171 75,254 121,247 1,641 6,402 13,932 29 O SE Downtown 85,902 238,289 401,534 626,629 17,222 65,493 138,330 30 O Priest Point 187,337 342,961 883,364 1,378,567 24,787 94,262 199,093 31 O San Francisco 131,988 456,023 1,579,389 2,351,557 29,209 114,494 253,692 32 O NE Downtown 6,831 36,103 436,384 2,218,348 1,408 3,260 13,668 33 O Bigelow 24,413 70,526 230,293 338,237 6,516 22,750 43,633 34 O Puget St 5,196 15,491 160,289 338,141 988 3,542 7,493 Bigelow 35 O Springs 5,196 15,491 160,289 338,141 988 3,542 7,493 36 O State Ave 5,196 15,568 161,526 340,696 1,040 3,619 7,571 37 O Lybarger 6,831 26,415 417,726 657,710 1,137 6,973 13,668 38 O 4th Ave E 9,875 34,086 181,987 376,396 2,218 8,609 18,915 39 O 5th Ave E 6,831 42,501 508,351 797,976 1,462 6,429 13,668 40 O Pear 11,736 34,969 361,607 762,861 2,287 8,085 16,995 41 O Plum 121,094 429,902 1,691,449 2,627,144 26,630 102,681 227,996 42 O I-5 Interchange 6,053 22,097 147,198 454,453 1,445 6,361 14,042 43 O Stevens Field 52,965 200,196 1,654,094 4,408,539 11,587 45,919 100,270 44 O S Capitol 24th 12,366 38,050 270,482 647,201 1,713 20,227 25,576 45 O S Capitol 22nd 7,039 52,651 468,844 1,429,012 489 4,321 15,776 46 O S Capitol 17th 14,372 28,812 304,319 693,675 4,917 10,250 16,726 47 O State Capitol 13,620 51,953 304,319 634,076 5,083 11,247 25,385 N Capitol 48 O Campus 13,703 43,447 276,907 374,486 1,934 8,073 23,852 49 O State Offices 19,545 69,510 465,610 1,011,437 4,495 17,316 37,443 Central 50 O Downtown 87,245 289,345 1,795,722 4,080,093 20,383 76,997 163,207 51 O Sylvester 110,352 374,620 2,926,948 5,426,248 27,265 101,345 209,186

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 16

Summer (Jun, Shoulder Winter Average Peak Peak Peak Jul, Aug, (Apr, (Nov- Basin City Location Annual Month Day Hour Sept) May, Oct) Mar) 52 O Heritage Park 107,050 434,898 2,799,638 3,415,415 6,065 45,449 242,493 53 O Port Peninsula 11,736 34,969 361,607 762,861 2,287 8,085 16,995 54 O Cedrona 8,330 17,839 38,036 65,313 2,992 6,801 11,053 55 O Westwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 O Old Port 68,545 230,143 771,401 1,043,397 16,588 63,123 133,680 57 O Cooper Point 50,222 159,815 314,061 457,658 5,104 40,852 97,141 58 O Goldcrest 36,291 108,073 279,011 445,100 2,662 19,201 47,914 59 O West Bay 14,409 54,647 145,249 226,673 1,732 10,789 30,860 60 O West Side 45,378 145,567 732,644 1,143,355 8,303 47,918 66,422 61 O Jefferson 207,940 742,462 2,564,537 3,406,985 53,989 191,301 379,857 62 O Harrison 15,523 73,000 488,165 761,825 3,114 12,444 30,921 63 O Decatur Woods 45,293 155,131 537,467 737,785 10,389 39,890 87,235 64 O Grass Lake 33,619 39,024 154,294 240,790 2,820 10,726 22,654 65 O West Olympia 2,379 6,594 13,813 26,481 614 1,790 3,787 66 O Capital Mall 32,056 125,844 436,852 548,079 4,192 23,820 49,465 67 O Percival Creek 13,085 62,621 209,897 279,350 2,118 13,587 26,096 68 O Ken Lake 93,228 303,328 797,144 875,045 22,282 81,166 178,900 69 O Mottman 79,826 263,194 681,510 817,255 12,551 62,529 149,223 70 T N Black Lake 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 T Sapp 188,757 475,855 883,349 1,039,883 85,224 174,668 308,141 72 T Tumwater Hill 110,202 329,342 862,739 1,037,537 34,191 89,332 173,503 73 T E Street 7,100 20,536 44,557 49,654 2,521 5,530 12,158 74 T H Street 5,709 18,311 36,784 48,528 2,164 4,366 9,870 75 T Barnes Lake 15,182 48,096 90,571 121,872 5,545 12,437 24,049 76 T NE Tumwater 28,709 78,216 160,327 252,961 9,749 24,113 43,725 Tumwater 77 T Valley 146 433 1,034 1,446 45 119 228 78 T Southgate 81,897 211,526 560,341 842,776 27,355 70,298 121,388 79 T Trosper 3,202 9,530 33,883 43,932 2,261 2,621 5,025 80 T Littlerock 6,582 18,897 47,021 86,064 2,251 5,508 10,470 Tumwater 81 T City Hall 6,077 22,401 68,574 84,315 1,619 4,523 9,642 82 T Trails End 6,077 22,401 68,574 84,315 1,619 4,523 9,642 83 T Hwy 99 6,077 22,401 68,574 84,315 1,619 4,523 9,642 84 T Airport 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 T S Airport 6,077 22,401 68,574 84,315 1,619 4,523 9,642 86 T Kimmie 6,077 22,401 68,574 84,315 1,619 4,523 9,642 87 T Salmon Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 T Black Lake 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 The Evergreen TESC State College 13,861 43,714 126,087 196,770 2,189 8,109 22,206

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 17

3.3.10 I&I Benchmarks and Basin Ranking

The intergovernmental agreement which established the LOTT I&I program includes a non- degradation clause. Based upon this clause, LOTT will annually evaluate I&I in each of its sewer basins. If the amount of I&I in a basin is found to be significantly increasing, LOTT and its partners will prioritize work in that basin to remedy the situation. In order to provide a measure which can be tracked on an annual basis, the I&I benchmarks listed in Table 3-5 have been selected. These benchmarks were established based upon a statistical analysis of the LOTT basins. They represent the top 33rd percentile of I&I measures across all of the basins when the benchmark was established in 2007. That is, two-thirds of the LOTT basins exhibited I&I parameters worse than these benchmarks at that time.

Table 3-5. LOTT Sewer Basin I&I Benchmarks Average Annual I&I per ERU 20 gpd/ERU Peak Month I&I per ERU 50 gpd/ERU Peak Day I&I per ERU 150 gpd/ERU Peak Hour I&I per ERU 250 gpd/ ERU Average Annual I&I per IDM 200 gpd/idm Peak Month I&I per IDM 500 gpd/idm Peak Day I&I per IDM 1,500 gpd/idm Peak Hour I&I per IDM 2,400 gpd/idm Peak Hour Flow to Base Flow Ratio 2.5

Each partner jurisdiction is compared with the benchmark in each of the nine categories. A benchmark average is then calculated, which provides a representation of how each city compares to the benchmark. Table 3-6 compares the last three years of benchmarks for Olympia, Tumwater, Lacey, and the system as a whole.

Table 3-6. City Benchmarks

Flow Monitor 2016 2017 2018 2019 Olympia 5.9 6.0 6.4 5.4 Tumwater 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.2 Lacey 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.1 System 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.3

Overall, the system benchmark ratio was 3.3, which is slightly lower than the previous year’s average of 3.8. The system benchmark decreased due to the addition of new sewer extension information into the model, giving a more accurate picture of the new pipelines in the cities.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 18

3.3.11 Comparison of Base Flow and I&I from 2018 to 2019

Figure 3-10 compares the city-wide flows and I&I projections.

Figure 3-10. City-Wide Base Flow and I&I Comparison, 2018 to 2019

The year-to-year changes from city to city were relatively small other than decreases in the peak day and peak hour flows in Lacey. Base flow appeared to increase slightly in Olympia and Tumwater and decrease in Lacey. These projections are based on winter season water consumption, and may reflect changes in occupancy, as well as environmental factors which can impact outdoor uses in the winter period.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 19

Figure 3-11 presents the change in flows between the 11 specifically monitored sites between 2018 and 2019.

Figure 3-11. Change in I&I, 2019 vs. 2018 2

1.5

1 Base Sanitary Flow

0.5 Avg. Annual

Peak Month 0

Peak Day -0.5 Peak Hour

-1 Change Change fromprevious year (mgd)

-1.5 OL25 OL33 L6 L7 OL27 D6 D11 MWPS CLPS KRPS WWTP

I&I parameters were largely unchanged from previous years at sites OL25, OL27, D11, KRPS, and CLPS. Notable changes at the other sites are discussed in the subsequent sections.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 20

MWPS

The MWPS receives flows generated in Lacey, and pumps flow to the BITP and the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant (MWRWP). The flow records are complicated by the flows pumped to and from the MWRWP. To estimate the flows generated in Lacey, the reclaimed water distribution flow from the MWRWP is added to the flow pumped to the BITP. Historically, this leads to a choppy flow record, particularly when MWRWP flows are not consistent. The large change in base flow noted in Figure 3-12 (511,000 gpd) most likely reflects some of this error, as flows to the MWRWP were reduced close to zero during parts of summer 2019.

Figure 3-12. MWPS Flow Record

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 21

WWTP

The I&I pattern at the BITP tends not to vary much from year to year. Last year’s model matched the 2018-2019 flows well, including the December 2019 storm. Figure 3-13 shows the model from 2018 applied to 2018-2019 flows. The model is slightly conservative in predicting peak flows in winter 2018 and fall 2019 (shown by the red model peaks above the blue observed peaks) but does very well with the December 2019 event.

Figure 3-13. WWTP I&I Model

OL27

OL27 is located on the Olympia/Tumwater border, measuring flow from the Mottman industrial area. This site had the largest change since last year with increases in average annual, peak month, summer, shoulder, and winter flows. The base flow at this site is irregular due to the large influence of industrial users, but has seen a steady increase since 2004. This site has been monitored three separate times in 2004, 2011, and 2018. The base flow has steadily increased each time from 0.4 mgd in 2004 to 0.65 mgd in this current monitoring period. A high base flow in the model will cause the model to become more sensitive to I&I, particularly for the long averaging time projections (average annual, summer, shoulder, winter). Peak day and peak hour I&I at this site were similar to previous years.

Figure 3-14. OL27 I&I Model (2018-19)

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 22

This site has exhibited a long-term trend of decreasing I&I. Since 2016, peak flows have decreased by close to 1 mgd, and flows during the December 2019 storm did not exceed 1.5 mgd.

Figure 3-15. L7 I&I Model (2017-18)

The base flow at D6 did not change from the previous year, but the average annual, peak month, summer, shoulder, and winter I&I projections increased by more than 50%. While this site’s flow has been remarkably steady in previous years, the flow exhibited some storm-related increase in December 2018, allowing the model to generate some I&I relationships which were not previously obvious.

Figure 3-16. D6 I&I Model (2018-19)

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 23

D11

The flow record at D11 exhibited unusually low flow in the latter part of 2017 (Figure 3-17). The low base flow reported for this site appears to have been an anomaly, which will be confirmed through further flow monitoring. This potential error explains the 0.11 mgd increase in base flow this year.

Figure 3-17. Daily Flow at Site D11

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 24

4. Conclusions & Recommendations

1. City-specific I&I parameters were generally in agreement with previous years observations. No more detailed assessment is recommended at this time. 2. Base flow at site D11 appeared to normalize in 2018-2019 after being very low in 2017. Base flow at this site should continue to be tracked to confirm that the 2017 flows were an anomaly. 3. Total I&I in the system has been increasing steadily, but compared to base flows and pipe lengths, actual I&I benchmarks have been improving in all three cities.

2019 Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring Report 25

2020 CAPACITY REPORTS

FLOWS & LOADINGS I&I/FLOW MONITORING CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

PREFACE

The Capacity Assessment Report is one of three related documents that are part of the annual process to monitor and evaluate capacity in the entire LOTT system. The intent, under LOTT’s Wastewater Resource Management Plan (also known as the Highly Managed Plan), is to assure that needed new capacity is brought on-line “just in time” to meet system needs. Capacity needs evaluated include wastewater treatment, Budd Inlet discharge, reclaimed water use/recharge, and conveyance capacity in the entire LOTT system. These three reports are prepared annually and are used to help identify capital projects for inclusion in the annual Capital Improvements Plan.

Flows and Loadings Report – analyzes residential and employment population projections within the Urban Growth Area and estimates the impact on wastewater flows and loading within the LOTT wastewater system.

Inflow And Infiltration – uses dry and wet weather sewer flow monitoring results to quantify the amount of unwanted surface (inflow) and subsurface (infiltration) water entering the sewer system and to prioritize sewer line rehabilitation projects.

As each report is published, it will be posted in the “Library” on LOTT’s website – www.lottcleanwater.org.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report i

Table of Contents PREFACE ...... i Executive Summary ...... iv 1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1 Purpose ...... 5 1.2 Current and Projected Flows and Loadings ...... 5 1.3 Operational Capacity ...... 7 2. Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Capacity ...... 8 2.1 Headworks ...... 9 2.1.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 10 2.1.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 12 2.1.3 Asset Management ...... 13 2.1.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 13 2.2 Primary Treatment ...... 15 2.2.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 15 2.2.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 16 2.2.3 Asset Management ...... 17 2.2.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 17 2.3 Secondary Clarifiers ...... 18 2.3.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 19 2.3.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 20 2.3.3 Asset Management ...... 20 2.3.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 20 2.4 Biological Process ...... 21 2.4.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 22 2.4.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 22 2.4.3 Asset Management ...... 23 2.4.1 Operations and Maintenance ...... 23 2.5 Ultraviolet Disinfection and Effluent Pumping ...... 24 2.5.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 25 2.5.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 27 2.5.3 Asset Management ...... 27 2.5.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 27 2.6 Sludge Thickening (DAFTs) ...... 29 2.6.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 30 2.6.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 31 2.6.1 Asset Management ...... 31 2.6.2 Operations and Maintenance ...... 31 2.7 Digesters (Sludge Stabilization) ...... 33 2.7.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 34 2.7.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 35 2.7.3 Asset Management ...... 36 2.7.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 36 2.8 Sludge Dewatering ...... 37 2.8.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 38 2.8.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 39 2.8.3 Asset Management ...... 39 2.8.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 39 2.9 Centrate Management ...... 40 2.9.1 Capacity Analysis ...... 40 2.9.2 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 41 2.9.3 Asset Management ...... 41 2.9.4 Operations and Maintenance ...... 41 2.10 Energy Recovery ...... 43

2019 Capacity Assessment Report ii

2.10.1 Completed and Planned Projects ...... 43 2.10.2 Asset Management ...... 44 2.10.3 Operations and Maintenance ...... 44 2.11 Ongoing and Planned Projects Overview ...... 45 3. Reclaimed Water Production Capacity ...... 46 3.1 Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant ...... 46 3.2 Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant ...... 48 3.3 Mullen Road Reclaimed Water Plant ...... 51 3.4 Deschutes Valley Reclaimed Water Plant ...... 51 4. Discharge Capacity ...... 53 4.1 Budd Inlet Outfall Permit Limitations ...... 53 4.2 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Biological Process Improvements ...... 55 4.3 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Site Planning ...... 58 4.4 Budd Inlet Discharge Capacity Analysis ...... 58 4.5 Alternative Discharge Planning ...... 60 4.5.1 Reclaimed Water Treatment ...... 60 4.5.2 Alternative Discharge Location ...... 61 4.5.3 Summary ...... 62 5. Conveyance System Analysis ...... 63 5.1 Sewer System Modeling Summary ...... 63 5.1.1 Pressure Mains ...... 64 5.1.2 Pump Stations...... 65 5.2 Required Capacity Improvements Projects ...... 65 5.2.1 Martin Way Interceptor (East) ...... 65 5.2.2 Indian Creek Interceptor ...... 66 5.2.3 Martin Way Forcemain ...... 67 5.2.4 Percival Creek/Mottman Road Interceptor ...... 67 5.2.5 Downtown Interceptors ...... 68 5.3 Summary of Pipe Capacity Projects ...... 69 5.4 Reclaimed Water Conveyance Lines ...... 69 6. Operational Capacity Analysis Summary...... 71

2019 Capacity Assessment Report iii

Executive Summary

For the 2019 Capacity Assessment Report, updated flows and loadings projections, along with inflow and infiltration and flow monitoring data, were used to evaluate the current and projected capacity limitations within the LOTT system. The flow projections are slightly higher compared to last year’s report and the loading projections are slightly lower. The higher flow projections are largely a result of higher base flows measured during the past year, and the lower loadings reflect a trend of reduced loadings measured at BITP over the past five years.

Much of the capacity discussion is centered on the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant’s (BITP) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, which limits discharge to a fixed load of biological oxygen demand (BOD) and total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) in pounds per day. The more the treatment plant can reduce its effluent concentration of BOD and TIN, the more flow it can discharge to Budd Inlet. Design is complete for the Biological Process Improvements project, which is intended to improve LOTT’s ability to consistently attain target effluent BOD and TIN levels.

Effective operational capacity equals the minimum combination of treatment, discharge, and conveyance capacity. Discharge capacity analysis considers two modeled flow projections – average flows and 10-year-return peak flows. All three seasonal conditions (summer, shoulder, and winter) were taken into account, with the summer and shoulder conditions being the most limiting. The first limitations are projected to occur in summer, in 2038, based on assumptions that include: 2 million gallons a day (mgd) of treatment capacity at the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant, 1.5 mgd of reserve capacity, and highly efficient operation of the biological process at the BITP. This report discusses how LOTT aims to meet those capacity limitations.

LOTT maintains a 1.5 mgd reserve of treatment/discharge capacity at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant. This allows for additional operational flexibility during peak flow events, minimizing the likelihood of a permit violation, and protects the system from unanticipated rapid population growth and/or delays in the construction of new capacity.

LOTT’s Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study will continue into 2021. The goal of the study is to provide local scientific data and community perspectives to help policymakers make informed decisions about future reclaimed water treatment and uses. LOTT will continue to maintain flexibility in its capacity planning process to respond to community expectations and future regulatory requirements.

Based on the updated projections, it is estimated that LOTT will need a total of 4 million gallons a day (mgd) of discharge capacity outside of the marine discharge to Budd Inlet by 2050. This capacity will be added through expansion of the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant and/or expansion of reclaimed water production at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, with re-use and recharge applications reducing the discharge to Budd Inlet. LOTT in underway with a master planning effort to evaluate alternatives for reclaimed water production, conveyance and disposition,

2019 Capacity Assessment Report iv

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

In accordance with the Wastewater Resource Management Plan, LOTT is continuously monitoring system demands and planning for future capacity on a “just in time” basis. The primary purpose of this document is to evaluate system capacity requirements based on projected demands and identify and evaluate capital improvement projects to meet these requirements.

1.2 Current and Projected Flows and Loadings

The Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) released their updated county-wide population projections in 2018. This included new residential population estimates for the years 2018, 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, and 2040. This data, along with drinking water consumption and flow monitoring data was used to update the flows and loadings projections. LOTT’s service area includes the urban growth areas (UGAs) of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater and is shown in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1. LOTT Service Area by Jurisdiction

2015 Capacity Assessment Report 5

Figure 1-2 compares the projected base sanitary flows against projections from the past few years. The base sanitary flow is defined as the minimum average flow registered over a 7- day period in each year and is assumed to have little influence from inflow and infiltration. For additional details on per capita wastewater generation rates, refer to the 2019 Flows and Loadings Report.

Figure 1-2. Base Sanitary Flow Projection Comparison 20.0

18.0

16.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

8.0 Current Projection

Base Flow (MGD) Flow Base 6.0 2017 Report 4.0 2016 Report

2.0 2015 Report Historical 0.0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Figure 1-3 presents the projected biological oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) loadings in the LOTT service area through 2050. These loading rates are calculated by multiplying the projected sewer populations by the per capita loading rates.

