09-17-86 Meeting of the La Porte Area Water Authority Minutes

Browse Search

TurnerColliec9Braden Inc. September 24, 1986 La Porte Area Water Authority Attention: Mr. Jack Owen Page Two The assumptions used in preparing these estimates are indicated on the attached tables. The estimated Capital Costs for each alternative are shown on Table 1, the calculations of Annual Debt Services are given on Table 2, and the total Annual Costs for the three different systems are listed in Table 3. From Table 3, the esti- mated costs per 1,000 gallons of water are $1.14 for LPAWA, $1.13 for SEWPP, and $1.21 for Deer Park. These costs include the raw water supply, treatment and finished water transmission to each of the customers in the LPAWA. The capital costs for raw water supply, treatment, storage and pumping are approximately the same for the LPAWA and Deer Park options, and are slightly lower for ~he SEWPP alternative. The major capital cost differences between alternatives are due to the pipeline costs. The costs of pipelines to transmit treated water to the LPAWA from the SEWPP or Deer Park sites are high because of the dis- tances and relatively large diameter pipe required. This factor is the primary reason for the differences in capital costs. The estimated annual operation and maintenance costs for the LPAWA and Deer Park alternatives are approximately equal, but the corresponding costs for the SEWPP alterna- tive are significantly lower than for the other two systems. This difference is due to the "economy of scale" resulting from operating a large capacity (80 mgd) facility. The lower estimated O&M costs for the SEWPP offset the higher annual debt service, resulting in a total annual cost that is the lowest of the three alternatives. The total annual costs estimated for the LPAWA alternative are just slightly higher than for the SEWPP, and could be considered essen- tially equal to the SEWPP costs based on the accuracy of the estimates. The estimated total annual costs for the Deer Park alternative are about 7% higher, due to the higher annual O&M expense compared to the SEWPP and to the higher annual debt service compared to the LPAWA alternative.