CR 2003-170 Approve Engineering Services Agreement,Lift Station No. 7 RehabilitaionCITY OF
HOPKINS
November 14, 2003 Council Report: 2003 -170
Approve Engineering Services Agreement, Lift Station No. 7 Rehabilitation
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: "Move that City Council authorize the
Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with SEH, Inc. for the design of Sanitary
Sewer Lift Station #7 Rehabilitation.
Overview.
Lift Station #7 is located at 801 6 Avenue South. This lift station is the largest sanitary sewer
lift station in the system. The station is a 30 -year old wet well /dry well confined space design in
generally poor condition with obsolete equipment components. The Station is in need of
rehabilitation in order to provide reliable service for the next 20 -30 years. City Council
authorized a preliminary design report in October , 2002 and the engineer has evaluated multiple
options for lift station replacement and rehabilitation. Staff and the engineer are recommending
station rehabilitation to include new pumps, valves and piping. The estimated cost of this
improvement is $200,000, including all engineering costs.
Primary Issues to Consider
• Project cost /funding
• Project Scope
• Project Impact
• Project Schedule
Supporting Information
• Proposed engineering agreement
• CIP Project sheet
• Design report /o attachments
%NA(
Steven J. Sadler, Public orks Director
Financial Impact: $ Yr 2000 - $ 200,000 Budgeted: Y — $200,000 San Sewer Fund
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _CIP - Project U -001
Notes:
Council Report 2003 -170
Page 2
Analysis of Issues
• Project cost /funding:
The engineers opinion of probable construction cost is $143,700. plus an estimated $40,000 for
city furnished equipment. The estimated project cost equals the CIP amount and the sanitary
sewer fund is capable of funding this project in 2004 while maintaining a healthy working capital
balance.
• Project Scope:
This project will include:
- Bypass pumping of existing flows
-Place new steel floor in dry well
- Install new sump pump and new anode packs for corrosion protection
- Install new pumps and use existing motors
- Install new check valves, isolation gate valves and piping in the dry well
- Install new control system
• Project Impact
There should be no sanitary sewer impact to customers connected to this lift station, as the
project requires bypass pumping during construction.
• Project Schedule
February 2004: Council approve plans and authorize bids
March 2004: Open bids, award contract
April /May 2004: Begin Construction
June /July 2004: Construction complete
•
5EN
November 11, 2003
Steven Stadler, PE
Public Works Director
City of Hopkins
1010 First Street South,
Hopkins, MN 55343
Dear Steve:
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
architecture • engineering • environmental • transportation
RE: Hopkins, MN
Proposal for Professional Services
Lift Station No. 7 Reconstruction
SEH No. P- HOPKNO303.00
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) is please to submit this proposal for the rehabilitation of the
existing City Lift Station No. 7. Based upon the Design Report we have concluded that the existing
lift station can be reconstructed by:
1. Bypass pumping of existing flows.
2. Eliminate grating in existing wet well.
• 3. Sandblast and recoat interior of existing dry well.
4. Place a new steel floor in the dry well.
5. Install new sump pump and new Magnesium Anode packs with test box.
6. Install two new pumps and use existing motors.
7. Install new check valves, isolation gate valves and piping in the dry well.
8. Install new control system incorporation a multi -level probe to sense the wet well level and
control pumping start and stops.
This proposal is for the preparation of Construction Bidding Documents, assistance during the
bidding phase and construction administration services.
SEH will provide all the necessary civil, structural, process and electrical engineering to complete
the design thru the completion and start-up of successful project.
The proposed work phases are divided up on the attached man hour task estimate. The total
proposed fee for the work is $51,763.00.
The project fee is based upon using various specialists that are not normally required on a municipal
sewer, water and street project where the estimated fee does not include electrical engineers,
structural engineers, coating specialists and process (mechanical) specialists. These specialists who
will be involved with the design of the lift station rehabilitation will also need to be involved with
specifying how to keep a temporary pump station in service during the rehabilitation period.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Your Trusted Resource • Equal Opportunity Employer
•
•
•
Steven Stadler, PE
November 11, 2003
Page 2
During the construction phase, shop drawings for all the components that will be incorporated into
the work must be verified as well as field trips for these people to verify installation and the start-p
of the facility.
SEH feels that the proposed fee is a fair price for doing this work.