Figure 1-3. Projected Loadings 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 Loading, lb/d Loading, 10,000 5,000 - 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

BOD TSS

Table 1-1 lists the projected flows generated in the LOTT service area in millions of gallons per day (mgd). The summer and shoulder compliance periods represent the average monthly values. The 10-year peak values are based on the 10-year return period flows. In any given year, there would be a 10% chance of averaging the projected flow for each period.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 6

Table 1-1. LOTT Service Area Projected Flows (mgd) Peak Base Peak Day Peak Sanitary Annual Hour (10- (10- Month Year Flow Average year) year) (10-year) Shoulder1 Summer2 Winter3 2019 11.08 14.47 68.43 45.26 20.69 13.98 12.32 16.49 2020 11.15 14.55 68.71 45.43 20.79 14.06 12.39 16.58 2021 11.49 14.91 69.33 45.91 21.18 14.41 12.73 16.94 2022 11.77 15.20 69.89 46.33 21.51 14.70 13.02 17.25 2023 11.93 15.37 70.23 46.58 21.70 14.87 13.18 17.42 2024 12.09 15.54 70.58 46.83 21.89 15.03 13.33 17.59 2025 12.25 15.71 70.93 47.08 22.08 15.20 13.49 17.77 2026 12.43 15.90 71.20 47.31 22.29 15.39 13.68 17.96 2027 12.62 16.09 71.49 47.55 22.49 15.59 13.87 18.16 2028 12.82 16.29 71.79 47.79 22.70 15.78 14.07 18.36 2029 13.01 16.49 72.12 48.05 22.92 15.99 14.26 18.57 2030 13.21 16.70 72.49 48.34 23.15 16.20 14.47 18.78 2031 13.44 16.94 72.92 48.67 23.42 16.43 14.70 19.03 2032 13.67 17.19 73.36 49.00 23.68 16.68 14.93 19.28 2033 13.91 17.44 73.81 49.34 23.96 16.92 15.17 19.53 2034 14.15 17.69 74.27 49.69 24.24 17.17 15.41 19.80 2035 14.39 17.95 74.74 50.05 24.52 17.43 15.66 20.06 2036 14.61 18.19 75.19 50.38 24.79 17.67 15.89 20.31 2037 14.84 18.43 75.65 50.72 25.06 17.91 16.12 20.55 2038 15.07 18.67 76.11 51.07 25.33 18.15 16.35 20.81 2039 15.30 18.92 76.58 51.42 25.61 18.40 16.59 21.06 2040 15.54 19.17 77.06 51.78 25.89 18.65 16.83 21.32 2041 15.69 19.34 77.36 52.01 26.07 18.81 16.99 21.49 2042 15.84 19.51 77.67 52.24 26.25 18.98 17.15 21.66 2043 16.00 19.67 78.00 52.48 26.44 19.15 17.31 21.84 2044 16.15 19.85 78.34 52.73 26.64 19.32 17.48 22.01 2045 16.31 20.02 78.68 52.98 26.83 19.49 17.64 22.19 2046 16.46 20.19 79.03 53.24 27.03 19.66 17.81 22.37 2047 16.62 20.37 79.38 53.49 27.23 19.84 17.98 22.55 2048 16.78 20.55 79.73 53.75 27.42 20.01 18.14 22.74 2049 16.94 20.73 80.08 54.01 27.63 20.19 18.32 22.92 2050 17.10 20.91 80.44 54.27 27.83 20.37 18.49 23.11 Full Sewering 21.53 25.68 89.82 61.18 33.19 25.11 23.04 28.03 1. June, July, August, and September 2. April, May, and October 3. November, December, January, February, and March

1.3 Operational Capacity

LOTT considers three types of capacity when describing operational capacity – treatment capacity, discharge/use capacity, and conveyance capacity. Treatment capacity is defined as the amount of wastewater that can be treated within permit limitations. Discharge/use capacity is a combination of the amount of treated wastewater that can be discharged into the environment within permit limitations (i.e. Budd Inlet outfall), the amount of Class A Reclaimed Water that can be infiltrated into the ground (i.e. Hawks Prairie Ponds and Recharge Basins), and the amount of Class A Reclaimed Water that can be utilized for other beneficial uses (i.e. reclaimed water customers). Conveyance capacity represents the hydraulic capacity of both: 1) sewer lines to convey wastewater from the point of collection to the point of treatment; and 2) reclaimed water lines to convey Class A Reclaimed Water from the point of treatment to the point of discharge/use.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 7

2. Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Capacity

The rated capacity of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant was established as part of the last major facility upgrade, which occurred in the mid-1990s. Although that rated capacity serves as the basis for this capacity assessment, it should be acknowledged that many systems have been upgraded since the mid-1990s and the plant capacity has likely increased. However, LOTT does not plan to request a re-rate of the plant until the Biological Process Improvements project has been completed and sufficient operational data has been collected.

The treatment capacity of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant is also tied to the capacity of each individual system within the plant. These capacities are assessed annually based on updated flows and loadings projections. The following sections are included in the overview of each system unit:

 System Profile – General description of the system and its purpose.

 System Schematic – Schematic depicting the various components and flow paths.

 Capacity Analysis – Discussion of the various capacities as they relate to projected flows and loadings.

 Completed and Planned Improvements – List of completed and planned improvement projects.

 Asset Management – List of major equipment to include its capacity, date of last upgrade, and risk score (based on a score of 1 through 6, with 1 being the highest risk and 6 being the lowest).

 Operations and Maintenance – Description of the various activities associated with the operation and maintenance of the system and a review of historical costs. Costs are broken down into materials, labor, and contracted services. These historical costs are shown primarily to illustrate the improvements to LOTT’s business practices in capturing costs through its computerized maintenance management system.

Figure 2-1 provides an overview of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant and the various supporting systems.

Figure 2-1. Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Process

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 8

2.1 Headworks

The headworks facility consists of preliminary treatment (screens and grit removal) and influent pumping. Flow enters the plant via a 60-inch plant influent pipe. A splitter box directs flow through four influent channels. Motor-operated sluice gates at the head of each channel control the flow to four mechanically cleaned screens that remove large debris from the influent wastewater. Screenings are conveyed to two screenings pits where chopper pumps convey ground-up screenings to two washer/compactor units. Dewatered screenings are collected and hauled to the Thurston County Waste and Recovery Center for disposal. After screening, wastewater enters two aerated grit channels that remove large inorganic

and organic particles. Grit collects in hoppers at the bottom of each tank and is removed by 10 grit pumps. Grit is conveyed to the grit screening/handling room where the grit is processed through two cyclone separators and grit washer/classifiers to remove organic material and return it to the process via the influent splitter box. Washed grit is stored in hoppers and then hauled to the Waste and Recovery Center for disposal. Liquid supernatant from the separator and classifier is recycled to the plant influent splitter box. Degritted sewage overflows from the grit tanks into two influent wet wells. Four variable speed 200- horsepower (hp) pumps and one variable speed 50-hp pump provide the influent pumping capacity. The influent pumping system conveys raw degritted sewage to the primary sedimentation tanks.

Figure 2-2. Headworks Process Schematic

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 9

Five equalization basins (EQs) provide up to 2.5 million gallons of storage. As the water level rises in the wet wells during peak flows, the tanks fill in series as determined by elevation of the internal weirs. After the headworks upgrade of 2012, the addition of control valves on the lines to the north EQs allows the option of filling from the bottom of the wet wells rather than over the weirs. This change adds flexibility to flow pace during the summer months, reducing the impact of fluctuating flows on the biological treatment process.

2.1.1 Capacity Analysis

Influent Pump Station/Equalization Basins

The influent pump station has an operational capacity of 72 mgd, and a firm capacity (one pump out of service) of 54 mgd. A hydraulic analysis was conducted to determine the impact of the existing 2.5 million gallon equalization basins on flow through the influent pump station. This analysis projected that the EQ basins could buffer approximately 13 mgd of peak hour flow, meaning that the equalized capacity of the influent pump station is approximately 85 mgd. Restrictions in the 60-inch influent sewer arise at flows between 60- 70 mgd, and those sewers may currently pass only 80-90 mgd depending on the pressure condition.

Figure 2-3 plots the peak hour influent flow against the estimated capacity of the influent pump station and equalization basins. Currently, influent pumping capacity is projected to reach 85% capacity in 2034. Based on the recommendations of the Equalization Basin Cost and Feasibility Assessment, completed in 2014, a project is planned to expand the two force mains feeding the primary sedimentation basins from 30-inches to 36-inches, with no modification to the influent pumps, and no expansion of equalization volume. LOTT is currently developing a comprehensive wet weather plan which will also assess capacity limitations in the influent piping to the BITP.

Figure 2-3. Influent Pump Station/Equalization Basins Capacity Projection 90

Peak hour flow(mgd)hourPeak 20

0 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048 Projected Flow Capacity (with EQ)

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 10

Headworks Screens

Each of the existing headworks screens has a rated peak hour influent flow capacity of 25 mgd. With four screens, the operational capacity of the screening facility is 100 mgd and the firm capacity is 75 mgd. Figure 2-4 shows the existing firm and total screening capacities relative to the projected peak hour influent flow. Because the plant has the ability to bypass excessive peak flows around the screens, the screening system is evaluated based upon the total, rather than the firm capacity. No capacity-related projects are planned for the headworks screens.

Figure 2-4. Headworks Screens Capacity Projection 120 100 80 60 40 20

Peak hour flow(mgd)hourPeak 0 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050

Projected Flow Firm capacity Total capacity

Aerated Grit Tanks

The capacity of the aerated grit tanks is expressed relative to the hydraulic retention time (HRT) at peak day flow. Ecology’s Orange Book recommends that aerated grit tanks be designed to maintain a minimum hydraulic retention time of three to five minutes in order to effectively remove grit during peak wet weather events. The retention time with both aerated grit tanks in service is projected to remain above this range through 2050. Therefore, no capacity-related projects are planned for the aerated grit tanks

Figure 2-5. Aerated Grit Tanks Capacity Projection 10 9 8 7 6 5

4 Orange Book recommended minimum detention time 3-5 minutes 3 2 1

Peak Peak detentionday time (min) 0 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 11

Headworks System Capacity Summary

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the capacity analysis and assumptions for the headworks system. This includes the influent pump station and equalization basins, the headworks screens, and the aerated grit tanks.

Table 2-1. Headworks System Capacity Summary Condition Utilization

Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050

Influent pump Peak hour flow station with equalization mgd Total 85 66.5 77.5 78% 91%

Headworks screens Peak hour flow mgd Total 100 66.5 77.5 66% 78%

Aerated grit tanks Peak day HRT min Total 4 6.2 5.2 65% 77%

2.1.2 Completed and Planned Projects

Planned future capital projects include expanding the capacity of the two influent pumping forcemains, currently planned for 2035. Additional flow equalization is not projected to be needed prior to 2050. However, given changing weather patterns and potential impacts related to climate change and sea level rise, LOTT maintains flexibility to expand equalization capacity as needed. In 2013, LOTT purchased a 1.44-acre property adjacent to the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant that was formerly owned by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. This property could be used for equalization basin expansion or other beneficial uses if needed in the future. The building was demolished in the spring of 2020. The site will be paved, fenced, and used on an interim basis as a contractor staging area for upcoming capital projects. Completed and planned projects for the headworks system are listed in Table 2-2.

Figure 2-6. Potential Future Equalization Basin Site

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 12

Table 2-2. Completed and Planned Project Summary On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Additional screening pumps to ensure 2013 Screenings Pumps $270,513 Completed process redundancy and reliability 2013 Grit Blower Replacement $183,509 Completed Two new grit channel blowers Includes replacement of the grit channel 2014 Headworks Improvements $1,024,025 Completed diffusers, influent wet well transfer gates, EQ valves, and basin and channel coatings Influent Screen #1 Included refurbishment of the #1 influent 2016 $51,082 Completed Refurbishment screen Replace suction and discharge isolation Influent Pump Station Valve 2019 $548,221.56 Completed gates, and check valves for four influent and Piping Improvements pumps Washington Street Property Demolish building, pave and fence site, 2020 $1,585,000 Construction Improvements and use for contractor staging Headworks Solids Handling 2025 $1,200,000 Design Replace grit washer/separators Improvements Influent Pumping Capacity Expand capacity to reduce risk of storm- 2035 $3,660,000 Future Expansion related overflows

2.1.3 Asset Management

Major equipment includes the influent pumps, headworks screens, and associated screenings handling equipment, and the equipment associated with grit removal. This equipment is shown in Figure 2-2 and is summarized in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3. Existing Headworks Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Influent Pumps 4 18 mgd 200 hp 1994 3 1 5 mgd 50 hp 1993 3 Headworks Screens 4 25 mgd 2 hp 2016 2 Screenings Pumps 2 200 gpm 20 hp 2012 2 Screenings Compactors 2 45 ft3/hr 7.5 hp 2003 3 Grit Pumps 10 150 gpm 25 hp 1980 3 Grit Separators 2 200 gpm 20 hp 2004 3 Grit Washer 2 1.5 ton/hr 0.5 hp 2004 3 Grit Chamber Blowers 3 263 cfm/11.6 psi 20 hp 2013 2

2.1.4 Operations and Maintenance

Headworks system operational costs include labor, energy, and disposal fees. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for the influent pump station, equalization basins, screens/screenings handling equipment, and the grit removal system. This also includes labor requirements for the collection, hauling, and disposal of dewatered screenings and grit. The major energy cost for the headworks system is the electrical power required for operation of the influent pumps, screens, and grit blowers.

Disposal costs have to do with the hauling and disposal of screenings and grit. Maintenance of the headworks system includes maintaining the major equipment, as well as associated instruments, gates, and piping systems. This may also include periodic draining and removal of any accumulated grit/sediment in the influent screen channels and grit tanks. Maintenance costs tracked in LOTT’s computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) are shown in Figure 2-7.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 13

Figure 2-7. Headworks – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$200,000 $180,000 Sum of Contracts $160,000 Sum of Materials $140,000 Sum of Labor $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 14

2.2 Primary Treatment

The primary treatment process removes easily settleable material from the screened and de-gritted wastewater. The system includes two sets of primary clarifiers totaling four basins, brought into service after an upgrade in 2013. The primary treatment system includes magnetic flow meters, which provide an estimate of primary influent flow. This flow measurement is used to control influent gates and the pump speed for influent pumping, return activated sludge, waste activated sludge, and internal mixed liquor recycle pumping.

Figure 2-8. Primary Treatment Process

All of the primary clarifiers include scum collectors, surface return flight sludge collectors, and primary sludge pumps. Primary scum is sent to an aerated tank where, under controlled conditions, a proprietary mixture of biomass prepares the scum for anaerobic digestion. Primary sludge removed from the primary sedimentation tanks is pumped to the dissolved air flotation thickeners.

Primary effluent is routed from the clarifiers to an effluent diversion structure. This structure can feed the first anoxic basin via a 60-inch pipeline. Under emergency conditions, the effluent diversion structure can send flow through a 48-inch pipeline to either first aeration or the ultraviolet disinfection system.

The primary clarifiers include an odor control facility and chemical building, which have been sized to accommodate a potential primary sedimentation basins expansion. The primary odor control facility receives foul air from the new primary clarifiers and treats it with a chemical (sodium hydroxide) scrubber, followed by a set of carbon scrubbers. The chemical building includes space and conduit for chemically enhanced primary treatment in the event that LOTT elects to augment solids removal in the future.

2.2.1 Capacity Analysis

The capacity of the primary treatment system may be defined as either hydraulic capacity or treatment capacity. The primary clarifiers can hydraulically pass up to 60 mgd of flow without flooding, though they are designed to treat flows up to 37.5 mgd. The latter condition corresponds to a surface overflow rate of 4,716 gpd/ft2, with all four basins in service. While

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 15

higher than Orange Book recommendations, six years of operational data supports operation to this flow rate. At a high surface overflow rate (SOR), the performance of the primary clarifiers will degrade, and total suspended solids (TSS) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removal rates will decrease. This will increase loadings to the secondary biological process and secondary clarifiers and will have a cascading effect on the capacity of downstream systems. The relationship between SOR and performance will be monitored, and the overall BITP capacity model is based upon that relationship.

Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) is another option to potentially improve the capacity of the existing primary clarifiers. Provisions for CEPT were included in the original design. Space in the chemical building was reserved for dosing pumps. A pad and secondary containment for chemical tanks was also included, as well as the necessary conduit and piping. LOTT conducted a pilot test in the winter of 2020. The results were promising and additional testing is planned for the fall of 2020.

For the purpose of this capacity assessment, the capacity of the primary clarifier will be judged on the Orange Book recommended peak overflow rate of 3,000 gpd/ft2. This criterion will be applied to a maximum month flow condition, as single day exceedances of the criterion would not be expected to impact permit compliance. Table 2-4 includes a summary of the various capacity parameters assessed and the related assumptions.

Table 2-4. Primary Clarifiers Capacity Summary

Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 Primary clarifiers Peak month SOR gpd/ft2 Total 3,000 2,357 3,132 79% 104%

While the average day SORs are higher than Orange Book standards, the system has performed well since its construction. The average TSS removal rate in 2018 was 60.5%. Figure 2-9. Primary Treatment Capacity Projection 4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500 Orange Book recommended SOR for peak flow 2,000 - 3,000 gpd/ft2 2,000

1,500 Orange Book recommended SOR for average flow 1,000 800 - 1,200 gpd/ft2 500 Surface overflow rate (gpd/ft2)overflowSurface Peak Month SOR Average Day SOR 0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

2.2.2 Completed and Planned Projects

Construction of the primary clarifiers was completed in 2013 and included new odor control and chemical storage facilities sized to meet build out conditions. Performance has been better than expected. Additionally, with the positive preliminary results of CEPT, the previously planned primary sedimentation basins Phase II project may no longer be needed. Further evaluation of CEPT is planned for the winter of 2020 and should provide additional

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 16

information on the viability of CEPT as a more cost effective approach to expand primary treatment capacity.

Table 2-5. Primary Treatment Completed and Planned Project Summary On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Port of Olympia Land Purchased property to locate the new 2010 $2,156,297 Completed Purchase primaries Project added new primary clarifiers, odor Primary Sedimentation 2013 $58,957,736 Completed control, and chemical feed and storage Basins facilities Chemically Enhanced Project will install dosing pumps, electrical, TBD Primary Treatment $2,913,000 Planning controls, and storage tanks (CEPT) Primary Sedimentation Project will add a second set of primary TBD $35,863,743 Future Basins, Phase II clarifiers and new centrate handling facility

2.2.3 Asset Management

A variety of mechanical equipment is involved in the operation of the primary treatment system. Major equipment includes the influent flow meters, the chain and flight sludge and scum collectors, and the primary sludge pumps. This equipment is shown in Figure 2-8 above and is summarized in Table 2-6 below.

Table 2-6. Existing Primary Treatment Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Influent flow meters 2 NA NA 2013 2 Clarifier chain and flight collectors 8 NA 0.5 hp 2013 2 Sludge pumps 2 230 gpm 15 hp 2013 2 Scum pumps 2 100 gpm 5 hp 2013 2

2.2.4 Operations and Maintenance

Primary treatment operational costs include labor and energy. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for the clarifiers, sludge pumps, and scum system. Energy costs are related to sludge pumping, operation of the chains and flights, and the odor control system fans. Chemical costs associated with scum digestion are small and are not tracked on a facility level. Maintenance of the primary treatment system includes maintaining the major equipment as well as associated instruments, gates, and piping systems.

Figure 2-10. Primary Treatment – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$160,000 $140,000 Sum of Contracts Sum of Materials $120,000 Sum of Labor $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 17

2.3 Secondary Clarifiers

The purpose of the secondary clarifiers is to retain the activated sludge bacteria within the secondary process, and discharge clean effluent to the disinfection system. The clarifiers receive flow from the final aeration basin, and clarified effluent from the clarifiers flows to the ultraviolet disinfection system. There are four clarifiers at the plant with a diameter of 120 feet and a 14.5-foot side water depth. A project to upgrade the secondary clarifiers was completed in 2007. The project included the replacement of the clarifier mechanisms, and both the waste activated sludge (WAS) and return activated sludge (RAS) pumping systems.

Each clarifier is equipped with two RAS pumps and one WAS pump. Settled sludge is withdrawn from each clarifier through dedicated RAS pumps that are connected to a manifold of pipes located on the clarifier’s rotating sludge collector rake arms.

A magnetic flow meter measures the flow from each pair of pumps. RAS is recycled back to the first anoxic basin or to the first aeration basin. The pumping rate is adjusted to maintain a blanket of settled sludge in the clarifier.

Figure 2-11: Secondary Clarifier Process

WAS is withdrawn from each RAS wet well and directed to the dissolved air flotation thickeners for solids processing. The WAS pumps are used to maintain the solids inventory in the system and the solids retention time in the secondary treatment process to allow the biological treatment process to operate correctly. The WAS pumps are operated continuously to even out the load to the dissolved air flotation thickeners.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 18

2.3.1 Capacity Analysis

The capacity of the secondary clarifiers was established through stress testing and fluid dynamic modeling in late 2008. Unit capacity is a function of the mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentration in the aeration basins and the mixed liquor sludge volume index (SVI) (Figure 2-12). MLSS is a function of the BOD loading to the aeration basins and the total aeration basin volume. In addition, the BOD loading to the aeration basins is itself a function of both satellite plant diversion and primary sedimentation performance.

Figure 2-12. Secondary Clarifier Capacity as a Function of MLSS and SVI

As noted above, secondary clarifier capacity is a function of several factors and is linked to the influent flows and loads to the plant, primary sedimentation performance, and operation of the aeration basins as it relates to MLSS concentration. LOTT is currently engaged in a process improvements project which will reconfigure the aeration basins and biological process. The relationship between influent loadings, MLSS concentration, and clarifier capacity will need to be re-evaluated after the conclusion of this project.

Table 2-7 provides a summary of the capacity analysis and assumptions for the secondary clarifiers. Much of the table is currently undefined pending the Biological Process Improvements project. Based on the anticipated improvements resulting from the project, secondary clarifier capacity is not projected to become limiting within the next 20 years.

Table 2-7. Secondary Clarifiers Simplified Capacity Summary Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 Secondary Peak day solids clarifiers loading rate lb/d/ft2 Total TBD 9.5 21.5 TBD TBD RAS Pumps Flow mgd Total 23 N/A N/A N/A N/A WAS Pumps Flow mgd Total 3.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 19

2.3.2 Completed and Planned Projects

After the Biological Process Improvements project is complete, a reassessment of the secondary clarifier capacity will be conducted. As part of LOTT’s master planning update for the footprint of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, additional technologies to address potential future capacity limitations will be evaluated. In the worst case scenario, two additional secondary clarifiers may be required by 2050. However, no projects are currently planned at this time.