We propose the following schedule for completion of the work:
City Council Authorizes Plan
Review Plans to City Staff '
Present Plans to Council and Authorize Bids
Receive Bids and Award Contract
Begin Construction
Substantial Construction Completion
Final Construction Completion
We greatly appreciate this opportunity to work with you and your staff and look forward to a
successful completion of this work.
Sincerely,
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC.
ichard C. Potz
Principal /Project Manager
ka
Enclosure
c: Mike Lauseng, City of Hopkins
h \civil\ proposal \hopkms \hopkn0303 \proposal Itrl 10403 doc
November 18, 2003
January 5, 2004
February 3, 2004
March 2, 2004
April 5, 2004
June 18, 2004
June 30, 2004
r SEI-I
Project Task Hour Budget
Lift Station NO. 7 Reconstruction
City of Hopkins, Minnesota
SEH No.: PHOPKNO303.00
November 2003
HACIV ILIPROP OSALIHo pkins1HOPKNO3034taskhrbdgt .x
k - ,)TASK .' - ' PRINCIPAL; WBBOJ.MGR; "ROF.,ENG ; _GRAD, ENG. SR. S -� .TECH. CLER. TASK LABOR
I. PREPARATION OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
A.
B
C
D
E.
Plans
Meeting with City
Specrt cations
Permits
Cost Estimate
Subtotal Hours
Subtotal Labor
Expenses
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE3a,
i4SERVICE COST (INCLUDING EXPENSES)
8
2
4
15
$2,025.00
20
4
20
3
48
$6,000.00
34
4
20
2
3
63
58.631.00
16
8
8
8
41
54,920.00
30
8
12
2
52
4
26
32
$4,680.00 $2,304 00
$13,146 00
$3,070 00
$9,692.00
$1,359.00
$1,293 00
$28,560.00
5650
$29,210.00
TOTAL BID
•
EXPENSES
III. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
J
K.
L
M
N
Construction Administration
Shop Drawings
Construction Inspection
Start Up
Project Finalization
Subtotal Hours
Subtotal Labor
Expenses
2
2
2
8
51.080.00
12
10
20
16
3
61
57,625.00
4
10
16
4
34
54,658 00
2
8
8
2
20
$2,400.00
4
4
4
2
14
$1,260 00
8
14
$3.494 00
$4 291 00
52,770 00
$5 926 00
3
2
$1,550 00
51,008 00 518,031.00
5450
TOTAL.CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICE COST
(INCLUDING EXPENSES)
Total Estimated Fee
TASK HOUR BUDGET
49
$4,072.0
- TOTAL HOUR'S 26 117 100 63 66
" TOTAL ESTIMATED LABOR COSTS 53,510 514,625 513,700 57,560 55,940 53,528 $48,863'
TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENSES 4000',
$51,763.00
ASSISTANCE
II. BIDDING
Issue Plans
1
$135 00
F.
Contractor Response
4
2
2
$1,014 00
G.
Addenda and Bid Opening
1
2
1
1
$594 00
H.
Bid Tab, Letter of Recommendation
1
2
2
$529 00
I.
Subtotal Hours
3
8
3
2
0
3
Subtotal Labor
5405.00
51,000
00
5411 00
5240.00
50.00
5216.00
$2,272.00
Expenses
$1,800
r SEI-I
Project Task Hour Budget
Lift Station NO. 7 Reconstruction
City of Hopkins, Minnesota
SEH No.: PHOPKNO303.00
November 2003
HACIV ILIPROP OSALIHo pkins1HOPKNO3034taskhrbdgt .x
k - ,)TASK .' - ' PRINCIPAL; WBBOJ.MGR; "ROF.,ENG ; _GRAD, ENG. SR. S -� .TECH. CLER. TASK LABOR
I. PREPARATION OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
A.
B
C
D
E.
Plans
Meeting with City
Specrt cations
Permits
Cost Estimate
Subtotal Hours
Subtotal Labor
Expenses
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE3a,
i4SERVICE COST (INCLUDING EXPENSES)
8
2
4
15
$2,025.00
20
4
20
3
48
$6,000.00
34
4
20
2
3
63
58.631.00
16
8
8
8
41
54,920.00
30
8
12
2
52
4
26
32
$4,680.00 $2,304 00
$13,146 00
$3,070 00
$9,692.00
$1,359.00
$1,293 00
$28,560.00
5650
$29,210.00
TOTAL BID
•
EXPENSES
III. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
J
K.
L
M
N
Construction Administration
Shop Drawings
Construction Inspection
Start Up
Project Finalization
Subtotal Hours
Subtotal Labor
Expenses
2
2
2
8
51.080.00
12
10
20
16
3
61
57,625.00
4
10
16
4
34
54,658 00
2
8
8
2
20
$2,400.00
4
4
4
2
14
$1,260 00
8
14
$3.494 00
$4 291 00
52,770 00
$5 926 00
3
2
$1,550 00
51,008 00 518,031.00
5450
TOTAL.CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICE COST
(INCLUDING EXPENSES)
Total Estimated Fee
TASK HOUR BUDGET
49
$4,072.0
- TOTAL HOUR'S 26 117 100 63 66
" TOTAL ESTIMATED LABOR COSTS 53,510 514,625 513,700 57,560 55,940 53,528 $48,863'
TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENSES 4000',
$51,763.00
SEfI
November 11, 2003
Mr. Steven Stadler, PE
Public Works Director
City of Hopkins
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Dear Mr. Stadler:
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
architecture • engineering • environmental • transportation
RE: Hopkins, Minnesota
Agreement for Professional Services
Lift Station No. 7 Reconstruction
SEH No. P- HOPKNO303.00
This letter constitutes an Agreement for Professional Services between City of Hopkins, Owner, and SEH for
providing professional services in connection with Lift Station No. 7 Reconstruction (hereinafter called the
"Project ").
You agree to furnish us with full information as to your requirements including any special or extraordinary
considerations for the Project or special services needed, and also to make available all pertinent existing
information and data that we will need to perform our services.
Our services will consist of preparation of construction documents, bidding assistance and construction
administration for the reconstruction of Lift Station No. 7, all as set forth in this letter and our proposal letter
dated November 11, 2003, which is attached.
We will also furnish such Additional Services as you may request.
You will pay us a fee for our services related to the Project, currently estimated to be $51,763.00, in
accordance with Exhibit C -1.
Payment for our services shall be based on the time required to perform the services and the billable rates for
the principals and employees engaged directly on the project, plus charges for expenses and equipment, all in
accordance with Exhibit C -1.
We will bill you monthly for services, expenses, and equipment. The estimated fee assumes prompt payment
of our bills and the orderly and continuous progress of the project through construction. If there are delays in
the payment of our invoices and if we agree to continue working on the project, it is agreed we are entitled to
collect, and you will pay interest at the rate of 1% per month for all amounts unpaid for thirty (30) days or
more. Additionally, if the project is delayed and we encounter additional costs as the result of the delays, it is
agreed we are entitled to additional fees upon submission of the appropriate documentation of extra costs.
We will start our services promptly after receipt of your authorization and will complete our services within
the time estimated in the proposal letter. If there are delays in the Project that are beyond our control, you
agree to grant additional time to complete the services.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
• Your Trusted Resource • Equal Opportunity Employer
•
City of Hopkins
November 11, 2003
Page 2
We will provide our opinion of probable construction cost for the proposed project. If you wish greater
assurance as to probable construction cost or if you wish formal estimates, an independent cost estimator
should be employed.
You agree, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to limit SEH's total liability for any and all claims,
expenses, or damages in any way related to the services provided under this Agreement to the total sum paid
to SEH for providing these services.
If conflicts arise during the performance of these services, we agree they shall be submitted to non- binding
mediation unless we have mutually agreed otherwise.
This letter and Exhibits B, and C -1 represent the entire understanding between you and us in respect of the
Project and may only be modified in writing signed by both of us. If it satisfactorily sets forth your
understanding of our agreement, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided below and
return it to us.
Sincerely,
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICI ON INC.
ichard C. Potz
Principal
h \ crvd\ proposal\hopkins \hopkn0303\agmt Itr doc
Enclosures: Exhibits B and C -1, Proposal Letter
c: Mike Lauseng, City of Hopkins
Accepted by: City of Hopkins
David C. Halter, PE
Client Service Manager
By: Date:
Authorized Client Signature and Title
By: Date:
Authorized Client Signature and Title
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
(Form 05/16/02)
EXHIBIT B
TO
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Between City of Hopkins (Owner)
and
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH)
Dated November 11, 2003
OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. GENERAL
The Owner's responsibilities related to the services to be provided by SEH are generally as listed in
this Exhibit B. Modifications to these responsibilities shall be made through Supplemental Letter
Agreements. The Owner shall:
1. Provide full information as to its requirements for the services to be provided by SEH and SEH
shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness thereof.