2.3.3 Asset Management

Major equipment involved in secondary clarifier operation includes secondary clarifier sludge collection mechanisms, RAS pumps, and WAS pumps. This equipment is illustrated in Figure 2-11 and is summarized in Table 2-8 below.

Table 2-8. Existing Secondary Clarifiers Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Secondary Clarifier Mechanisms 4 120-ft diameter N/A 2007 3 RAS Pumps 8 2,000 gpm 20 hp 2007 3 WAS Pumps 4 300 gpm 10 hp 2007 3

Maintenance costs to include labor, materials, and contracted services captured in LOTT’s CMMS are included in Figure 3-14.

2.3.4 Operations and Maintenance

Operational costs for the secondary clarifiers include labor and energy. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for the secondary clarifiers. Electrical energy is required to operate the secondary clarifier mechanisms and the RAS/WAS pumps.

Maintenance of the secondary clarifier system includes maintaining the major equipment, as well as associated instruments and piping systems.

Figure 2-14. Secondary Clarification – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$70,000 Sum of Contracts $60,000 Sum of Materials Sum of Labor $50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 20

2.4 Biological Process

LOTT’s biological nutrient removal system operates a modified four-stage Bardenpho process to optimize total inorganic nitrogen removal from the incoming wastewater. Effluent from the primary sedimentation tanks flows through a series of anoxic (low dissolved oxygen) basins and aeration (higher dissolved oxygen concentration) basins. These basins are identified as the first anoxic, first aeration, second anoxic, and final aeration basins. In order to achieve the required nitrogen limits, flows are recycled inside the aeration basin system from the first aeration basin back to the first anoxic basin at a rate up to four times the plant’s influent flow.

The first anoxic basin (stage 1) removes nitrate from the wastewater (denitrifies). Each basin is mixed by a mixer mounted on the roof of the basin. Denitrified mixed liquor flows by gravity to the intermediate pump station, which transfers it to the first aeration basin. The intermediate pump station lifts the mixed liquor and primary effluent flow to allow gravity flow through the remaining elements of the secondary treatment process and ultraviolet disinfection.

Figure 2-15: Biological Process

In the first aeration basin (stage 2), the wastewater is aerated to provide for BOD removal and nitrification (conversion of ammonia to nitrate). The mixed liquor is aerated with fine bubble diffusers located on the floor of the basins. Air is supplied to the diffusers by a system of blowers. Mixed liquor flows from the first aeration basin to a splitter box that directs flow either back to the first anoxic basin or to the second anoxic basin/final aeration basin.

The second anoxic and final aeration basins (stage 3 and 4) provide the final biological denitrification and nitrification steps prior to settling and disinfection. Stages 3 and 4 consist of two trains, each with four cells. The first three cells of each train serve as the second anoxic zone, and the fourth cell as the final aeration zone. In the anoxic cells, additional nitrate removal is achieved. In the final aeration cells the mixed liquor is aerated to further polish the mixed liquor prior to flowing to the secondary clarifiers.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 21

2.4.1 Capacity Analysis

The secondary process tanks comprise of 15.27 million gallons of anoxic and aerobic basin volume. While this process volume is sufficient to provide for BOD and TIN removal through build out, performance becomes increasingly tied to the mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentrations. The MLSS concentration is proportional to the BOD loading, which is projected to increase by approximately 200% by build out. The MLSS concentration is inversely proportional to the volume of the secondary process tanks.

The Biological Process Improvements project is currently underway, which will reconfigure the secondary process tanks to provide for improved control and efficiency. Key outcomes of the project include reduced energy use, a reduction in foam trapping, improved dissolved oxygen control, and improved mixed liquor settleability. Consolidation of the biological treatment process will also free up valuable space on the plant site for additional future treatment processes. These positive outcomes are balanced against a possible reduction in process volume tied to the elimination of the existing first anoxic basin. The volume reduction could increase the projected MLSS concentration, which in turn increases downstream loading on the secondary clarifiers and reduces secondary clarifier capacity.

Table 2-9. Biological Process System Capacity Summary

Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 Aeration basins Capacity is driven by secondary clarifier solids loading Aeration blowers Peak day air flow scfm Firm 20,800 14,000 21,132 67% 102%

The capacity of the aeration basins is linked to the secondary clarifiers via the relationship between MLSS concentration and solids loading. This relationship will need to be revisited after the reconfiguration of the aeration basins. The Biological Process Improvements project will also address aeration blower capacity.

2.4.2 Completed and Planned Projects

In 2011, a new Neuros high-speed dual-core turbo blower was installed to add more control and redundancy to the process aeration system. The total project cost was $767,803, though the project qualified for a Puget Sound Energy rebate in the amount of $374,772, resulting in a total project cost of $344,264.

The Biological Process Improvements project is currently in the design phase and is scheduled to be completed in 2022. The purpose of this project is to optimize the current biological treatment process at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant. The project will reconfigure the existing first aeration basins, as well as reduce the energy required to accomplish biological nutrient removal. The improvements include replacing oversized blowers and minimizing recycle pumping, which will reduce power consumption. The project will also optimize methanol addition to the secondary process.

Table 2-10. Completed and Planned Biological Process Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2011 Aeration Blower Upgrade $344,264 Completed Added Neuros high-speed turbo blower Upgrades aeration control, Biological Process 2022 $35,902,102 In Process instrumentation, and process tank Improvements reconfiguration

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 22

2.4.3 Asset Management

A variety of mechanical equipment is involved in operation of the aeration basins. Major equipment includes mixers for the anoxic basins and first aeration basin, pumps at the intermediate pumping station, and aeration blowers/diffusers. This equipment is shown on Figure 2-12 and is summarized in Table 2-11 below.

Table 2-11. Existing Aeration Basins Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) First Anoxic Basin Mixers 16 10 hp 1980 4 First Aeration Basin Mixers 5 25 hp 1993 3 Second Anoxic Basin Mixers 6 15 hp 2010 3 Intermediate Pumps 2 17 mgd 75 hp 1993 3 4 33 mgd 150 hp 1993 Centrifugal Blowers 3 7,400 scfm 500 hp 1993 5 Turbo Blowers 1 6,000 scfm 400 hp 2011 2 Aeration Diffusers 30,000 2012 3

2.4.1 Operations and Maintenance

Aeration basin operational costs include labor, energy, and chemicals. Energy is primarily required for operation of the aeration blowers, recycle pumping, and operation of the anoxic and aeration basin mixers when in use.

Chemical costs include supplemental carbon to drive denitrification, and polyaluminum chloride (PAX) to reduce biological foaming. The plant typically uses methanol as a supplemental carbon source, and doses during the summer and shoulder permit seasons. PAX is typically dosed during the winter, to limit the growth of foaming filaments.

Maintenance of the aeration basins includes maintaining the major equipment, as well as associated instruments and piping systems. The aeration diffusers require periodic cleaning, which involves taking a basin out of service and manually cleaning the membranes.

Figure 2-16. Biological Treatment – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$400,000

$350,000 Sum of Contracts $300,000 Sum of Materials Sum of Labor $250,000

$200,000

$150,000

$100,000

$50,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 23

2.5 Ultraviolet Disinfection and Effluent Pumping

Ultraviolet Disinfection

The ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system is the final liquid stream processing step prior to discharge to Budd Inlet. The purpose of the system is to disinfect the effluent from the secondary clarifiers to satisfy NPDES permit requirements for fecal coliform counts in the final effluent.

The system exposes bacteria in the effluent to UV light by flowing past UV bulbs arranged in modules across the width of each channel. The spacing of the lamps in the channels provides sufficient UV radiation to ensure destruction of pathogenic microorganisms as effluent flows through the channel. The performance of the UV disinfection system is contingent on the successful performance of the secondary clarifiers, since high suspended solids will block the UV radiation and reduce the amount available for disinfection.

Figure 2-17. UV Disinfection Process

Effluent Pumping

The BITP treatment plant has two 48-inch outfalls, the North Outfall and the Fiddlehead Outfall. Final disinfected effluent is typically pumped to Budd Inlet via the North Outfall that extends 953 feet off the shoreline near the north end of Washington Street. The final 250 feet of the outfall includes a diffuser section approximately 19 feet below the mean lower low water level (MLLW). The Fiddlehead Outfall is reserved for emergency situations, when flows exceed the pumping capacity of the North Outfall, or to facilitate maintenance activities on the North Outfall pumping and piping system. In the event that the Fiddlehead Outfall is utilized, LOTT must notify the Department of Ecology that flow was diverted to this pipe.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 24

2.5.1 Capacity Analysis

UV Disinfection

In 2019, a project was completed to upgrade the TrojanUV3000TM to the new TrojanUVSignaTM ultraviolet disinfection system. Five of the seven channels were deepened to accommodate the new 45-degree angle modules. Each channel now has a maximum treatment capacity of 18.75 mgd for a total capacity of 93.75 mgd and a firm capacity (one of the largest units out of service) of 75 mgd. With the capacity of the influent pump station limited to 72 mgd, the existing channel system will have capacity to treat all secondary- treated flows throughout build-out. Figure 2-18 illustrates the projected UV disinfection system capacity through 2015.

Figure 2-18. UV Disinfection System Capacity Projection 80

Flow Flow (mgd) 30

0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

Avg Flow Peak day flow (mgd) Avg Day Capacity Peak Capacity

The design criteria for the new system is included in Table 2.12.

Table 2.12 TrojanUVSignaTM Design Criteria Parameter Capacity Peak Design Flow 75 mgd Average Daily Flow 23.3 mgd UV Transmission 63% minimum Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 30 mg/l (30 Day Average, grab sample) Minimum Dose 24 mJ/cm2 Discharge Limit 200 Fecal Coliforms, 30 Day Geometric Mean

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 25

Effluent Pumping

There are four pumps discharging to the North Outfall, each with a nameplate capacity of 16.7 mgd at high tide. However, experience has suggested a real-world combined pumping capacity of 55 mgd at high tide, and pressure limitations in the outfall pipeline would limit flow increases above this level. Under normal tidal conditions, the outfall can pump up to 75 mgd. Two additional 15 mgd pumps can direct flow to the Fiddlehead Outfall under emergency circumstances, bringing the combined outfall capacity to 85 mgd. LOTT prefers to minimize use of the Fiddlehead Outfall as much as possible. Figure 2-19 shows the existing capacity of the North Outfall, not including Fiddlehead capacity, relative to the projected 10-year peak day flow.

Figure 2-19. North Outfall Capacity Projection 90

70 Range of outfall capacity 55-75 mgd 60

50 Flow(mgd) 40

Peak hour flow 10 Influent Pump Station capacity 0 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042 2046 2050

Currently, the North Outfall does not have capacity to discharge peak hour flows under high tide conditions. However, such conditions are rare, and the plant’s influent flow equalization basins typically reduce peak hourly flow through the plant. Therefore, the plant has very rarely needed to discharge flow to the Fiddlehead outfall.

A plan is currently being developed to increase the capacity of the North Outfall by replacing the 30-inch section of pipe, which is currently limiting pumping capacity, and by upgrading the existing pumps. After those improvements, the North Outfall will have the capacity to match the influent pump station (72 mgd) under all tidal conditions. This project is currently planned for 2036.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 26

UV Disinfection System and Outfalls Capacity Summary

Table 2-13 provides a summary of the capacity analysis and assumptions for the UV disinfection system and the North Outfall.

Table 2-13. UV Disinfection System and Outfalls Capacity Summary Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 UV Disinfection Peak day flow mgd Firm 55 43.3 51.3 79% 93% North Outfall pumps Peak hour flow mgd Firm 55 66.5 77.5 121%1 141%1 Fiddlehead Outfall pumps Peak hour flow mgd Firm 30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1. Capacity rating is based on flow capacity at maximum tide conditions

2.5.2 Completed and Planned Projects

The Trojan UVSignaTM Disinfection System was installed in 2019. A list of planned projects is included in Table 2-14 below. The North Outfall Upgrade, planned for 2036, will address the current pressure limitations in the North Outfall pipeline and will help reduce future use of the Fiddlehead Outfall.

Table 2-14. Completed and Planned Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2013 Effluent Drive and Motor $1,692,754 Completed Replaced effluent pump variable frequency drives Control Centers and motor control centers Replacement 2019 Ultraviolet Disinfection $6,692,188 Completed Upgrades 20-year-old TrojanUV3000TM system to Upgrades new TrojanUVSignaTM 2027 North Outfall pumping $9,070,000 Future Upgrades existing pumps upgrade 2036 North Outfall Upgrade $5,250,000 Future Remove existing bottleneck from outfall pipe run

2.5.3 Asset Management

A variety of mechanical equipment is involved in the operation of the UV disinfection system and the effluent pump station. Major equipment includes the UV disinfection system, North Outfall pumps, Fiddlehead Outfall pumps, and Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant pumps. This equipment is shown in Figure 2-17 and is summarized in Table 2-15 below.

Table 2-15. Existing UV Disinfection and Effluent Pumping Equipment Date of last Risk Score System Count Unit capacity Motor upgrade (1-6) TrojanUV3000TM Disinfection System 6 11 mgd N/A 1993 5 Effluent Pump Station Pumps – North 3 18 mgd 150 hp 1997 3 Outfall 2 12 mgd 2001 3 Effluent Pump Station Pumps – 2 15 mgd 125 hp 1980 3 Fiddlehead Effluent Pump Station Pumps – Budd 3 1 mgd 60 hp 2004 3 Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant

2.5.4 Operations and Maintenance

Operational costs for the UV disinfection system and outfalls include labor and energy. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for both systems. The major energy cost for the UV disinfection system is associated with the electrical energy

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 27

needed to power the UV lamps. The outfalls also require electrical energy to operate the effluent pumps.

Maintenance of the UV disinfection system and outfalls includes maintaining the major equipment, as well as associated instruments, gates, and piping systems. Maintenance costs have increased in recent years due to the system approaching the end of its useful life.

Figure 2-20. UV Disinfection and Outfall – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$90,000 Sum of Contracts

$80,000 Sum of Materials

$70,000 Sum of Labor

$60,000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 28

2.6 Sludge Thickening (DAFTs)

The sludge thickening process removes excess water from the combined primary and waste activated sludge (WAS) flows prior to anaerobic digestion. The Budd Inlet Treatment Plant sludge thickening system consists of four rectangular dissolved air flotation thickener (DAFT) tanks. Polymer is used to enhance sludge thickening and performance of the DAFTs.

Figure 2-21. Dissolved Air Flotation Thickeners Process

Three of the DAFT tanks use a dedicated pressurization system to provide high-pressure air for flotation. A portion of the DAFT effluent is recycled to the pressurization tank, and the pressure is elevated to 40 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) using the plant’s high- pressure service air. Pressurized flow from the tank passes through a pressure release valve, where it combines with the sludge and polymer feeds to the DAFT tanks. The decompressed air bubbles attach to the sludge and polymer particles floating them to the surface. Skimmers collect the thickened sludge and push it to hoppers for transfer to the anaerobic digesters.

Sludge that settles to the bottom of the DAFT tanks is drained back to headworks once each day. Overflow from the DAFTs drains back to headworks for re-processing with the plant influent flow. The fourth DAFT tank recently replaced its air pressurization system with a self-aspirating pump. The new system saves energy and is easier to maintain. The relative capacities of the two types of DAFT are currently being evaluated.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 29

2.6.1 Capacity Analysis

Common hoppers are shared between DAFT tanks 1 and 2 and between DAFT tanks 3 and 4. The thickened sludge then combines in a common manifold and is carried to the sludge digestion system. The DAFT system was rated to a capacity of 29.7 pounds per square foot per day (lb/ft2/d) in the 2006 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Master Plan. However, the system has been operated at much higher loadings since that time. Historically, the system has been operated up to 60 lb/ft2/d, although recently the system has struggled to perform under such loadings, and a more conservative estimate of capacity may be closer to 45 lb/ft2/d. The DAFT system is currently undergoing stress testing to determine its capacity. The value of 45 lb/ft2/d has been used to assess capacity needs for the sludge thickening system.

Figure 3-22 depicts the capacity of the DAFT system assuming three tanks in service. The system is projected to reach capacity in 2044.

Figure 2-22. Sludge Thickening Capacity Projection 90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

Peak day Peak day (lb/d) load 20,000

10,000

0 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048 Projected load Capacity

Table 2-16 provides a summary of the capacity analysis and assumptions for the sludge thickening system. Three DAFT units are projected to meet firm capacity needs through 2044. The system is currently undergoing stress testing to verify the capacity rating, and alternatives for future expansion are being evaluated as part of long-range planning for the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant.

Table 2-16. Sludge Thickening System Capacity Summary Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 Peak day solids DAF Thickening lb/d/ft2 Firm 45 25.7 38.4 57% 85% load

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 30

2.6.2 Completed and Planned Projects

LOTT, with assistance from HDR Engineering, conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the DAFT system in 2016. Much of the equipment, originally installed in 1982, is reaching the end of its useful life. A list of near-term improvements, with the goal to extend the useful life of the existing DAFT system by ten years, was developed to ensure operational reliability and redundancy to include the following:

 Install self-aspirating pumps to replace the existing pressurization system, which are inefficient and reaching the end of their useful lives  Upgrade thickened sludge (THS) pumping  Replace bottom collectors in tanks 1, 2 and 3

On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Thickening System Included the replacement of the sprocket, 2011 Equipment $372,196 Completed chains, collectors, and beaches for the top Replacement collectors for each of the 4 tanks DAFT Cover 2012 $223,516 Completed Replaced tank covers Replacement Added new polymer mixer and transfer pump DAFT Polymer 2014 $918,128 Completed and replaced metering pumps and associated System Upgrade controls and electrical DAFT Ventilation Fan 2015 $42,764 Completed DAFT ventilation fan replacement Replacement DAFT System and Includes upgrading the DAFT system with new 2020 Thickened Sludge $2,920,000 In Process bottom collectors, aspirating pumps, thickened Pumping Upgrade sludge pumps, and process piping Will include a complete upgrade of the system Sludge Thickening 2030 $4,790,000 Future based on the results of the business case Upgrade evaluation

2.6.1 Asset Management

For the existing DAFT system, there is a variety of mechanical equipment involved in sludge thickening operations. Major equipment includes the DAFT sludge collection flights, scum collection flights, as well as the thickened sludge pumps and pressurization system. This equipment is shown in Figure 2-16 and summarized in Table 2-18.

Table 2-18. Existing Sludge Thickening Equipment Date of last Risk Score System Count Unit capacity Motor upgrade (1-6) Top Collectors 4 33 lb/ft2-d 1.5 hp 2005 3 Bottom and Cross Collectors 4 33 lb/ft2-d 1982 5 Pressurization System 4 1982 4 Polymer Metering Pumps 4 4 gpm 0.75 2014 2 Thickened Sludge Pumps 4 100 gpm 10 hp 2003 3

2.6.2 Operations and Maintenance

Sludge thickening operational costs includes labor, energy, and chemicals. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for the DAFTs and associated polymer supply system. Electrical energy is required to operate the DAFTs, polymer equipment, thickened sludge pumps, and odor control. Chemical costs are related to thickening polymer. The current cost of polymer for sludge thickening is approximately $80,000 per year.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 31

Figure 2-23. Sludge Thickening – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$180,000 Sum of Contracts $160,000 Sum of Materials $140,000 Sum of Labor $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 32

2.7 Digesters (Sludge Stabilization)

The anaerobic digesters biologically stabilize thickened sludge from the DAFTs by converting portions of the sludge to carbon dioxide, methane, and water. Following anaerobic digestion, the residual material (biosolids) is suitable for land application.

Anaerobic sludge digestion facilities include four 70-feet diameter, 30-feet deep concrete tanks with floating covers. Normal practice is to operate three digesters at a time, with the fourth digester held in reserve.

Figure 2-24. Digesters Process

The anaerobic digester equipment building contains all process mechanical equipment needed to operate the digestion process. Thickened sludge is fed to the bottom of the digesters through the circulating sludge system in the center of the tank. Circulating sludge is withdrawn from each digester and pumped to sludge heat exchangers before being returned to the digesters to assist in keeping them completely mixed. The heat exchangers are used to maintain the temperature in the digester at 95° F, which is a permit requirement in order to meet Class B Biosolids standards.

Methane gas from the digesters is the principle fuel for the high temperature heat loop system. Digested sludge is withdrawn from the bottom of the digesters and pumped to solids dewatering centrifuges. Each digester is equipped with floating gasholder-type covers, which are supported by digester gas pressure. Each digester contains two separate gas- piping systems. The gas utilization system withdraws gas for use as fuel for the high temperature heat loop system. The second system uses digester gas to continuously mix the contents of the digester. A dedicated gas compressor recirculates digester gas through each digester.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 33

Foul air from the anaerobic digester equipment building is collected and treated in the odor control system prior to release to the atmosphere.

2.7.1 Capacity Analysis

Digester capacity is typically evaluated in terms of the hydraulic retention time (HRT) and the volatile solids loading rate. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) biosolids rule requires a minimum detention time of 15 days. Historically, the BITP has aimed to maintain an HRT of at least 25 days in order to allow stable operation. Most mesophilic digesters can operate at volatile solids loadings rate of 0.150 to 0.200 lb/ft3/d. However, digesters with limited or inefficient mixing, such as the gas mixing employed at the plant, may have much lower loading capacities. Operations staff prefer to limit digester loading to 0.08 lb/ft3/d.

Although the plant has four digesters, one unit is reserved for secondary digestion or solids holding, while another unit is reserved as a standby unit. This effectively limits primary digestion to two units.

Of the two capacity criteria, volatile solids loading is more critical. Figure 2-25 plots projected volatile solids loading for 2 and 3 primary digesters.

Figure 2-25. Digester System Volatile Solids Loading Capacity Projection 0.20

0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.08

0.06 Volatile Volatile solids loading (lb/ft3/d) 0.04

0.02 2 Digesters 3 Digesters 0.00 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048

The system is currently operating at higher than the preferred loading rate of 0.08 lb/ft3/d with either two or three digesters in service. The more traditional planning guideline of 0.150 lb/ft3/d would be reached in 2033 with two digesters in service.

Neither the two- or three-digester system is projected to come close to the regulatory limit of 15 days. However, the two-digester system would have an HRT of less than the preferred 25 days in 2028. Figure 2-26 plots the projected hydraulic retention time in the digester system.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 34

Figure 2-26. Digester System Hydraulic Retention Time Projection 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Hydraulic Hydraulic retention time(days) 2 Digesters 3 Digesters 0 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048

Clearly, the digester system is currently limited when evaluated in terms of staff’s preferred operating conditions. A study is currently underway to determine a long-range approach to solids stabilization. At minimum, the result could be improved mixing and cover modifications, which should extend volatile solids loading capacity to more conventional ranges. Beyond that, the study will assess options such as thermophilic digestion and thermal hydrolysis to expand both capacity and energy recovery.

Table 2-19 below summarizes the digester loading projections and capacity.

Table 2 -19. Digester System Capacity Summary Condition Utilization Unit Process Capacity Units Redundancy Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 basis Basis Anaerobic Peak 14-day lb/ft3/d 2 digesters 0.08 0.12 0.17 145% 217% digestion volatile solids loading Anaerobic Minimum 14- days 2 digesters 15 29.0 19.4 52% 77% digestion day hydraulic retention time

2.7.2 Completed and Planned Projects

A project to add digestion capacity has been added to the Capital Improvements Plan, scheduled for 2030. A list of projects is included in Table 2-20.

Table 2-20. Completed and Planned Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2014 Boiler Upgrade $2,205,675 Complete Replace 1980 boiler and upgrade controls Digester Concrete 2016 $192,084 Complete Repair degraded concrete supports Support Repair Digester Building Drain Replace failing drain lines in the digester 2018 $286,580 Complete Replacement building Digester 2024 $22,336,000 Ongoing Refurbishment of aging components Refurbishments Digestion Capacity 2030 $3,430,000 Future Thermophilic upgrades Expansion

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 35

2.7.3 Asset Management

A variety of mechanical equipment is involved in the operation of the digesters. Major equipment includes sludge transfer and recirculation pumps, gas circulating compressors, and sludge heat exchangers. This equipment is shown on Figure 3-24 and is summarized in Table 3-21.

Table 2-21. Existing Digester Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Sludge Transfer Pumps 3 250 gpm 10 hp 1999 3 Sludge Recirculation Pumps 5 310 gpm 10 hp 2011 2 Gas Circulating Compressors 5 180 scfm at 25 psig 20 hp 2002 3 Sludge Heat Exchangers 5 1,500 mbtu/hr N/A 2011 2 Engine Generator 1 335kW N/A 2013 1

2.7.4 Operations and Maintenance

Maintenance of the anaerobic digestion system includes maintaining the major equipment, as well as associated instruments and piping systems. The digester units themselves require periodic cleaning, which involves taking a unit out of service, pumping out the sludge, and removing grit and other debris that accumulates at the bottom. Such cleaning is required once every five years at a cost of $10,000 per event.

Digester operational costs include labor and energy. While energy to heat the digester is provided by the plant’s cogeneration system, pumping and facility HVAC energy represents an annual cost.

Figure 2-26. Sludge Digestion – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$160,000 Sum of Contracts

$140,000 Sum of Materials

Sum of Labor $120,000

$100,000

$80,000

$60,000

$40,000

$20,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 36

2.8 Sludge Dewatering

The solids dewatering process removes excess moisture from anaerobically digested sludge (2-3% solids) to create biosolids (20-24% solids), reducing land application hauling costs. Solids dewatering equipment consists of two centrifuges, dewatered sludge conveyance equipment, and loading facilities for sludge hauling trucks. All solids dewatering equipment is contained in the solids handling building. Foul air from the centrifuges and solids handling building is exhausted to the north odor scrubber.

Figure 2-27. Sludge Dewatering Process Diagram

The 1979 facility was completely overhauled in 2018 to include two new Andritz D6LX centrifuges, each with a maximum capacity of 3,500 dry pounds per hour. It is assumed that the units will have a minimum 20-year life, at which time a new project will be initiated to upgrade the system. Firm capacity assumes one unit to remain as a standby to provide full redundancy.

The established level of service requires a truckload to be dewatered in no longer than 12 hours per day, 7 days per week (including centrifuge flushing). For optimum performance, the manufacturer’s recommendation is to operate the centrifuges in an approximate range of 60-80% of the design capacity. The system will allow both centrifuges to run simultaneously if needed.

Polymer is added to improve dewatering performance. Dewatered biosolids are discharged from the centrifuges into a screw auger conveyor and transferred to the biosolids hauling trucks for land application. Effluent from the centrifuges (centrate) is drained to the centrate handling facility. Centrate is then metered into the secondary treatment process to control the ammonia loading.

Truck and trailer combination sets are used to transport biosolids to contracted land application sites in Eastern Washington. The trucks and trailers are all equipped with heavy- duty tarping systems and watertight tailgates to reduce odors and eliminate spillage. Depending on dewatering efficiency, 250 - 350 truckloads of biosolids are delivered for land application every year. The number of loads over the past six years is shown in Figure 2-28.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 37

Figure 2.28. Historical Biosolids Truckloads 350 300 250 200 150

TruckLoads 100 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Loads 233 259 239 246 255 255 287 298 286 271

2.8.1 Capacity Analysis

With a single unit capacity of 3,500 lb/hr, the system can operate up to 20,000 lb/d for a 40- hour work-week, or up to 42,000 lb/d when operated for 12 hours per day. System capacity is projected on Figure 2.29.

Figure 2.28. Dewatering System Capacity Projection 50,000

45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000 day day load (lb/d) - 15,000

10,000 Peak 14 5,000

0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Projected load Capacity

Table 2-22 below provides a summary of the capacity analysis and assumptions for the sludge dewatering system.

Table 2-22. Sludge Dewatering System Capacity Summary

Condition Utilization Redundancy Unit Process Capacity Basis Units Basis Capacity Current 2050 Current 2050 Peak 14-day Dewatering solids loading lb/hr Firm 3,500 1,451 2,168 41% 62%

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 38

2.8.2 Completed and Planned Projects

Having just completed an overhaul of this system, no future projects are currently planned. Table 2-23. Completed and Planned Sludge Dewatering Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Sludge Dewatering Replace existing centrifuges and polymer 2018 $12,972,813 Completed System Upgrade addition system

2.8.3 Asset Management

A variety of mechanical equipment is involved in the operation of the sludge dewatering system. Major equipment includes the polymer system, sludge transfer pumps, centrifuges, and dewatered sludge conveyors. Table 2-24 lists the current equipment.

Table 2-24. Existing Sludge Dewatering Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Centrifuges 2 3,500 lb-TS/hr 150 hp 2018 2 Polymer Feed Pumps 3 50 gpm 5 hp 2018 2 Dewatered Sludge Conveyors 1 variable 10 hp 2018 3

2.8.4 Operations and Maintenance

Sludge dewatering operational costs include labor, energy, chemicals, and disposal. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for the centrifuges and the associated polymer supply system. Detailed operations and maintenance labor costs are not available at this time. The centrifuges represent the main electrical energy consumer for the sludge dewatering system. Electrical energy is also required to pump the sludge from the digesters to the centrifuges, as well as for operation of the polymer equipment and dewatered sludge conveyance equipment. In addition, sludge dewatering requires chemicals to enhance performance. LOTT currently spends approximately $180,000 per year on dewatering polymer.

Figure 2-30. Sludge Dewatering – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$160,000 Sum of Contracts

$140,000 Sum of Materials Sum of Labor $120,000

$100,000

$80,000

$60,000

$40,000

$20,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 39

2.9 Centrate Management

The centrate handling process removes easily settleable material from the centrate and provides storage for equalizing the ammonia load sent to the biological treatment process. LOTT now uses the original primary sedimentation basins as a dedicated centrate handling facility. This process includes flow measurement, ammonia concentration monitoring, seven rectangular sedimentation tanks modified to provide settling and storage of centrate, three centrate discharge pumps, and two centrate sludge pumps as illustrated in Figure 2-31.

Figure 2-31: Centrate Handling Process

Centrate Settling Tank 1 Aeration Basins: Sludge Intermediate Dewatering Pump Station Tank 2a

Valve Tank 2b Pump Splitter Aeration Basins: Box First Anoxic Basin Weir Tank 3 Baffle Sludge Thickening Cross Collector (DAFT) Long Collector Tank 4 Liquid Flow

Solids Flow

Centrate from the solids dewatering process enters the centrate handling facility through a 12-inch line. Centrate can be sent to either tank 1 or 2a, though during normal operation, flow is directed to tank 1, where any remaining solids are allowed to settle. Longitudinal collectors move settled sludge to the sludge hoppers, where it is pumped to the dissolved air floatation thickeners (DAFT) via two positive displacement, progressing cavity pumps.

Clarified centrate overflows from tank 1 to tank 2a via a weir at the north end, and then flows south through tank 2a and back north through tank 2b. Centrate is metered into either the first aeration or first anoxic basins via the diversion structure via two self-priming centrifugal pumps.

2.9.1 Capacity Analysis

Capacity related to the centrate handling facility is dependent on a variety of factors to include solids dewatering (centrifuging) duration and performance, centrate dilution, and the amount and concentration of centrate that can be sent to the secondary treatment process due to performance issues or compliance periods (i.e. permit discharge limitations).

There are seven tanks, each with a volume of 100,000 gallons, totally 700,000 gallons of storage capacity. The plant produces an average of 50,000 gallons per day of centrate, which is diluted at a ratio of 3:1 to minimize struvite formation. Up to 270,000 gallons of diluted centrate may be sent to this system on a peak day. During normal operation, only

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 40

tanks 1, 2a, and 2b are used. Sufficient pumping and storage capacity is available until a new facility is constructed.

2.9.2 Completed and Planned Projects

A project is scheduled for 2023 to replace the roof structure and odor control system, as well as add covers to the tanks, and make upgrades to the electrical systems.

Future centrate handling or treatment alternatives are being evaluated as part of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant long range planning effort. The timing of this project is arbitrarily linked to expansion of the primary clarifiers, scheduled for 2034.

Table 2-25. Completed and Planned Centrate Handling Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2009 Centrate Metering Pump $30,000 Completed Replace centrate metering pump Upgrades the centrate pumping system to Centrate Handling 2017 $942,106 Completed include adding two new pumps, Improvements instrumentation, and baffles Replace roof structure, odor control system, Centrate Building 2024 $4,012,573 Future electrical upgrades, and add covers to the Rehabilitation tanks TBD Centrate Handling and $5,000,000 Future Install new centrate treatment system Treatment

2.9.3 Asset Management

Major equipment involved in centrate handling include centrate pumps, longitudinal collectors, cross collectors, odor control system, and sludge withdrawal pumps, which are included in Figure 2-31 and summarized in Table 2-26 below.

Table 2-26. Existing Centrate Handling Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) Tanks 7 100,000 gal NA 1955 3 Cross Collectors 6 0.5 hp 2017 2 Longitudinal Collectors 6 0.75 hp 2009 3 Centrate Pumps 1 250 gpm 7.5 hp 2009 3 Centrate Pumps 2 130-425 gpm 10 hp 2017 1 Sludge Pumps 2 5-90 gpm 5 hp 2017 3

Maintenance costs to include labor, materials, and contracted services captured in LOTT’s CMMS are included in Figure 2-31.

2.9.4 Operations and Maintenance

Operational costs for the centrate handling facility include labor and energy. Labor costs are associated with operations staffing requirements for metering centrate to the secondary process. Electrical energy is required to operate the odor control fans, bottom flights, cross collectors, sludge pumps, and centrate metering pumps. Figure 2-32 includes the maintenance costs from the time the facility was operated solely for centrate management.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 41

Figure 2-32. Centrate Management – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$60,000 Sum of Contracts Sum of Materials $50,000 Sum of Labor

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 42

2.10 Energy Recovery

Methane gas is produced through the digestion process. LOTT utilizes this gas in an engine generator which produces electricity as well as heat. Additionally, two boilers are available to combust the methane gas to produce heat used to maintain the low heat loop. The system is illustrated in Figure 2-33.

Figure 2-33: Energy Recovery Process

Raw digester gas contains hydrogen sulfide and must be conditioned before it can be utilized by the engine generator or boilers. The gas conditioning system consist of two hydrogen sulfide (H2S) scrubber tanks which use a media to strip off the H2S. The gas passes through a chiller to drop out the moisture. The gas is reheated and sent through a siloxane scrubber. The scrubbed gas is utilized in the engine generator or boilers to create electricity and heat.

2.10.1 Completed and Planned Projects

The original co-generation project was completed in 2011 through a Puget Sound Energy (PSE) grant. A long block overhaul of the Jenbacher engine generator was completed in 2018.

Table 2-27. Planned/Completed Energy Recovery Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Installed gas conditioning system and GE 2011 LEED Cogeneration $3,002,636 Completed Jenbacher Engine Generator Replaced 1980 boiler with two new boilers Boiler Upgrade Project $2,205,675 Completed 2015 (one large and one small) Replace roof structure, odor control system, Engine Generator $401,299 Completed electrical upgrades, and add covers to the 2018 Replacement tanks Replace aging waste gas flare and install Biogas Flare and 2021 $2,280,000 Planning digester microaeration to reduce H2S Microaeration concentrations Select and implement preferred biogas Biogas Utilization 2025 $2,390,000 Future utilization strategy anticipating engine Upgrades generator end of life

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 43

2.10.2 Asset Management

Major equipment includes the engine generator, boilers and gas conditioning system. This equipment is summarized in Table 2-28 below.

Table 2-28. Energy Recovery Equipment Date of Last Risk Score System Count Unit Capacity Motor Upgrade (1-6) GE Jenbacher Engine Generator 1 335kw NA 2018 3 Large biogas boiler 1 4,184mbh 125hp 2015 2 Pony Boiler 1 1,339mbh 25hp 2015 2 Natural Gas Boilers 2 1,512mbh NA 2011 2 H2S Scrubber Tanks 2 16,000 lbs media NA 2011 2 Siloxane Scrubber Tanks 2 1,815 lbs media NA 2011 3 Gas compressors 3 NA 7.5hp 2011 4 Chiller 1 NA NA 2018 2

2.10.3 Operations and Maintenance

Operational costs for the energy recovery system include labor, scrubbing media, and natural gas. Labor costs are associated with general operations and swapping of the gas conditioning system media. Natural gas is used to supplement heat when the biogas conditioning system is not available. Figure 2-34 includes the maintenance costs from the time it was operated solely for energy recovery system.

Figure 2-34. Energy Recovery – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$60,000 Sum of Contracts Sum of Materials $50,000 Sum of Labor

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 44

2.11 Ongoing and Planned Projects Overview

As described in the previous sections, a number of projects are either planned or currently underway to address anticipated capacity limitations. The following highlights some of the major upcoming projects. For a comprehensive list of planned projects, refer LOTT’s 2019- 2020 Budget and Capital Improvements Plan.

 The Biological Process Improvements project is currently in the design phase and will optimize the biological treatment processes at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant by reconfiguring the existing first aeration basins, as well as reduce the energy required to accomplish nitrogen removal. The improvements include replacing oversized blowers and minimizing recycle pumping, which will reduce power consumption. The project will also optimize methanol addition to the secondary process. Capacity projections for the aeration basins and secondary clarifiers will be reassessed once this project is complete.

 Hydraulic limitations at the influent pump station will be addressed by upsizing the influent pumping forcemain that feeds the primary sedimentation basins. The project is planned for 2036 and will reduce the risk of bypass to the Fiddlehead Outfall to less than once in ten years.

 With commercial development planned for the neighborhood surrounding the plant, a project to further reduce odors is planned for 2024. This project will involve replacing the old north odor scrubber with new technology that will be more effective in eliminating odiferous constituents and more efficient in balancing airflows. The project will also include improvements to the headworks, solids, and maintenance buildings air handling capacities.

 Projected limitations in the anaerobic digesters have resulted in an evaluation of long range alternatives. Refurbishment of the existing digesters is planned to be completed by 2024. A project to expand capacity of this system with an additional digester is planned beyond 2039.

 The solids thickening process is currently being tested to determine capacity. A conservative estimate projects a capacity limitation in 2044. A study is underway to determine the best long range approach to solids thickening capacity.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 45

3. Reclaimed Water Production Capacity

Reclaimed water production capacity is an essential component of LOTT’s overall treatment program. In response to community questions about residual chemicals from pharmaceuticals and personal care products, LOTT initiated the multi-year Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study. The study is designed to identify the risks from infiltrating reclaimed water into groundwater because of chemicals that may remain in the water from products people use every day, and determine what can be done to reduce those risks. The study is expected to continue through 2021. The study will provide LOTT and the Board of Directors with data and community perspectives to guide future decisions regarding reclaimed water treatment technologies and uses.

3.1 Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant

The Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant (BIRWP), commissioned in 2004, produces Class A Reclaimed Water using sand media and sodium hypochlorite to filter and disinfect secondary effluent. The facility is capable of treating up to a maximum of 1.5 mgd in the form of three bays of sand filters (0.5 mgd each). Some water is used for internal processes at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant and the Capitol Lake Pump Station. The City of Olympia has various customers in the downtown and Port Peninsula area that irrigate using reclaimed water. With the completion of the Tumwater Reclaimed Water Storage Tank in 2015, the City of Tumwater also uses reclaimed water to irrigate the Tumwater Valley Municipal Golf Course. Approximately 206.4 million gallons of reclaimed water were produced and put to beneficial use in 2019.

Figure 3-1. Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant Process

Completed and Planned Projects

LOTT is currently able to meet the instantaneous demands of its existing customers. Future capacity expansion will likely be driven by demand for reclaimed water. The Washington State Capitol Campus was identified as the next potential user of reclaimed water. The

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 46

current capital plan has expansion of the BIRWP to 3.0 mgd scheduled for 2040, however this may change based on demand for the product.

In 2015, a project was completed to replace deteriorating pipes, valves, seals, and flow meters, and upgrade the hypochlorite disinfection system.

Table 3-1. Completed and Planned Project Summary On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2015 BIRWP Improvements $425,990 Completed Upgrades to the existing facility 2040 BIRWP Expansion to 3 mgd $8,000,000 Future Add 1.5 mgd of capacity to existing facility

Historical maintenance costs for the BIRWP are included in Figure 3-2.

Figure 3-2. Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$70,000 Sum of Contracts

$60,000 Sum of Materials

$50,000 Sum of Labor $40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 47

3.2 Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant

The Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant (MWRWP) is a membrane bioreactor, treating raw wastewater to Class A Reclaimed Water. The Martin Way Pump Station performs preliminary screening of the raw wastewater, which is pumped to the plant for treatment. The plant has a current treatment capacity of 2 mgd. Reclaimed water produced at the plant is pumped to LOTT’s Hawks Prairie Ponds and Recharge Basins for groundwater infiltration. Reclaimed water is also utilized at the Woodland Creek Groundwater Recharge Facility, a water rights mitigation project developed by the cities of Lacey and Olympia.

In 2019, the MWRWP produced 350 million gallons of reclaimed water, of which 239 million gallons were diverted to the Hawks Prairie Ponds, 121 million gallons to the Woodland Creek Groundwater Recharge Facility, and the remainder was used for internal processes at the Martin Way treatment plant and pump station.

Figure 3-3. Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant Process

The MWRWP is designed to be expandable up to 5 mgd of treatment capacity with additional construction at the site. Process tanks for the third mgd of treatment capacity were included as part of the original construction project. Additional property adjacent to the site shown in Figure 3-4 was secured from the City of Lacey through a perpetual easement and provides enough space to expand the capacity to 8 mgd if needed.

The current plan is to expand the plant as soon as there are sufficient raw wastewater flows at the Martin Way Pump Station. Based on the updated flows and loadings projections, this may not occur until 2038.

Flow availability is largely dependent on the septic conversion schedule for the City of Lacey. There are roughly 24,800 parcels within the service boundary of the Martin Way Pump Station. Of those parcels, 12,700 are sewered, 9,400 have on-site septic systems, 700 are vacant, and 2,000 are undeveloped. In terms of flow, there is 2.2 mgd of base flow currently discharging to on-site septic systems within this basin. The current model projects that 3,600 septic parcels in this basin will be sewered by 2050 (38% of total). At that point, approximately 2 mgd of base flow will discharge to on-site systems. The City of Lacey assumes 2% per year will be connected to the system in their 2015 Sewer Comprehensive Plan update.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 48

Table 3-2 lists the timing of flow availability to the MWRWP. These projections are based on the assumption that parcels with existing septic tanks in the Tanglewilde and Thompson Place areas will be 60-70% connected to sewer by 2050. Projections also include 500,000 gallons a day reserved as base flow in the system to ensure sufficient flow remains in the sewers to convey waste activated sludge from the reclaimed water plant to the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant.

Table 3-2. Flow Availability for the Martin Way Plant1 Year Flow (mgd) Without Flow With Flow Equalization Equalization 1 Existing Existing 2 Existing Existing 3 2036 2021 4 2048 2033 5 -- 2042 1. Allows for 500,000 gpd of base flow remaining in the system.

Production capacity at the MWRWP could potentially be increased with the addition of flow equalization capacity at the plant. Excess flow during the day could be sequestered for treatment at night, resulting in a relatively constant flow to the membranes. Flow equalization would therefore eliminate the constraint of overnight low flows. Figure 3-4 demonstrates the extreme amount of variability, as overnight flow reaches as low as 40% of the daily average.

Figure 3-4. Diurnal Flow at the Martin Way Pump Station

180%

160%

140%

120%

100%

80%

60% Weekday Percent of Daily Average of Daily Percent Weekend 40% Overall 20%

0% 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Hours of the Day

Figure 3-5 depicts the base sanitary flow projection at the Martin Way Pump Station. Up to 6 mgd will be available at this location by 2050, with another 2 mgd added with full septic system conversion. Even during the summer, there is likely to be some component of inflow and infiltration, meaning that actual average daily flows should be slightly higher than those included in this evaluation.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 49

Figure 3-5. Base Flow Projections at the Martin Way Pump Station 10.00 Full sewering of service area 9.00

8.00

7.00

6.00

5.00

4.00 Base Sanitary Flow (MGD) Flow Base Sanitary 3.00

2.00

1.00

- BO 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050

Completed and Planned Projects

Consistent and reliable operation of the facility is increasingly important now that the Woodland Creek Groundwater Recharge Facility is on-line. To address near-term reliability issues, a project in underway to add a redundant drum screen and aeration blower at the plant. Additional improvements will be accomplished as part of the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant Improvements project scheduled to be completed in 2026.

It is anticipated that replacement of the existing membranes will also be included in the project as they will be due for replacement in 2023 based on the original estimated useful life. The membrane performance has been good and may last longer than originally expected. LOTT will continue to monitor efficiency and update the timing of replacement as necessary.

Expansion to the third mgd of treatment capacity is currently scheduled for 2038. Whether this expansion includes flow equalization has yet to be determined, and this decision may impact the timing of the project.

A project to add the fourth and fifth mgd is included in the CIP for planning purposes. However, expansion could be driven by reclaimed water demand or by changes to the regulatory environment.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 50

Table 3-3. Completed and Planned Project Summary On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description

2006 2 mgd Plant $25,798,818 Complete Original plant construction

2010 Huber Drum Screen $720,000 Complete Added secondary fine screens

2014 MWRWP Membrane Upgrade $2,674297 Complete Upgrades to the existing facility Waste Activated Sludge Replaced two WAS pumps and associated 2018 $462,372 Complete (WAS) Pump upgrades controls Redundant Drum Screen and Project adds additional drum screen and 2021 Design Aeration Blower aeration blower MWRWP Membrane Filter Replace the membrane filters at the end of 2023 $2,094,657 Future Replacement their service life 2026 MWRWP Improvements $8,478,244 Future Upgrades to the existing facility Add equipment to bring facility capacity to 3 2036 MWRWP 3rd mgd Equipment $6,600,000 Future mgd. Martin Way to Hawks Prairie 2045 $11,100,000 Future Expand conveyance capacity Pipeline Expansion 2047 MWRWP 4th and 5th mgd $33,300,000 Future Expand facility to 5 mgd

Historical maintenance costs are included in Figure 3-6.

Figure 3-6. Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant – Historical Maintenance Expenditures

$600,000 Sum of Contracts $500,000 Sum of Materials $400,000 Sum of Labor $300,000

$200,000

$100,000

$- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

3.3 Mullen Road Reclaimed Water Plant

Based on the updated flows and loadings projections, it was determined that the Mullen Road Reclaimed Water Plant will not be needed. However, LOTT is retaining the property in the event that projections change.

3.4 Deschutes Valley Reclaimed Water Plant

LOTT owns approximately 45 acres of the former brewery property in the Deschutes River Valley as a potential location for future reclaimed production capacity expansion (Figure 3- 7). The facility could draw raw sewage from Tumwater and portions of southeast Olympia or treat secondary effluent from the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant. Depending on regulatory constraints and/or demand, product quality could range from Class A Reclaimed Water to water suitable for direct potable reuse.

LOTT initiated a Deschutes Valley master planning effort in 2014 to guide the use and ultimate development of the property. This effort has been suspended pending the

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 51

completion of LOTT’s master planning update efforts, which should provide a better understanding of LOTT’s future capacity expansion options.

Figure 3-7. Deschutes Valley Property Owned by LOTT

Several near-term site improvements, including removal of several degraded structures, were recommended as part of the first phase of the plan. Further work on the property master plan has been postponed due to uncertainties related to future capacity projections and site development. Plans for the site may change as a result of the long-term systemwide planning effort initiated in 2018. For example, if it is determined that there is adequate space within the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant footprint to accommodate future expansion of reclaimed water production, a separate reclaimed water facility at the Deschutes Valley site may not be necessary. LOTT is thus far retaining the property to maintain flexibility in meeting future system capacity needs.

Table 3-4 includes planned projects at the Deschutes Valley property. Work in 2019 included completing of a hazardous materials assessment. LOTT is in the process of removing several buildings to limit liability while the property remains undeveloped.

Table 3-4. Completed and Planned Project Summary On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2015 Deschutes Valley Master $400,000 Suspended Develop master plan for Tumwater property Planning reserved for future treatment facilities 2019 Hazardous Materials $22,000 Completed Complete assessments and develop cost Assessments for estimates for potential demolition of additional Remaining Buildings high-risk buildings 2020-2021 Demolition of Select $224,000 Active Demolish several buildings to limit liability Structures while site remains undeveloped

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 52

4. Discharge Capacity

All of the flow generated within the LOTT system must ultimately be discharged or beneficially used. At the BITP, final effluent is discharged to Budd Inlet. Reclaimed water is reused at LOTT facilities and distributed to LOTT partner cities for beneficial reuse by a variety of users. Reclaimed water is also used to replenish groundwater at LOTT’s Hawks Prairie Ponds and Recharge Basins and Lacey and Olympia’s Woodland Creek Groundwater Recharge Facility. LOTT will continue to identify and evaluate potential properties for purchase that are suitable for additional infiltration/disposition facilities to meet build out condition requirements.

Reclaimed water produced at the Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant and the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant is also available for distribution to the partner jurisdictions and their reclaimed water customers. However, for planning purposes, purveyed Class A Reclaimed Water will not be included in the analysis of the LOTT system discharge capacity, as it cannot be assumed that these uses will be consistently available.

4.1 Budd Inlet Outfall Permit Limitations

Based on LOTT’s existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, discharge limitations to Budd Inlet are based on both concentration as well as loadings (pounds per day). Primary loading limitations include biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), and total inorganic nitrogen (TIN). The existing permit was issued on February 16, 2018 with an expiration date of March 31, 2023. Table 4-1 lists the loadings-based permit limitations.

Table 4-1. Budd Inlet Treatment Plant NPDES Discharge Limits (lbs/d) Winter Shoulder Summer (November-March) (April, May, and October) (June-September) Parameter Monthly Weekly Monthly Weekly Monthly Weekly BOD (lbs/day) 5,640 8,460 900 1,350 671 1,006 TSS (lbs/day) 5,265 7,898 5,265 7,898 5,265 7,898 TIN - - 3 mg/L, 338 lbs/day 3 mg/L, 288 lbs/day 26 mg/L 36 mg/L Ammonia (as N)

The amount of allowable flow to be discharged to Budd Inlet is based on the level to which the wastewater is treated. By treating wastewater to lower effluent concentrations of BOD and TIN, greater discharge capacity can be achieved.

The two primary discharge limitations versus flow for the two seasonal conditions, summer and shoulder, are plotted in Figures 4-1 and 4-2.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 53

Figure 4-1. Effluent Concentration versus Discharge Flow, Summer Condition

10 9 BOD mg/l 8 TIN mg/l 7 6 5 4 3 2

Effluent Concentration(mg/L) Effluent 1 0 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Allowable Discharge Flow (MGD)

The allowable discharge is: mgd = 671 lbs/d BOD ÷ x mg/L BOD ÷ 8.34 (based on BOD) mgd = 288 lbs/d TIN ÷ x mg/L TIN÷ 8.34 (based on TIN)

Figure 4-2. Effluent Concentration versus Discharge Flow, Shoulder Condition

14 BOD mg/l 12 TIN mg/l 10

2 Effluent Concentration (mg/L) Concentration Effluent

0 8 101214161820 Allowable Discharge Flow (MGD)

The allowable discharge is: mgd = 900 lbs/d BOD ÷ x mg/L BOD ÷ 8.34 (based on BOD) mgd = 338 lbs/d TIN ÷ x mg/L TIN÷ 8.34 (based on TIN)

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 54

4.2 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Biological Process Improvements

LOTT has completed the design of a project to upgrade its secondary biological treatment system. The existing biological nutrient removal process requires recirculation of treated water between two process areas in the plant. The proposed improvements will reconfigure the existing process. The benefits include reducing recycle-pumping rates, increasing process control with additional instrumentation, and freeing up valuable space at the plant site for additional treatment processes in the future.

A better understanding of the potential effect on LOTT’s treatment capacity will not be available until the project is completed and has been in operation for several years. However, it is anticipated that the project will improve performance and efficiency.

The current NPDES permit is based on loadings (pounds per day) of biological oxygen demand (BOD) and nutrients in the form of total inorganic nitrogen (TIN). By increasing the efficiency of the treatment process (lowering the effluent loadings concentration), LOTT could potentially gain discharge capacity to Budd Inlet.

Table 4-2 summarizes the plant’s current performance relative to its existing NPDES permit.

Table 4-2. Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Final Effluent Levels (mg/L) Parameter/Season NPDES Average Maximum Permit 2019 Month 2019 Limits TIN (mg/L) Summer 3.0 2.46 3.57 Shoulder 3.0 2.42 2.81 BOD (mg/L) Summer 7.0 6.52 8.56 Shoulder 8.0 7.68 8.77 Winter 30 12.32 19.87 TSS (mg/L) Winter 30 10.62 18.05

In addition to the NPDES permit limitations, LOTT reserves 1.5 mgd of treatment capacity as an added measure of safety in measuring operational capacity. This serves two purposes – it provides for a buffer capacity to manage peak flow events or illicit discharges impacting the biological process, thus minimizing the likelihood of a permit violation; and it protects the system from unanticipated rapid population growth and/or delays in the construction of new treatment capacity.

Figures 4-3 through 4-6 show the plant’s BOD and TIN performance in terms of both concentration and loading for 2019. While LOTT strives to perform below discharge levels required by permit, it is important to note that:

 Operational conditions and performance vary considerably due to factors outside of LOTT’s control, such as temperature. Therefore, the existing buffer between permit limits and performance levels is necessary to ensure continued permit compliance.

 LOTT is responsible for management of wastewater from our partner jurisdictions, and they in turn are responsible for accommodating growth. By enhancing the performance of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, LOTT gains capacity in the system that will be necessary to responsibly manage community growth in the future.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 55

Figure 4-3. Monthly Final Effluent BOD Compared to Permit 35

BOD Permit 30 FE BOD

15 FE FE BOD (mg/L) 10

0 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov

Figure 4-4. Monthly Final Effluent TIN Compared to Permit 30

TIN Permit 25 FE TIN

10 FE TIN(mg/L)

0 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 56

Figure 4-5. Monthly Final Effluent BOD Load Compared to Permit

6,000

BOD Permit 5,000 FE BOD

4,000

3,000

2,000 FE FE BOD (lb/d)

1,000

0 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov

Figure 4-6. Monthly Final Effluent TIN Load Compared to Permit 2,000

1,800 TIN Permit FE TIN 1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

FE FE TIN(lb/d) 600

400

200

0 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 57

4.3 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Site Planning

LOTT has begun initial work on a long-term master planning effort which will be conducted in two phases. The first phase will evaluate the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant footprint and update the site plan, locating various treatment processes.

The second phase will reevaluate LOTT’s reclaimed water production, distribution, and disposition program. This planning takes into account that system capacity requirements have decreased, and that community use and demand for reclaimed water has increased since LOTT’s original Wastewater Resource Management Plan (1999) and Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Master Plan (2006) were completed.

4.4 Budd Inlet Discharge Capacity Analysis

Discharge capacity planning involves projecting a reasonable level of performance to allow compliance with the load-based BOD and TIN limits. Operation at the permitted concentrations would restrict the amount of discharge to Budd Inlet to 11.5 mgd in the summer (from Figures 4-1 and 4-2). In 2019, the average summer flow generated in the LOTT system was 11.0 mgd. However, Budd Inlet discharge was held below permit loadings as shown on Figures 4-5 and 4-6. This was due to three factors:

1. Reclaimed water production at the MWRWP and end uses in Lacey 2. Reclaimed water production at the BIRWP and end uses in Olympia and Tumwater 3. Effluent concentrations generally lower than permit regulation (Figures 4-3 and 4-4)

LOTT’s approach to planning includes a number of assumptions—some conservative, some expedient. These assumptions include the following:

 A reserve of 1.5 mgd capacity is maintained, year-round.

 Credit for reclaimed water production is only applied where groundwater recharge is available. Other end-uses are not assumed to be guaranteed, and are therefore not considered.

 Effluent concentrations at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant may average 5 mg/L for BOD and 2.25 mg/L for TIN during summer and shoulder seasons. While these values are used for this analysis, the plant is not expected to always perform at these target levels, due to the inherent variability in operational conditions.

With these assumptions, an analysis was performed to determine when the first operational discharge limitation would occur during average flow conditions for each of the compliance periods. Figure 4-8 depicts the projected system-wide summer and shoulder season flow, plotted against the amount of discharge currently available in the system. This includes 2 mgd of discharge at the Hawks Prairie Ponds and Recharge Basins, 1.5 mgd of reserve capacity, and assumed BITP discharge at the concentrations assumed above.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 58

Figure 4-8. Projected Flows Compared to Currently Available Discharge 22

Flow Flow (mgd) 14

10 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Summer Flow Shoulder Flow Summer Limit Shoulder Limit

Note: Assumes 2 mgd of discharge at Hawks Prairie Ponds and 1.5 mgd of reserve capacity

The figure shows that the system will become limited in 2036. This limitation is driven by the summer TIN regulation. The shoulder season limitation is not projected until 2039.

For discharge planning, Figure 4-8 may be translated into a plot showing the amount of alternative discharge required, based on the assumptions listed above. This is plotted on Figure 4-9.

Figure 4-9. Projected Amount of Alternative Discharge Required Outside of Budd Inlet

Note: Maintains 1.5 mgd of reserve capacity

This figure also shows the limitation arising in 2036, and estimates that a total of 5 mgd of discharge capacity will need to be in place by 2050, and up to 10 mgd for the full connection scenario.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 59

4.5 Alternative Discharge Planning

There are several approaches to alternative discharge. These include the following:

 Non-potable reuse (NPR), which includes consumption of reclaimed water by end users for irrigation or industrial uses  Environmental uses, which include streamflow or surface water augmentation and wetland enhancement  Indirect potable reuse (IPR), which includes: . Groundwater recharge through soil percolation . Direct injection to groundwater  Direct potable reuse (DRP), which involves discharge to a potable water distribution system

Reclaimed water currently generated at the BIRWP and MWRWP is primarily used for irrigation, process water at LOTT facilities, and groundwater recharge.

In its capital program, LOTT has general plans to generate up to 8 mgd of alternative discharge by 2050, which is more than the projected requirement per Figure 4-9. The purpose of additional generation is to reduce risk, and to satisfy end user demand.

4.5.1 Reclaimed Water Treatment

Existing treatment facilities include the BIRWP and the MWRWP. These sites generate Class A Reclaimed Water suitable for NPR, environmental uses, and groundwater recharge.

The BIRWP has a current treatment capacity of 1.5 mgd, which is sufficient to meet the demand of existing reclaimed water customers. Construction of the Tumwater Reclaimed Water Tank has allowed LOTT to meet instantaneous demands and allows for more reliable delivery to LOTT existing users. Community demand for reclaimed water in the area may drive expansion of the BIRWP. Potential users may include the Washington State Capitol Campus. In 2016, Gray and Osborne Consulting Engineers completed the Capitol Campus Reclaimed Water Assessment. The estimated cost was $2,427,000 to construct the necessary infrastructure to provide service to the campus.

The MWRWP treats raw sewage generated in Lacey. Reclaimed water from this facility is primarily used for groundwater recharge at LOTT’s Hawks Prairie Ponds and Recharge Basins, and by the cities of Lacey and Olympia for water rights mitigation through their Woodland Creek Groundwater Recharge Facility. The plant is currently able to treat up to 2 mgd of reclaimed water, and the process basins are in place to expand capacity to 3 mgd with equipment installation. Further expansion to 5 mgd is programmed into the existing facility design. LOTT may ultimately expand the facility to 8.0 mgd if needed. Expansion is limited by flow availability, with the third mgd not projected to become available until 2036. With influent flow equalization, this could be moved forward to 2021.

The Deschutes Valley Property (DVP) shown in Figure 2-8 has sufficient space to build a 2 mgd raw sewage treatment facility similar to the MWRWP plus a 20 mgd facility capable of receiving effluent from the BITP and generating any variety of NPR, IRP, or DPR product. Based on current capacity projections, these facilities are not needed in the foreseeable future, and LOTT currently has no plans to construct these facilities.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 60

Table 4-3 summarizes previous assumptions about existing, planned, and potential reclaimed water production facilities in the LOTT system. The second phase of LOTT’s current long-term planning effort will explore options for reclaimed water production and disposition, and may result in changes to the dates and locations of reclaimed water production shown here.

Table 4-3. Reclaimed Water Production Sites Planned Existing Capacity in Potential Capacity 2050 Capacity Facility Product (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) Next Steps

Budd Inlet Reclaimed Expand to 3 mgd (demand- Class A 1.5 3.0 5.0 Water Plant driven)

Martin Way Reclaimed Water Class A 2.0 5.0 8.0 Expand to 3 mgd (2036) Plant

Deschutes Valley Reserve space for future Reclaimed Water Class A 0 0 2.0 implementation, as needed Plant

Capable of NPR, IPR, Deschutes Valley Reserve space for future DPR, or 0 0 20.0 Advanced Water Plant implementation, as needed environmental uses

Total 3.5 8.0 35.0

4.5.2 Alternative Discharge Location

While LOTT prefers to direct its reclaimed water to end users for environmental or other beneficial uses, such discharge tends to be seasonal, and is subject to the needs of the end users. To ensure the capacity for adequate discharge, LOTT has plans to develop its own groundwater recharge locations. LOTT has purchased a number of properties with soil suitable for infiltration and has plans to develop the pump stations and distribution network required to deliver product to these locations, as needed. Table 4-4 lists the existing and potential locations for groundwater infiltration of reclaimed water.

Table 4-4. Groundwater Infiltration Sites Site Current Planned Potential Recharge Characterization Capacity Capacity in Capacity Basin Status (mgd) 2050 (mgd) (mgd) Next Steps

Hawks Prairie Complete 2.0 5.0 8.0 Expand to 3 mgd (2036)

Henderson 50% Complete Additional site characterization, 0 0 1.5 South groundwater modeling

Henderson 75% Complete Additional site characterization, 0 0 1.0-1.3 North groundwater modeling

Rixie Road 75% Complete Additional site characterization, 0 0 1.0 groundwater modeling

South 50% Complete Additional site characterization, 0 0 10.0 Deschutes groundwater modeling

Total 2.0 8.0 25.5

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 61

4.5.3 Summary

Expansion of the Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant to 3 mgd and the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant to 3 mgd will allow LOTT to generate 6 mgd of reclaimed water by 2036. This provides more discharge capacity than strictly required per Figure 4-8, and allows LOTT to stay comfortably ahead of regulatory drivers for reclaimed water production.

The timing of additional increments of treatment and discharge capacity may change based on community desire for increased availability of reclaimed water. LOTT’s Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study will also provide valuable information to assist policymakers in developing a strategy to meet the community’s long-term wastewater treatment needs.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 62

5. Conveyance System Analysis

LOTT has instituted a program to inspect all of its collection system manholes and pipes on a regular schedule. This program keeps track of the condition of collection system assets and prioritizes projects to repair or replace pipes and manholes.

Conveyance system capacity is periodically assessed through dynamic sewer modeling. Modeling is conducted in response to changes in the flow projections, or changes to planning parameters involving flow to satellite plants, or system connectivity. As a detailed assessment was conducted last year, and peak hour flow projections are generally within 1- 2 percent of the previous year’s projection, conveyance system modeling was not included in this year’s report. The following sections summarize last year’s modeling results, and update capacity projections for systems not dependent on the model analysis (pump stations and force mains).

5.1 Sewer System Modeling Summary

Key findings from last year’s sewer modeling include the following:

 A number of pipes in Olympia and Lacey are either capacity-limited or projected to become capacity-limited in the near future. These pipes are currently acting as bottlenecks, and restricting flow to downstream pipes under peak hourly flow conditions. These include:

o The pipe between manholes 510030 and 510027 on Capital Blvd o The pipe between manholes 539011 and 530044 on Franklin and Jefferson St. o Piping along Madison Ave and West Bay Road o Piping along Central Street in downtown Olympia o Both of the pipelines along East Bay Road, but particularly the one originating on San Francisco Ave.

 15-inch capacity bottlenecks in the Martin Way Interceptor (East), commencing between 2030 and 2040, which give rise to excessive surcharging.

 30-inch and 36-inch bottlenecks in the Martin Way Interceptor (West), commencing between 2040 and 2050, which give rise to excessive surcharging.

 Marginal capacity limitations and low-level surcharging in both the Cooper Point and Percival Creek Interceptors, but with limited risk of flooding due to pipe depth and/or slope.

 Capacity limitations in at least five segments of pipe in the Indian Creek Interceptor, commencing between 2020 and 2030, which give rise to excessive surcharging with risk of flooding.

 Capacity limitations and excessive surcharging of downtown interceptors, particularly notable between 2030 and 2040, with increased risk of flooding.

Because most of the LOTT pipelines are deep interceptors, none of the LOTT manholes are projected to flood, or to even come within 1 foot of flooding, by 2050. The LOTT manholes which come closest to flooding are:

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 63

 MH70-042 in the Plum St. Interceptor (within 1.1 ft of flooding)  MH70-260 in the Percival Creek Interceptor (within 1.3 feet of flooding)  MH70-134 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.5 ft)  MH70-139 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.5 ft)  MH70-129 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.5 ft)  MH70-117 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.6 ft)  MH70-136 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.6 ft)  MH70-131 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.7 ft)  MH70-013 in the State Street Interceptor (1.8 ft)  MH70-132 in the Indian Creek Interceptor (1.9 ft)

5.1.1 Pressure Mains

The existing LOTT forcemain capacities and projected capacity reached in future years is listed in millions of gallons a day in Table 5-1 assuming a flow velocity of 7 feet per second.

Table 5-1. LOTT Forcemain Capacity Size Capacity Force Main (in) (mgd) 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050 Martin Way Forcemain1 18 8.0 46% 57% 63% 74% 98% Capitol Lake Forcemain (south only) 24 14.2 78% 81% 85% 93% 97% Capitol Lake Forcemain (south and north) 20+24 24.1 46% 48% 50% 55% 57% Southern Connection 22 11.9 36% 38% 40% 46% 50% Kaiser Road Forcemain 10 2.5 13% 13% 13% 13% 14% 1. Including satellite flow diversion increments for the Martin Way: existing (2 mgd), 2038 (3 mgd)

 The Martin Way Forcemain would reach 85% capacity in 2028 with no flow to MWRWP. With flow to MWRWP as planned, the force main will not reach 85% until 2045.

 The Capitol Lake Pump Station discharges into two forcemains, a 24-inch pipeline that runs south of the lake, and a 20-inch pipeline that runs north of the lake. Using just the southern pipeline, the system would reach 85% capacity by 2031. With both forcemains in use, the system is not projected to reach 85% capacity within the planning period.

 The Southern Connection is a double-barreled forcemain, which runs from Tumwater to the Capitol Lake Pump Station. The smaller 20-inch pipeline has been converted to a pipeline to convey reclaimed water from the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant to Tumwater. With only the 22-inch pipeline used for wastewater conveyance, the system is not projected to become limited within the planning period.

 The Kaiser Road Force Main is not projected to become limited at any point in the planning period.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 64

5.1.2 Pump Stations

Table 5-2 lists the current capacity of the LOTT pump stations in million gallons a day and the percentage of that capacity that will be reached in future years based on updated flow projections. The capacity listed is firm capacity, the capacity of the pump station with one of the largest units out of service.

Table 5-2. LOTT Pump Station Capacity Capacity Pump Station Pumps 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050 (mgd)

Martin Way Pump Station1 4 18 32% 37% 39% 50% 60%

Capitol Lake Pump Station 5 24 46% 48% 50% 55% 57%

Kaiser Road Pump Station 3 2 16% 16% 16% 16% 17%

1. Including satellite flow diversion increments for the Martin Way: existing (2 mgd), 2015 (2 mgd), 2038 (3 mgd)

 None of the pump stations are projected to reach 85% capacity by 2050. Even with full build out and sewer connection, MWPS would only reach 84% of its full capacity

5.2 Required Capacity Improvements Projects

5.2.1 Martin Way Interceptor (East) Up to 40 percent of the Martin Way Interceptor (East) will be surcharged by 2050, however the risk of flooding will remain low until after 2050. LOTT plans to install a parallel pipeline, running from Marvin Road to the Martin Way Pump Station (10,000 feet), in response to further development in western Lacey. The parallel pipeline will not become necessary until the 2040-2050 time frame, unless development and/or septic conversion in Lacey accelerates beyond the current projection.

Figure 5-1. Martin Way Interceptor (East) Parallel Pipeline

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 65

5.2.2 Indian Creek Interceptor The Indian Creek Interceptor is projected to become capacity limited at several locations, most notably in the two sections of pipe which cross under I-5 near its outlet. A bottleneck removal project would include several sections of pipe replacement. The project consists of upgrades to three sections of pipe, illustrated in red in Figure 5-2, and includes two crossings of Interstate 5. This project is scheduled to occur in 2035, but may be delayed if the MWRWP is expanded before 2038.

Figure 5-2. Indian Creek Interceptor Bottleneck Removal Project

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 66

5.2.3 Martin Way Forcemain Like the Indian Creek Interceptor, the Martin Way Forcemain capacity is highly dependent upon the magnitude and pace of satellite flow diversion in Lacey. According to the current plan, the forcemain will not need to be expanded before 2050. The forcemain is 7,700 feet along its current alignment, which includes one crossing of Interstate 5.

Figure 5-3. Martin Way Force Main Expansion

5.2.4 Percival Creek/Mottman Road Interceptor

A recent project expanded the capacity of the interceptor near Mottman Road as identified in red in Figure 5-4. The downstream segment, from manhole MH70-283 to MH70-282 is projected to be capacity limited just after 2050. Even if the segment is capacity limited, the pipe’s burial depth does not pose a high risk of manhole flooding, or backwater effects. If an upgrade is warranted, the most appropriate project would upgrade piping from manhole MH70-283 through MH70-279. A budget will be set aside for a potential project, set to occur in 2038. Project drivers will be evaluated in future reports.

Figure 5-4. Percival Creek/Mottman Road Interceptor Project

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 67

5.2.5 Downtown Interceptors

The downtown interceptors projected to be heavily surcharged and capacity-limited by 2040, although these improvements could be pushed back with additional treatment beyond 2 mgd at the MWRWP. Regardless, capacity restrictions in this area will need to be addressed as the service population expands. Most of the issues in the downtown system stem from capacity restrictions in the State Street interceptors and the 60-inch diameter pipeline entering the BITP. Figure 5-5 envisions a comprehensive project to remove bottlenecks in the downtown sector. Modeling suggests that resolution of the limitations along Adams Avenue alone may allow ample flow capacity through 2050.

Figure 5-5. Downtown Interceptor Project

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 68

5.3 Summary of Pipe Capacity Projects

The following table summarizes the sewer pipe capacity projects discussed in this section.

Table 5-3. Planned Pipe Capacity Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description 2035 Martin Way Interceptor (East) $11,400,000 Future Increases capacity from Marvin to Carpenter Indian Creek Interceptor Removes bottlenecks in the Indian Creek 2036 $16,000,000 Future Improvements Interceptor Relieve capacity limitations at Adams Ave and 2037 Downtown Interceptors $5,000,000 Future State post- Percival Creek/Mottman Relieves projected capacity limitations in the $4,500,000 Future 2050 Road Interceptor Percival Creek Interceptor

5.4 Reclaimed Water Conveyance Lines

Table 5-4 summarizes existing reclaimed water distribution pipes and their related capacities and Figure 5-25 maps the existing pipelines. The system includes a one-million-gallon Reclaimed Water Storage Tank to manage reclaimed water supply to the Tumwater Valley Golf Course and other end-users in Olympia and Tumwater.

Table 5-4. Reclaimed Water Distribution Pipe Capacities Size Capacity Length Reclaimed Water Main 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050 (in) (mgd) (ft) Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant 14 4 16,600 2 2 2 3 51 to Hawks Prairie Ponds Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant 12 3.5 7,160 1.5 3 3 3 3 to Marathon Park Marathon Park to Southern 20 10 230 1.5 3 3 3 3 Connection A Marathon Park to Southern 18 8 180 1.5 3 3 3 3 Connection B Marathon Park to Southern 20 10 8,900 1.5 3 3 3 3 Connection C Southern Connection to Deschutes 18 8 1,110 1.5 3 3 3 3 Valley Deschutes Valley to Tumwater Golf 20 10 5,110 1.5 3 3 3 3 Course Mullen Road 12 3 7,250 0 0 0 0 0 1. Capacity to be increased by adding an 18” pipeline

Planned Projects

A portion of the pipeline from the Tumwater Reclaimed Water Storage Tank to the planned Henderson North infiltration basins has been budgeted to enable collaboration with the City of Tumwater’s project to extend their trail system to connect Pioneer Park.

Table 5-5. Planned Reclaimed Water Pipe Projects On-line Name Cost/Estimate Status Description Tumwater Golf Course to Constructs line to Pioneer Park in collaboration 2023 $924,476 Future Henderson North: Phase I with City of Tumwater Trail project Tumwater Golf Course to Extends line from Pioneer Park to the Henderson 2039 $7,200,300 Future Henderson North: Phase II North Groundwater Infiltration site Adds parallel forcemain to meet projected Martin Way to Hawks Prairie capacity limitations, though affected by pace at 2046 $8,855,543 Future Pipeline Expansion which the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant is expanded

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 69

Figure 5-6. Existing Reclaimed Water Conveyance Pipelines

Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant to Hawks Prairie Ponds

Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant to Tumwater

Mullen Road Reclaimed Water Pipeline

Deschutes Valley Reclaimed Water Storage Tank

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 70

6. Operational Capacity Analysis Summary

The projects identified in the 2019-2020 Capital Improvements Plan tie together process limitations at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, and capacity limitations related to treatment, discharge/use, and conveyance throughout the system. The list is based upon a number of key assumptions, many of which will have to be re-evaluated on an annual basis. In particular, the discharge capacity analysis will have to be re-assessed as the Biological Process Improvements project moves forward, and the target effluent TIN concentrations are finalized.

LOTT maintains 1.5 mgd of reserve discharge capacity to Budd Inlet in order to manage peak flows and potential delays in the construction of new capacity. LOTT will continue to evaluate and monitor the system requirements and adjust capital improvement projects accordingly to ensure operational capacities are met.

The Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study will provide scientific data and community perspectives that will inform future decisions about reclaimed water levels of treatment and options for ultimate disposition of reclaimed water. LOTT will continue to maintain flexibility in its capacity development process, ensuring its ability to meet changing needs and conditions into the future.

In 2018, LOTT initiated a two phased long-term planning effort to evaluate alternatives for meeting future capacity needs. The first phase will focus on the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant footprint, evaluating alternatives for locating treatment processes. The second phase will focus on LOTT’s reclaimed water production, conveyance and disposition program.

2019 Capacity Assessment Report 71

Budget and Capital Improvements Plan

2019-2020

Table of Contents

Executive Summary  1

Financial Planning  3

Capital Budget and Capital Improvements Plan  13

Operating Budget  58 Executive Summary

The LOTT Clean Water Alliance provides wastewater Many of these projects are large-scale, span multiple treatment and reclaimed water production services years, and require substantial investment. At the for the urban areas of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater same time, LOTT must operate its treatment facilities in north Thurston County. LOTT’s complex system of 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, to treatment and conveyance facilities represents one of ensure that wastewater is properly treated and our communities’ largest regional investments, worth cleaned before it is released into the environment. To an estimated $750 million. support all this, LOTT must carefully manage financial resources, planning ahead with a long-term view that provides flexibility to adjust to changing conditions, while minimizing impacts to ratepayers.

LOTT uses a six-year financial planning period, and 2019 and 2020 represent the first biennium of the current planning cycle.

This document outlines LOTT’s two budgets for the 2019-2020 biennium – a Capital Budget and an Operating Budget. The Capital Budget includes costs to replace, upgrade, or rehabilitate existing facilities and to build new system capacity. These projects are described in the Capital Improvements Plan, also LOTT treatment facilities operate continuously to ensure that included in this document. The Operating Budget wastewater is properly treated and cleaned. contains all the costs necessary to operate LOTT’s facilities and provide related services. The following To sustain the communities’ investment in the existing table shows a combined summary of both operating system and accommodate future service needs, and capital revenues and expenses for 2019-2020. LOTT operates under a continual cycle of planning, designing, and completing numerous capital projects.

Overall Budget Summary 2019-2020

2019-2020 2017-2018 Annual REVENUE Budget Budget % Change

Wastewater Service Charge $61,352,922 $54,873,484 5.9% Capacity Development Charge $12,279,900 $10,342,772 9.4% Miscellaneous Revenue $800,000 $930,000 (7.0%) Net Revenue from Rates and Charges $74,432,822 $66,146,256 6.3% Debt Funding $19,050,000 $1,050,000 857.1% (Increase)/Decrease in Cash $13,366,664 $16,223,043 (8.8%) Total Resources $106,849,486 $83,419,299 14%

2019-2020 2017-2018 Annual EXPENSES Budget Budget % Change

Net Operating Expense $26,938,876 $24,733,548 4.5% Debt Service $18,149,681 $18,043,479 0.3% Capital Expense $61,760,929 $40,642,272 26% Total Expenses $106,849,486 $83,419,299 14%

1 Capital Budget • Wastewater Service Charge – The monthly rate in 2019 will be $39.80, increasing by $1.16 from the Capital costs are based on LOTT’s Capital 2018 rate due to a 3% inflationary adjustment. Improvements Plan (CIP), which is reviewed and updated each biennium. The projects identified in the • Capacity Development Charge – The fee for new CIP are necessary to ensure LOTT sustains the existing connections in 2019 will be $6,049.21, increasing wastewater treatment system and provides needed from $5,810.79 in 2018. The 2019 rate includes the new system capacity. The CIP includes a detailed six- 3% inflationary increase, and an additional $64.10 year plan through 2024 and a summary long-range increase that occurs annually through 2019. plan for 2025 through 2039 and beyond. The Capital • Service Charges – LOTT also receives revenues Budget includes costs for projects on the short-term such as disposal fees from waste haulers. Rates CIP that LOTT expects to spend within the calendar for disposal of septage, vactor, and similar non- years 2019 and 2020. It is up about 26% per year over septage wastes are automatically adjusted in the 2017-2018 Capital Budget due to several large- conjunction with the Wastewater Service Charge. scale projects needed to upgrade portions of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant. Revenues Operating Budget Throughout the past several budget cycles, monthly Wastewater Service Charge (WSC) revenues have The Operating Budget includes three categories of seen stable growth as new customers are added to expense – personnel, direct operating expense, and the system. This natural growth in WSC revenues general expense. Overall operating expenses for funds the increased expenses associated with the 2019-2020 have increased approximately 4.5% per Operating Budget. Growth in the number of Capacity year over the previous Operating Budget. Development Charge (CDC) connection fees has been modest in the Rates last few years, however, there are indications LOTT has two primary that the local housing rates – a monthly rate for market, and associated LOTT sewer service and a new connections, are one-time connection fee. on the upswing. LOTT The monthly rate is called continues to take a the Wastewater Service conservative approach Charge (WSC). Revenue to revenue forecasting from the WSC is used to and anticipates modest pay for costs of sustaining growth in the 2019- and operating the existing 2020 WSC and CDC. wastewater treatment system. The connection fee is referred to as the Capacity Development Charge (CDC). Revenue from the CDC pays for costs associated with building new system capacity to serve new customers.

The Operating Budget includes three categories of expense – personnel, direct operating expense, and general expense.

2 Financial Planning Overview

The LOTT Clean Water Alliance operates a and capital expense – exist to fund the total complex system of facilities worth an cost of capital construction. For 2019- estimated $750 million. The LOTT Net 2020, LOTT’s combined infrastructure system includes the Budd Inlet Operating investment (debt service plus capital Treatment Plant, Budd Inlet Expense costs) represents 75% of total Reclaimed Water Plant, Martin Way 25% expense, with operating costs Reclaimed Water Plant, Hawks Capital representing 25%. Prairie Reclaimed Water Ponds Expense and Recharge Basins, three major 58% Debt With large-scale capital project pump stations, 22 miles of sewer Service commitments, the Board of interceptor lines, and 11 miles of 17% Directors must consider budget reclaimed water pipelines. Portions of decisions based on long-term the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant are over financial planning. LOTT uses a 60 years old, and major upgrades to the plant customized finance planning tool to track have been ongoing for the past several years. anticipated expenses into the future, develop a capital finance plan that provides sufficient funds To sustain the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant and other for capital projects, and balance the source of facilities, LOTT operates under a continual cycle of funds between rate income and borrowed dollars. planning, designing, and completing numerous Continual efforts are made to identify and implement capital projects. Many of these projects are large- cost-saving measures, and savings realized help to scale, span multiple years, and require substantial minimize LOTT’s debt, reducing costs to ratepayers investment. LOTT revenue needs are driven primarily from interest and other expenses associated with by the cost of this capital construction. Of the three borrowing money. The results of this approach cost centers shown in the chart, two – debt service have been excellent. LOTT’s service charge remains below the average for the region, and the percentage increase in rates is consistently below regional and national averages.

The Projected Budget Summary table on the following page shows anticipated expenses for each biennium over the next six years.

With large-scale capital project commitments, the Board of Directors must consider budget decisions based on long-term financial planning.

4 Projected Budget Summary 2019-2024

2019-2020 2021-2022 2023-2024 REVENUE Budget Budget Budget

Wastewater Service Charge $61,352,922 $67,056,000 $73,289,648 Capacity Development Charge $12,279,900 $13,027,740 $13,821,130 Miscellaneous Revenue $800,000 $700,000 $677,000 Net Revenue from Rates and Charges $74,432,822 $80,783,740 $87,787,778 Debt Funding $19,050,000 $0 $0 (Increase)/Decrease in Cash $13,366,664 $11,177,578 ($7,893,602) Total Resources $106,849,468 $91,961,318 $79,894,176 2021-2022 2023-2024 EXPENSES 2019-2020 Budget Budget Budget Net Operating Expense $26,938,876 $30,480,321 $34,847,082 Debt Service $18,149,681 $20,125,685 $16,835,557 Capital Expense $61,760,929 $41,355,312 $28,211,537 Total Expenses $106,849,486 $91,961,318 $79,894,176

To sustain facilities, LOTT operates under a continual cycle of planning, designing, and completing numerous capital projects.

5 Revenue, Rates, and Fee Summary

LOTT’s primary sources of revenue are the monthly service rate, known as the Wastewater Service Charge, and a new connection fee, known as the Capacity Development Charge. LOTT also receives miscellaneous revenues from other sources.

Wastewater Service Charge CDC Adjustment – The fee for new connections in The Wastewater Service Charge (WSC) is used to pay 2019 will be $6,049.21, and in 2020, will be $6,230.69. most of the cost for repairs or upgrades to the existing This reflects a 3.0% increase for inflation each year. In wastewater treatment system, loan payments for 2019, it includes an additional $64.10 increase that is system-related capital costs, and operating costs. a separate non-inflationary adjustment put in place The WSC is assessed based on the equivalent in 2002 to allow for incremental adjustment of the residential units (ERUs). The LOTT charge is included on CDC over 17 years. The revenue from this adjustment the customers’ utility bills, which are sent out by LOTT’s accounts for the cost of initial projects associated partner cities. Each city also assesses a separate charge with implementation of LOTT’s Wastewater Resource on utility bills for costs associated with maintaining Management Plan. their city-owned sewer collection systems. Miscellaneous Revenue Because 75% of LOTT’s expenses are related to LOTT also earns interest on cash deposits and capital construction, a 3% inflationary adjustment receives revenues from miscellaneous other sources based on construction industry data is planned to such as disposal fees from waste haulers. Rates for apply to both the WSC and the CDC rates each year disposal of septage, vactor, and similar non-septage of the 2019-2024 planning period. The adjustment wastes are automatically adjusted in conjunction with was originally established by the LOTT Board of the Wastewater Service Charge. Directors in 2012 as part of a comprehensive capital finance plan to ensure the utility keeps pace with Service Charge Adjustments – The adjusted rate escalating construction costs over time and is able to for septage disposal will change to $16.42 per adequately fund LOTT’s Capital Improvements Plan. 100 gallons in 2019. The rate for vactor and similar The adjustment was reviewed and reaffirmed non-septage disposal will change to $4.25 per by the Board during the 2019-2024 strategic 100 gallons. In 2020, the septage disposal rate is planning process. $16.91 per 100 gallons. The rate for 2020 vactor and similar non-septage disposal is $4.38 per 100 gallons. WSC Adjustment – For 2019, the monthly charge will be $39.80, increasing $1.16 from the 2018 rate. For 2020, the monthly charge is $41.00. Revenue Projections and Analysis Capacity Development Charge Throughout the past several budget cycles, WSC The Capacity Development Charge (CDC), also revenues have seen slow but stable growth, while described as a connection fee or hook-up fee, is growth in CDC revenue has fluctuated considerably. used to build projects that add new capacity, such LOTT takes a conservative approach to revenue as satellite reclaimed water plants, larger sewer lines, forecasting and anticipates modest growth in both and other projects that increase LOTT’s ability to the WSC and the CDC for 2019 and 2020. serve new customers. The CDC is also assessed based on equivalent residential units.

6 Wastewater Rate Comparisons

The LOTT Clean Water Alliance is frequently asked why its rates are high. Concern about the cost of wastewater services is often expressed by residents who are comparing the cost of wastewater and drinking water services, which can appear on the same utility bill, or by new residents to the community who have moved here from areas of the country with lower utility costs.

Wastewater treatment is, in general, an expensive LOTT is a recognized leader in wastewater treatment business. LOTT treats an average of 14 million gallons in the state. The Budd Inlet Treatment Plant remains of wastewater each day. The water must be treated one of the only treatment plants employing to high standards to meet state permit requirements biological nutrient removal on Puget Sound. This and be safely released into the environment. This advanced nitrogen removal technology is likely to be requires a complex system of infrastructure – required of most major plants along Puget Sound in pipelines, pump stations, the future, potentially treatment plants, and resulting in major related equipment – that rate increases for must be up and running those communities. 24 hours a day, 7 days LOTT also operates an a week. advanced membrane biological reactor By contrast, drinking system at the Martin water services are Way Reclaimed considerably less Water Plant, which expensive. This is due to was one of the first the fact that our region membrane plants in enjoys a stable supply of the state producing high quality groundwater Class A Reclaimed to meet drinking water The vast differences in drinking water and wastewater services rates is due Water. This same to the complexity of treatment involved. needs. This water requires technology is now only minimal treatment. being developed by Rates for drinking water and for wastewater services several communities in our region to meet ever more can seem disproportionate, but are mainly due to stringent treatment requirements, and will likely the vast differences in the amount and complexity of require significant increases to their rates. treatment involved in each. LOTT conducts an informal survey every few years Part of the cost of wastewater treatment comes from to see how its residential rates compare with other our communities’ location along Puget Sound. The communities. Some utilities, like LOTT, use a flat rate U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires structure and others use a volume-based structure. states to comply with the federal Clean Water Act To even out the different structures, all of the by identifying water bodies that do not meet water surveyed rates were compared assuming 585 cubic quality standards and developing action plans to feet (or 4,376 gallons) per month for an equivalent bring those waters into compliance. Puget Sound, residential unit. The current survey, conducted in and more specifically, Budd Inlet, are water quality 2018, shows that our monthly charges are lower impaired. The Washington State Department of than the average. Given LOTT’s lower than average Ecology has placed stringent requirements on LOTT rates, and the advanced treatment already provided, to reduce the amount of nitrogen and biochemical LOTT ratepayers are receiving a high value for the oxygen demand discharged into Budd Inlet. LOTT investments they are making. LOTT strives to ensure was the first, and until recently, the only plant along its service charges are reasonable and affordable, and Puget Sound that was required to treat wastewater to is meeting that objective when compared to other advanced secondary standards to remove additional utilities in the region. nitrogen from the water. This high level of treatment adds technological complexity and cost to the operation of LOTT’s main treatment facility. 7 Wastewater Rate Comparisons

2018 2016 2-Year Annualized Flat or 2018 2016 Rate Rate Increase Volume Rank Rank

Tamoshan $127.56 $115.70 5.1% F 1 1 City of Tenino $122.00 $94.00 14.9% F 2 2 Boston Harbor $99.39 $82.14 10.5% F 3 5 City of Shelton $96.62 $45.02 57.3% V 4 27 Olympic View $95.71 $86.81 5.1% F 5 4 City of Chehalis (in city limits) $91.11 $91.11 0.0% V 6 3 City of Bonney Lake $85.76 $73.75 8.1% V 7 8 Grand Mound $83.58 $75.81 5.1% F 8 7 City of Centralia (in city limits) $80.02 $76.98 2.0% V 9 6 City of Seattle $78.74 $71.78 4.8% V 10 9 City of Renton $74.13 $70.26 2.8% F 11 10 City of Everett $69.65 $59.87 8.2% F 12 15 City of Bellevue $69.20 $64.96 3.3% V 13 12 City of Auburn $69.11 $66.32 2.1% F 14 11 Average $65.68 $58.64 6.3% City of Snoqualmie $65.16 $44.51 23.2% F 15 28 City of Longview (in city limits) $64.67 $63.41 1.0% V 16 13 City of Yelm $64.56 $57.37 6.3% F 17 17 City of Bremerton (in city limits) $62.65 $61.09 1.3% V 18 14 City of Olympia $60.11 $57.79 2.0% F 19 16 City of Kelso $59.55 $57.24 2.0% F 20 18 City of Lacey $59.07 $55.95 2.8% F 21 19 City of Sumner $58.88 $55.24 3.3% V 22 20 City of Tumwater $55.75 $53.02 2.6% F 23 21 City of Tacoma $52.34 $47.95 4.6% V 24 23 City of Vancouver $51.80 $46.70 5.5% F 25 25 City of Puyallup $51.41 $48.22 3.3% V 26 22 Pierce County Sewer $48.44 $45.64 3.1% F 27 26 City of Mount Vernon $47.32 $47.32 0.0% V 28 24 City of Orting $44.93 $42.59 2.7% F 29 29 City of Bellingham (in city limits) $43.16 $39.47 4.7% F 30 30 Lakehaven Sewer District (KC Metro) $42.79 $39.32 4.4% V 31 32 City of Hoquiam $41.44 $39.44 2.5% F 32 31 Lakehaven Sewer District (Pierce Co) $40.80 $36.57 5.8% V 33 34 City of Edmonds $39.86 $33.25 9.9% F 34 35 City of Aberdeen $36.78 $36.78 0.0% F 35 33 Lakehaven Sewer District $30.27 $27.62 4.8% V 36 36

8 Cost Allocation

Operating costs are paid out of Wastewater Service LOTT is currently conducting a cost of service analysis Charge (WSC) revenue; capital projects and debt to update the basic unit of measurement (the service are paid from both WSC and Capacity equivalent residential unit or ERU), and to review the Development Charge (CDC) revenues. The allocation cost centers and cost allocations employed in LOTT’s between these funds depends on the type of project accounting practices. LOTT’s partner communities involved, as specified by the Interlocal Cooperation are using more reclaimed water than ever before, Act Agreement for Wastewater Management. and have high interest in using more water than LOTT currently produces. As a result, future Capital The primary purpose of the CDC is to pay for new Improvements Plans may include projects that capacity in the system and to ensure that growth pays are demand-driven, rather than strictly capacity- for growth. This was one of the guiding principles in driven, and adjustments in LOTT’s cost allocations the development of the interlocal agreement. The may be needed to accommodate this “new” type of LOTT Board determined that the costs assigned to the project. Results of the cost of service analysis will be CDC should reflect the full spectrum of construction, integrated into future budgets and CIPs. interest on debt, costs for staff, and related ancillary costs to support new capacity development. Because LOTT develops new capacity “just in time,” the utility Emergency Reserves invests significant staff time and other resources in One of LOTT's Board-directed goals is to maintain ongoing activities, such as planning, engineering, land six months of operating expenses and additional acquisition, permit acquisition, public involvement, reserves for emergency capital expenditure. These and other project-related activities. amounts are separate from, and in addition to, reserves required by debt covenants. For 2019 and It is important to recognize that the CDC is adjusted 2020 emergency reserves will include: over the life of the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) • $3.0 million for emergency capital expenditures and is not used for short-term revenue adjustments. When conditions require short-term revenue • $8.8 million (approximately) in emergency adjustments for capital projects, the WSC must be operating reserves raised to meet costs as required by the interlocal agreement. Over time, the two funds are reviewed to ensure that system costs and new capacity costs are applied to the appropriate projects. The estimated costs and revenues are balanced over the life of the Capital Improvements Plan, and the Board of Directors reviews these costs each biennium to determine if adjustments are needed.

The primary purpose of the Capacity Development Charge is to pay for new capacity in the system and to ensure that growth pays for growth.

9 Investment in a knowledge management program is helping create training tools and succession plans to provide specialized technical knowledge needed to run a complex treatment plant such as LOTT’s.

Cost Control

LOTT operates under a set of core values that includes managing financial resources in a responsible, sound, economical, and equitable manner. Toward that goal, LOTT actively manages projects and programs to identify efficiencies and cost-savings, minimize expenses, and limit the need to increase rates. Cost control takes vigilance and effort, and is an integral aspect of how LOTT does business. LOTT cannot prevent the rising cost of supplies and labor, but makes every effort to minimize capital and operational costs through a variety of efforts, including:

• Asset Management – The Asset Management • Energy Reduction Efforts – LOTT achieved its Program inventories LOTT’s equipment, processes, goal of 5% reduction in total energy use by 2018. and systems to proactively identify and schedule Through extensive work with Puget Sound Energy, needed repairs and replacements. This program Cascade Energy, Oregon State University, and protects LOTT’s assets and extends their useful life. Washington State University, several energy audits have been conducted to identify ways to optimize • Finance Management – LOTT seeks out grants energy usage throughout LOTT’s facilities. LOTT has and low interest loans, and has kept interest rates also developed an incentive program to recognize below 3.2% for all outstanding debt. Large-scale employee-generated ideas for energy-saving projects are awarded based on competitive projects, and anticipates significant additional bidding. Other contracts, such as services, are energy reduction will be achieved from planned actively negotiated to obtain the best pricing. upgrades to the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant.

• Business Case Evaluation – Value engineering • Human Resource Management – LOTT works by a diverse team of technical staff ensures that to make the most of staffing levels, realigning each project is designed and built efficiently and workloads and resources to create efficiencies. effectively. Projects are scheduled over time, and Investment in a proactive knowledge management rearranged on the CIP, so as not to exceed available program is helping create training tools and financial and staffing resources. succession plans to effectively prepare future employees with the specialized technical knowledge needed in this industry. 10 Capital Improvements Planning

LOTT operates under a National Pollution Discharge maintained properly to keep the plant running. Asset Elimination System (NPDES) permit that is issued management is a proactive approach to sustaining by the Washington State Department of Ecology the plant and LOTT’s other infrastructure, allowing for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). the utility to keep ahead of needed maintenance LOTT must meet all permit requirements, as well as and avoid unexpected, and potentially catastrophic, expectations of federal and state agencies regarding system failures. responsible utility management. The EPA has developed the Capacity, Management, Operation, and Capacity-related data is modeled in a geographic Maintenance Performance Program Plan, requiring information system (GIS) to develop population wastewater utilities to demonstrate that they have growth forecasts and predict associated wastewater a comprehensive, long-term plan for maintaining flows and loadings spatially throughout the system. existing utility infrastructure and meeting future This information is used to develop a three-part system needs. LOTT meets that expectation through Capacity Report, which helps identify and prioritize development of an organizational Strategic Plan capital projects for inclusion in the Capital every six years, and through continual review and Improvements Plan. Based on this report, LOTT adjustment of the Capital Improvements Plan. The identifies needs within the system and develops Capital Improvements Plan, prepared each biennium, projects to meet those needs. is submitted to the Department of Ecology, along with a three-part Capacity Report, as part of permit All this information funnels into the Capital requirements. Improvements Plan, which lists projects anticipated over the short- and long-term. Continuous planning is key to this process and allows LOTT to sustain existing infrastructure and build new infrastructure to meet projected future capacity needs. One of the first steps in planning Capacity Report capital improvements is gathering information LOTT's Capacity Report is updated annually, about the condition of existing infrastructure, repair and is available on LOTT’s website at and replacement needs, current system capacity, www.lottcleanwater.org. The report contains and needs for additional capacity in the future. Data three sections: gathered includes: • Asset management data, such as system condition, Flows and Loadings Report analyzes criticality, and useful life residential and employment population projections within the urban growth area, and • Population forecasts from the Thurston Regional estimates the impact on wastewater flows Planning Council and loadings in the LOTT wastewater system. • Recently added sewer pipelines Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring • Anticipated septic tank conversions to the Report uses dry and wet weather sewer flow sewer system monitoring results to quantify the amount of • Flow monitoring results unwanted surface stormwater (inflow) and subsurface groundwater (infiltration) entering • Planned development the sewer system, and prioritizes sewer line rehabilitation projects. The asset management data is used to identify and prioritize projects necessary to sustain existing Capacity Assessment Report analyzes treatment, conveyance, and discharge equipment system components to determine when and facilities. Portions of LOTT’s main treatment limitations will occur and provides a timeline facility, the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, are over for new and upgraded system components. 60 years old. The plant involves a complex maze of piping and thousands of assets that must be

11 Capital Project Categories Support Services and Projects

Support Services and Projects provide planning LOTT’s Capital Improvements Plan is built around information and services that support projects in all four major project categories. Understanding these categories. They include the ongoing flow monitoring categories, and the types of projects within them, and flow reduction programs, property acquisition, provides a general understanding as to how they are and special studies and projects that support LOTT’s funded. Each individual project is assessed regarding long-range Wastewater Resource Management Plan. the proportion of existing system/new capacity Engineering and staff costs allied with the Capital benefits, and is funded through a combination of Improvements Plan are also included in this category. WSC/CDC funds that reflects that proportion. These projects are funded from monthly rates.

System Upgrades CIP Overview and System Upgrade projects include improvements to existing facilities. Upgrades are necessary to replace Organization outdated equipment, improve efficiency, and in some cases, to meet higher water quality standards. One The Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) represents all of the public values guiding LOTT’s operations is to major capital projects in the foreseeable future. It is maximize use of existing facilities before building revised each biennium based on updated capacity new ones. These projects are funded primarily from reports, asset management evaluations, and other monthly rates. changing conditions.

The CIP is divided into two sections – short-term and New Capacity long-term. Each section is summarized in a table. New Capacity projects are those that provide new • 2019-2024 CIP – This six-year CIP groups projects facilities to serve added wastewater flows. Under the by category. It includes a Capital Budget column Wastewater Resource Management Plan, also known showing anticipated spending for 2019 and 2020 as the Highly Managed Plan, LOTT is continuously for each project. Following the table, a project planning for new system capacity, to be built “just in summary page is provided for each project in the time” to ensure that future demands are met. For this short-term plan. purpose, LOTT considers three types of capacity when describing its overall operational capacity – treatment • 2025-2039 CIP – The longer-range table divides capacity, discharge and use capacity, and conveyance projects by operational systems, based on asset capacity. New capacity projects are funded primarily management life-cycle investments needed to from new connection fees. meet the expected build-out condition of the entire Lacey-Olympia-Tumwater service area. Asset Management (Repair,

Rehabilitation, and Capital Budget and Short-Term Replacement) CIP Summary

When systems or equipment reach the point 2019-2020 2019-2024 where repairs are no longer cost-effective, they Budget CIP can be rehabilitated (overhauled) to a usable System Upgrades $39,161,012 $68,327,427 condition or they can be replaced. These projects are funded from monthly rates. New Capacity $188,769 $660,691 Asset Management $4,796,715 $16,884,373 Support Services and Projects $17,614,433 $45,277,429 Total $61,760,929 $131,149,921

12 Capital Budget and Capital Improvements Plan 2019-2020 Capital Budget / 2019-2024 Capital Improvements Plan Summary Year Year 2019-2020 2019-2024 Page Start Complete Expenditure CIP System Upgrade Projects $39,161,012 $68,327,427

Budd Inlet Treatment Plant $33,659,794 $53,510,361

16 DAFT System and Thickened Sludge Pumping Upgrade 2019 2020 $2,391,572 $2,391,572 17 Biological Process Improvements 2020 2021 $22,446,697 $31,175,969 18 Ultraviolet Disinfection Upgrades 2019 2019 $9,185,865 $9,185,865 19 North Odor Scrubber and Air Handling Upgrades 2023 2024 $103,664 $5,183,223 20 Centrate Building Rehabilitation 2022 2023 $0 $4,012,573 21 Storage Warehouse 2021 2022 $554,105 $583,269 22 Washington Street Property Improvements 2019 2019 $977,889 $977,889 Conveyance $2,779,666 $5,379,265

23 Capitol Lake Pump Station Wet Well Coatings 2019 2020 $231,254 $231,254 24 Collection System Management Program 2008 Ongoing $203,000 $1,479,090 25 Collection System Piping Rehabilitation I 2019 2020 $1,795,304 $1,795,304 26 Collection System Piping Rehabilitation II 2021 2022 $0 $974,868 27 Manhole Rehabilitation 2020 2021 $232,428 $581,069 28 Martin Way and Sleater Kinney Manhole Repair 2019 2019 $317,681 $317,681 29 STEP Waste Receiving Station 2022 2023 TBD TBD Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant $721,553 $9,437,801

30 Reclaimed Water Plant Improvements 2022 2023 $721,553 $8,478,244 31 Membrane Filter Replacement 2023 2023 $0 $959,556

New Capacity Projects $188,769 $660,691

32 Henderson Conveyance and Recharge 2022 2024 $188,769 $660,691 Asset Management Projects $4,796,715 $16,884,373

33 General Equipment Repair and Replacement (LERF) 2009 Ongoing $1,162,351 $3,633,847 34 Instrumentation and Controls Replacement 2012 Ongoing $871,600 $1,959,285 35 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Groundwater Control 2022 2022 $0 $341,914 36 Digester Refurbishment 2015 2024 $2,169,702 $9,402,042 37 Facility Roof Repair and Replacement 2016 Ongoing $0 $954,224 38 Influent Pump Station Valve and Piping Improvements 2018 2019 $360,062 $360,062 39 Capitol Lake Pump Station Power Improvements 2019 2019 $233,000 $233,000

14 2019-2020 Capital Budget / 2019-2024 Capital Improvements Plan (continued) Summary Year Year 2019-2020 2019-2024 Page Start Complete Expenditure CIP Support Services and Projects $17,614,433 $45,277,429

40 Annual Miscellaneous Professional Services 2006 Ongoing $649,600 $2,069,891 41 Engineering Project Support 2006 Ongoing $3,065,365 $9,663,563 42 Facilities Project Support 2006 Ongoing $2,778,097 $8,757,951 43 Administrative Project Support 2006 Ongoing $2,754,813 $8,684,548 44 Flow Monitoring Program 2006 Ongoing $393,000 $1,052,298 45 Flow Reduction Programs 2006 Ongoing $440,000 $1,290,000 46 WET Center Exhibit Updates 2011 Ongoing $60,000 $560,000 47 Miscellaneous Small Projects 2006 Ongoing $743,911 $2,199,259 48 Reclaimed Water infiltration Study 2012 2019 $1,381,934 $1,381,934 49 Information Technology Upgrades 2014 Ongoing $356,326 $944,658 50 Water Quality and Habitat Improvement 2006 2024 $350,000 $1,050,000 51 Septic Conversion Incentive Program 2017 2024 $640,000 $1,920,000 52 Energy Efficiency and Consumption Reduction Program 2014 Ongoing $194,880 $620,967 53 Property Acquisition 2017 Ongoing $2,500,000 $3,500,000 54 Occupied Space and Facilities Improvements 2018 Ongoing $1,114,183 $1,514,183 55 Public Health Emergency Support Program 2018 2024 $250,000 $250,000

Total $61,760,929 $131,149,921

The Ultraviolet Disinfection project will upgrade the existing system and refurbish the Fiddlehead outfall emergency gate.

15 DAFT System and Thickened Sludge Pumping Upgrade

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This is phase two of the effort to upgrade the dissolved air flotation thickener (DAFT) system. This project includes installation of new bottom sludge collectors, aspirating pumps, thickened sludge pumps, and process piping.

Background The DAFT system is used to thicken primary and waste sludge before it is pumped into the digesters. The DAFTs were constructed in the early 1980s and much of the associated equipment is approaching the end of its useful life.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2020 $2,391,572 $2,391,572

16 Biological Process Improvements

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This project involves optimizing the current biological treatment process by reconfiguring the first aeration basins, and reducing the energy required for biological nutrient removal. The improvements include replacing oversized blowers and minimizing recycle pumping. The project also includes optimizing methanol addition to the secondary process.

Background The first aeration basins were installed in 1994 and were originally sized to meet the anticipated demands of the former brewery in Tumwater. Much of the equipment is reaching the end of its useful life.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2020 2021 $22,446,697 $31,175,969

17 Ultraviolet Disinfection Upgrades

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This project involves upgrading the existing ultraviolet disinfection system, including ultraviolet lamps, ballasts, control modules, and power supplies, and refurbishing the Fiddlehead outfall emergency gate.

Background UV disinfection is the final treatment step prior to discharge to Budd Inlet. The existing system was installed in 1993 and has an estimated useful life of 20 years. Manufacturer’s support for this equipment was discontinued in 2018.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2019 $9,185,865 $9,185,865

18 North Odor Scrubber and Air Handling Upgrades

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This project replaces the north odor scrubber with new, state-of-the-art technology that is more effective in removing odor-causing compounds and more efficient in balancing airflows. The project also includes improvements to the headworks, solids, and maintenance building air handling systems.

Background The north odor scrubber equipment was originally installed in the early 1980s as part of the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant construction for the secondary upgrade and is reaching the end of its useful life.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2023 2024 $103,664 $5,183,223

19 Centrate Building Rehabilitation

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description Phase two of the centrate management system upgrade includes replacement of the roof, refurbishment of the interior steel beams, odor control system replacement, electrical upgrades, and the addition of centrate basin covers.

Background Centrate is a byproduct of the solids dewatering process. With the completion of the east primary sedimentation basins, the original basins can be used to store and manage centrate. This is the second phase of work to repurpose the basins and better manage centrate loading to the secondary treatment process.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2022 2023 $0 $4,012,573

2030 Storage Warehouse

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This project involves the design and construction of a 5,000 square foot warehouse at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant to store and manage LOTT’s extensive spare parts inventory.

Background LOTT currently stores spare parts in 14 different locations, on and off the site of the main treatment plant, making it extremely difficult to maintain inventories and manage parts. The number of critical spare parts that need to be in stock and readily accessible has increased as LOTT’s Asset Management Program has matured.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2021 2022 $554,105 $583,269

3021 Washington Street Property Improvements

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This includes removal of a LOTT-owned building between Washington and Franklin Streets, which is in a severe state of disrepair, and paving of surrounding gravel parking areas.

Background The property was purchased by LOTT in 2013 as a site for future facilities associated with the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, such as additional equalization basins, digesters, secondary clarifiers, or other treatment process infrastructure.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2019 $977,889 $977,889

22 Capitol Lake Pump Station Wet Well Coatings

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Capitol Lake Pump Station

Description This project involves replacing the coatings in the Capitol Lake Pump Station wet wells, which have begun to fail, creating the risk of wet well deterioration and pump blockages.

Background Coatings of wet wells protect the concrete from degradation caused by the presence of hydrogen sulfide. Wet well coatings were installed at the Capitol Lake Pump Station in 1999, however, moisture from groundwater intrusion prevented proper adhesion of the coatings. The new wet well coatings will increase the lifespan of the concrete in the wet wells and reduce the risk of system failure during high flow situations.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2020 $231,254 $231,254

23 Collection System Management Program

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Systemwide

Description This includes the ongoing monitoring and rehabilitation of sewer lines and manholes within the LOTT collection system. It ensures federal compliance with capacity management, operations, and maintenance standards and is an integral part of LOTT’s Asset Management Program. Annual activities include closed circuit televised inspection and condition assessment, which is used to develop plans for needed repairs and replacements.

Background LOTT currently owns and maintains approximately 22 miles of gravity sewer lines, 8 miles of forcemains, and 300 manholes. In alignment with LOTT’s overall Asset Management Program, a formal collection system management program has been developed. The program provides an efficient and systematic approach to inspection, maintenance, repair, and replacement of LOTT’s collection system assets.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2008 Ongoing $203,000 $1,479,090

24 Collection System Piping Rehabilitation I

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Collection System

Description This is one of two collection system rehabilitation projects, which includes interceptor pipeline segments along Cherry Street, Chestnut Street, State Avenue, Martin Way West, and Tumwater Hill.

Background In 2017, LOTT completed a comprehensive condition assessment of the collection system including manholes and sewer interceptors. This project was identified as part of a prioritized investment plan to ensure reliability of the collection system.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2020 $1,795,304 $1,795,304

25 Collection System Piping Rehabilitation II

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Collection System

Description This is the second of two collection system rehabilitation projects, which includes interceptor pipeline segments along Cooper Point Road North, Mottman Road, and Tumwater Hill.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2021 2022 $0 $974,868

26 Manhole Rehabilitation

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Collection System

Description As a result of a condition assessment, 23 manholes were found to be in need of rehabilitation. These manholes will be rehabilitated with structural liners.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2020 2021 $232,428 $581,069

27 Martin Way and Sleater Kinney Manhole Repair

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Collection System

Description Six manholes located along the Martin Way Interceptor West will be refurbished.

Background The Martin Way Pump Station forcemain discharges into the Martin Way gravity interceptor at Sleater Kinney Road. This discharge releases hydrogen sulfide, a corrosive sewer gas, which has corroded the manholes downstream of the forcemain.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2019 $317,681 $317,681

28 STEP Waste Receiving Station

Project Type System Upgrade – Conveyance

Location Collection System

Description This project involves efforts to optimize flows and loadings in the northeast portion of the service area. One component of this effort is construction of a waste receiving station to allow for controlled input and management of septic tank effluent pumping (STEP) system loads.

Background LOTT plant processes are vulnerable to disruption by the growing number of high- strength STEP loads from large community septic systems. This facility would isolate these loads, allowing them to be sampled, analyzed, and pretreated as necessary, prior to metering the loads into LOTT’s treatment facility influent. More analysis is needed to evaluate potential project components and further define the scope and costs.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2022 2023 TBD TBD

29 Reclaimed Water Plant Improvements

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant

Description This project involves a number of improvements to the treatment plant to replace aging infrastructure and improve operational reliability. Improvements include valve replacement, additional blower capacity, improvements to automation, and upgrades to the electrical and control systems.

Background Since the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant first came on-line in 2006, a number of operational challenges have been identified. Also, reclaimed water demand in the system has increased significantly making continuous and reliable operation increasingly important. This project will address some of the operational limitations of this facility.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2022 2023 $721,553 $8,478,244

30 Membrane Filter Replacement

Project Type System Upgrade

Location Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant

Description This project involves the scheduled periodic replacement of the membrane filters at the Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant.

Background The Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant uses membrane bioreactor technology to produce Class A Reclaimed Water. The membrane filters were last replaced in 2013. Based on the manufacturer’s recommendation, the estimated useful life of the membranes is 7 to 10 years. The next replacement is currently scheduled for 2023, though this timeline may change based on condition and performance of the membranes.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2023 2023 $0 $959,556

31 Henderson Conveyance and Recharge

Project Type New Capacity – Conveyance

Location Deschutes Valley Reclaimed Water System

Description This includes design and construction of a reclaimed water pipeline from LOTT’s Reclaimed Water Storage Tank in Tumwater to future recharge basins. The pipeline will be approximately two miles in length and will include a connection to Pioneer Park. This also includes continued site evaluation at LOTT's Henderson North property.

Background The Henderson North property was purchased in 2015 as a potential site for future recharge of reclaimed water produced at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant.

Duration 3 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2022 2024 $188,769 $660,691

32 General Equipment Repair and Replacement

Project Type Asset Management

Location Systemwide

Description This provides funding for miscellaneous small repair and replacement projects.

Background In 1987 LOTT established the LOTT Equipment Replacement Fund (LERF) to set aside funds for equipment replacement. These funds pay for small projects identified through LOTT’s asset management program.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2009 Ongoing $1,162,351 $3,633,847

33 Instrumentation and Controls Replacement

Project Type Asset Management

Location Systemwide

Description This line item provides funding for instrumentation and controls replacements and upgrades.

Background The control system receives input from a number of controls and instuments, many of which are reaching the end of their useful lives and need to be replaced.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2012 Ongoing $871,600 $1,959,285

34 Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Groundwater Control

Project Type Asset Management

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This project involves assessment of groundwater intrusion into facilities within the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, such as the utilidor and process tankage, and installation of corrective measures, such as dewatering wells, to minimize groundwater intrusion.

Background In 2014, after the east primary sedimentation basins were completed, excessive groundwater intrusion was noted in and around the north end of the utilidor. One source, a leaky pipe, was identified and addressed, but flow continued into some plant structures. In recent years plant construction appears to have shifted flow from area artesian springs underlying the plant and increased groundwater intrusion. This assessment and construction of dewatering wells is intended to alleviate the excess groundwater intrusion, protect plant infrastructure from further groundwater-related degradation, and minimize related impacts on plant capacity.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2022 2022 $0 $341,914

35 Digester Refurbishment

Project Type Asset Management

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description The project includes the inspection and refurbishment of aging components associated with the digesters.

Background The digesters were constructed in 1982 and much of the associated equipment is reaching the end of its useful life. There are four digesters, with three in-service and one off-line at any one time. Use of the digesters is rotated on an annual basis. This project will follow the rotational schedule to complete the inspection and refurbishment of one off-line digester at a time.

Duration 10 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2015 2024 $2,169,702 $9,402,042

36 Facility Roof Repair and Replacement

Project Type Asset Management

Location Systemwide

Description This includes repair and replacement of facility roofs at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant and offsite facilities.

Background As part of LOTT’s Asset Management Program, a maintenance and monitoring program was established to maximize the life of the existing roofs and ultimately plan for their replacement. A number of roofing systems at the plant and pump stations are reaching the end of their useful lives and need to be replaced in the coming years.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2016 Ongoing $0 $954,224

37 Influent Pump Station Valve and Piping Improvements

Project Type Asset Management

Location Budd Inlet Treatment Plant

Description This replaces valves and piping associated with the isolation of influent pumps.

Background The influent pumps lift and move flow to the primary sedimentation basins. The pump station valves isolate the pumps from the wet well to allow routine maintenance and emergency repairs. The valves and associated piping, installed in 1994, are reaching the end of their useful life.

Duration 2 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2018 2019 $360,062 $360,062

38 Capitol Lake Pump Station Power Improvements

Project Type Asset Management

Location Capitol Lake Pump Station

Description This project will upgrade aging electrical systems to improve the redundancy and reliability of the pump station, and the ability to perform necessary maintenance.

Background The Capitol Lake Pump Station was expanded in 2000 and since then, electrical standards for redundancy, reliability, and safety have changed.

Duration 1 year

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2019 2019 $233,000 $233,000

39 Annual Miscellaneous Professional Services

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This provides funding for various unexpected small projects that are identified during the biennium, including projects associated with emergency situations.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $649,600 $2,069,891

40 Engineering Project Support

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description Engineering staff provide support for current and future projects. Services include facility planning, permitting, engineering design, construction management, and documentation.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $3,065,365 $9,663,563

41 Facilities Project Support

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description Staff from Operations, Maintenance, Control Systems, and Environmental Compliance provide support for capital projects. Services include participation on project teams, design review, construction support, equipment and process commissioning, and integration into LOTT's asset management system.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $2,778,097 $8,757,951

42 Administrative Project Support

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description Staff from the Finance and Environmental Planning & Communication Divisions provide a variety of support for capital projects. Services include environmental evaluations, public notification, participation on project teams, contracting and bid support, accounting, and financing. This line item also includes a portion of LOTT's general expenses related to capital projects.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $2,754,813 $8,684,548

43 Flow Monitoring Program

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This provides funding for the collection and analysis of flow monitoring data to support the development of the annual three-part Capacity Report (Flows and Loadings, Inflow & Infiltration and Flow Monitoring, and Capacity Assessment). Annual costs include the monthly data collection fees, and annual calibration, relocation, and maintenance of flow meters.

Background As part of LOTT’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, LOTT is required to monitor its sewer collection basins so that each is assessed within a seven-year period.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $393,000 $1,052,298

44 Flow Reduction Programs

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Regional

Description This line item funds efforts related to the regional Water Conservation Program, implemented in collaboration with LOTT's partner water utilities.

Background To help maximize capacity at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant, LOTT encourages and facilitates water conservation. Through this program LOTT provides incentives for residential and commercial projects that cost-effectively reduce water use and wastewater flows.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $440,000 $1,290,000

45 WET Center Exhibit Updates

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Regional Services Center

Description The WET Science Center serves as the heart of LOTT's education and outreach program. Exhibits and other features of the WET Center are updated occasionally to ensure they reflect relevant, up to date information and hold community interest.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2011 Ongoing $60,000 $560,000

46 Miscellaneous Small Projects

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This line item provides funding for unidentified small projects that arise during the biennium.

Background Small-scale projects that fall into this category include collection and conveyance system improvements, small construction projects, and engineering analysis and design. This also includes funding for projects authorized through LOTT’s Public Art Policy, which was approved by the Board of Directors in July 2008 to incorporate public art in large-scale, publicly accessible capital projects.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 Ongoing $743,911 $2,199,259

47 Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This is a multi-year study to examine the interrelationships and issues related to reclaimed water, groundwater infiltration, and residual chemicals, such as those from soaps, household cleaners, medicines, and cosmetics, as well as other contaminants. Activities for 2019-2020 include data analysis, modeling, and extensive public involvement.

Background As identified in the Wastewater Resource Management Plan, LOTT’s strategy for meeting future capacity needs includes reclaimed water production and use of reclaimed water for groundwater recharge. The intent of this study is to provide necessary, related scientific information to policymakers.

Duration 8 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2012 2019 $1,381,934 $1,381,934

48 Information Technology Upgrades

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This funds information system upgrades to include network servers, routers, switches, desktop computers, security, fire protection, and video surveillance systems. It also supports the continued development of LOTT’s electronic operation and maintenance (O&M) manual system, which is a permit requirement.

Background As technology continues to advance, LOTT must keep pace and continue to upgrade and maintain its information technology infrastructure.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2014 Ongoing $356,326 $944,658

49 Water Quality and Habitat Improvement

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Regional

Description LOTT funds ongoing efforts to identify and support water quality and habitat improvement projects. Some of these projects result from collaborative efforts with the Squaxin Island Tribe and other local organizations.

Background Projects that protect or enhance the water quality or habitat of local surface waters or groundwater have benefit in terms of improving these vital shared resources. They also help protect the receiving waters where LOTT discharges water treated at the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant or infiltrates reclaimed water to groundwater.

Duration 19 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2006 2024 $350,000 $1,050,000

50 Septic Conversion Incentive Program

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Regional

Description This program incentivizes conversion from urban septic systems to sewer service through rebates for a portion of LOTT's connection fees.

Background Connecting properties served by onsite septic systems to the public sewer system helps protect LOTT's receiving waters by ensuring a higher level of treatment than can be provided by septic systems.

Duration 8 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2017 2024 $640,000 $1,920,000

51 Energy Efficiency and Consumption Reduction Program

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This line item provides funding for energy conservation efforts. A team of LOTT staff nominate, evaluate, and prioritize projects for implementation. Anticipated projects include replacing old and inefficient motors throughout LOTT facilities.

Background Through the Energy Efficiency and Consumption Reduction Program, funds previously used to purchase green power from Puget Sound Energy are now being used for internal energy conservation projects.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2014 Ongoing $194,880 $620,967

52 Property Acquisition

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This line item provides funding for purchase of property to meet future infrastructure and system needs.

Background As capacity needs and regulatory requirements change over time, additional properties may be needed to expand existing facilities and to build new treatment, conveyance, and discharge facilities.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2017 Ongoing $2,500,000 $3,500,000

53 Occupied Space and Facilities Improvements

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Systemwide

Description This provides funding for the continued maintenance, refurbishment, and expansion of LOTT-owned occupied spaces such as offices and workrooms. It also includes funding for security improvements for LOTT facilities.

Duration Ongoing

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2018 Ongoing $1,114,183 $1,514,183

54 Public Health Emergency Support Program

Project Type Support Services and Projects

Location Regional

Description This program provides grants to LOTT's partner jurisdictions for efforts to improve management of human waste associated with homelessness. An example of an eligible project is the purchase of equipment, such as portable toilet and shower trailers, for use in managed camping areas.

Background The homeless crisis has resulted in a significant increase in human waste along streets, sidewalks, and other outdoor areas. This poses a risk to public health and the environment, as runoff can carry bacteria and nutrients into storm drains and nearby surface waters. Projects that protect or enhance the quality of local surface waters help protect LOTT's receiving waters – Budd Inlet.

Duration 7 years

Start Complete 2019-2020 Expenditure 2019-2024 CIP 2018 2024 $250,000 $250,000

55 Long-Range Planning

The long-range Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) Capitol Lake/Budd Inlet Total Maximum Daily Load represents major capital projects projected to occur (TMDL) Study, and regional plans related to climate within the 2025-2039 timeframe and those that are change and urban septic system conversion. The anticipated beyond that period. This table is based result is a long-range plan that is continually adjusted, on LOTT’s current understanding of system needs shifting projects in time, based on the most current well into the future. However, the plan is refined information. each biennium based on new information, including updated capacity reports, asset management evaluations, and other data. Revisions also occur due to changing conditions that result from planning efforts and influences such as LOTT’s Reclaimed Water Infiltration Study, the state-level Deschutes River/

Long-Range Capital Improvements Plan

System Life-Cycle Investments 2025-2039 Beyond 2039 Project Cost

Headworks

Influent Pumping Capacity Expansion ✓ $7,000,000

Solids Handling Improvements ✓ $1,400,000

Primary Sedimentation

Primary Sedimentation Basins Phase II ✓ $57,000,000

Final Effluent Pumping

North Outfall Evaluation and Upgrade ✓ $15,200,000

Sludge Stabilization

Budd Inlet Treatment Plant 5th Digester ✓ $18,000,000

Occupied Spaces

Budd Inlet Treatment Plant Roof Repair and Replacement ✓ ✓ $3,500,000

Control and Electrical

Substation and Switchgear A/B Replacement ✓ $1,600,000

Substation and Switchgear C/D Replacement ✓ $2,200,000

Medium Voltage Aeration Blowers MCC Replacement ✓ $3,800,000

Standby Generators Replacement and Improvements ✓ $2,500,000

Substation and Switchgear E/F Replacement ✓ $2,200,000

Substation and Switchgear G/H Replacement ✓ $2,200,000

Control System Replacement ✓ $12,500,000

56 Long-Range Capital Improvements Plan (continued)

System Life-Cycle Investments 2025-2039 Beyond 2039 Project Cost

Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant

Budd Inlet Reclaimed Water Plant 1.5 mgd Expansion ✓ $8,000,000

Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant

Membrane Replacement ✓ ✓ $24,500,000

Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant 3rd mgd Equipment ✓ $8,000,000

Martin Way To Hawks Prairie Pipeline Expansion ✓ $17,100,000

Martin Way Reclaimed Water Plant 4th and 5th mgd ✓ $51,300,000

Deschutes Valley Reclaimed Water Plant

Henderson Recharge Basins ✓ $9,000,000

Deschutes Valley 2 mgd Reclaimed Water Plant ✓ $50,600,000

Southern Recharge Conveyance and Development ✓ $112,400,000

Collection

Percival Creek/Mottman Road Interceptor ✓ $4,500,000

Martin Way Parallel Forcemain ✓ $3,400,000

East Corridor Upgrade (Marvin to Carpenter) ✓ $11,400,000

Henderson/Indian Creek Improvements ✓ $4,000,000

Indian Creek Interceptor Improvements ✓ $16,000,000

Pump Stations

Martin Way Pump Station Improvements ✓ $2,100,000

General

Property Acquisition ✓ ✓ $6,000,000

57 Operating Budget 2019-2020 Operating Budget

The Operating Budget for 2019-2020 was the subject of multiple work sessions with the Board of Directors during 2018. It includes three categories of expense – Personnel, Direct Operating Expense, and General Expense. Budgeted amounts for each category are shown in the table. The overall 2019-2020 Operating Budget has increased approximately 4.5% per year over the previous budget.

Operating Expense Summary 2019-2020

2019-2020 2017-2018 Annual Annual Budget Budget % Change $ Change

Personnel $16,436,474 $14,299,605 7.5% $2,136,869 Direct Operating Expense $8,666,810 $8,394,249 1.6% $272,561 General Expense $1,835,592 $2,039,694 (5.0%) ($204,102) Total Operations Expense $26,938,876 $24,733,548 4.5% $2,205,328

Personnel General Expense This category includes all staffing and related benefit General Expense, the smallest of the three categories, costs. LOTT’s staffing plan for 2019-2020 includes includes all other necessary expenses that are not a total of 84.75 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. directly related to operations. This includes items This includes the addition of seven FTE positions such as training, professional services, and other within the biennium. Costs associated with these overhead costs. Total expenses in this category new positions are minimal due to reduced consultant have decreased 5% in comparison to the and contract labor costs. Increases in healthcare 2017-2018 budget. and scheduled cost of living adjustments also contributed to increased personnel costs.

Direct Operating Expense This accounts for all the non-personnel costs associated with the wastewater treatment process and production of reclaimed water. It includes items such as operating supplies, utilities, chemicals, and tools. This category increased by 1.6% per year, largely due to an increase in the cost of biosolids hauling.

Direct Operating Expense includes items such as supplies, utilities, chemicals, and tools.

59 Our Commitment

The LOTT Clean Water Alliance is committed to meeting future needs for new treatment capacity meeting our communities’ needs for wastewater requires effective operations, continuous planning, treatment and reclaimed water production services, and completion of large-scale capital projects. While and doing so in a fiscally responsible, sound, and the cost of these needs is substantial, LOTT has equitable manner. Protecting our communities’ managed to minimize impacts to ratepayers, while investment in LOTT’s regional infrastructure and keeping the utility financially sound.

LOTT is a recognized leader in wastewater treatment in the state, with the Budd Inlet Treatment Plant being one of the only plants employing biological nutrient removal on Puget Sound.

60 500 Adams Street NE, Olympia, WA 98501 (360) 664-2333 • www.lottcleanwater.org