2. Assist SEH by furnishing all available information pertinent to the services to be provided by
SEH. All information available in electronic formats shall be provided in such formats suitable
for use with current SEH systems and technology.
3. Guarantee access to and make all provisions for SEH to enter upon public and private lands as
required for SEH to perform its services under this Agreement.
4. Provide such legal, accounting, financial and insurance counseling and other special services as
may be required for the Project.
5. Give prompt written notice to SEH whenever the Owner observes or otherwise becomes aware
of any changes in the Project or any defect in the services being provided by SEH or makes or
wishes to make changes in the Project.
6. Furnish television inspection of sewers, land surveys, soil borings, laboratory tests, material
tests, soil tests and other special items pertinent to the Project and the services provided by
SEH.
7. 'Be responsible for the accuracy of all data consisting of, but not limited to, computations,
as -built drawings, electronic data bases and maps furnished by the Owner. The costs associated
with correcting, creating or recreating any data that is provided by the Owner that contains
inaccurate or unusable information or is found to omit information necessary for SEH to
perform its services are the responsibility of the Owner.
8. Promptly examine all studies, reports, sketches, opinions of construction costs, specifications,
drawings, proposals and other documents presented by SEH and render the necessary decisions
and instructions so SEH may continue in a timely manner to provide the services necessary for
completion of the Project.
9. Pay all costs incidental to advertising for bids and acquiring regulatory or review agencies'
permits and /or approvals.
10. Designate a person to act as Owner's representative with respect to SEH's service to be
performed; such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive
information, and interpret and define the Owner's policies and decisions with respect to service
covered by this Agreement.
Exhibit B - 1 City of Hopkins
11. Furnish or instruct SEH to provide, at the Owner's expense, additional services that become
necessary to complete the work called for in this Agreement or to complete work added to the
Project by the Owner or others and not related to the agreed responsibilities of SEH.
12. Furnish to SEH, prior to any performance of services by SEH, a copy of any design and
construction standards and comprehensive plans which the Owner shall require SEH to follow
or incorporate into its work.
13. Act promptly to review and approve or reject all proposed Change Orders and /or Supplemental
Agreements.
14. Employ and pay the costs for an independent cost estimator as provided in Section IV.A. of the
Agreement.
15. Bear all costs incidental to compliance with the requirements of this Exhibit B.
16. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, Owner shall notify SEH of any notice or
certification that SEH will be requested to provide to Owner or third parties in connection with
the project. Owner and SEH shall reach agreement on the terms of any such requested notice or
certification, and Owner shall authorize such Additional Services as are necessary to enable
SEH to provide the notices or certifications requested.
B. ASSUMPTION OF RISKS
The Owner and SEH agree that the risks of the Project and the costs related to those risks remain
with the Owner or with others and that SEH does not assume any risks that are not specifically called
out in the Agreement.
h \civil\ proposal \hopkins \hopknO3O3 \exhibnb doc
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
(Form 05/16/02)
Exhibit B - 2 City of Hopkins
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
(Form 05/16/02)
EXHIBIT C -1
TO
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Between City of Hopkins (Owner)
and
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH)
Dated November 11, 2003
PAYMENTS TO SEH FOR SERVICES AND EXPENSES
USING THE HOURLY BASIS OPTION
The Agreement for Professional Services is amended and supplemented to include the following
agreement of the parties:
A. HOURLY BASIS OPTION
The Owner and SEH select the hourly basis for payment for services provided by SEH. SEH shall be
compensated monthly. Monthly charges for services shall be based on SEH's current billing rates for
applicable employees plus charges for expenses and equipment. Current billing rates shall be by the
Actual Billing Rates of Personnel Method.
1. Actual Billable Rates of Personnel Method - Applicable billing rates of employees shall be
based on the actual payroll rates of personnel times a multiplier plus the cost of expenses and
equipment outlined in Paragraphs B and C of this Exhibit C -1.
SEH will provide an estimate of the costs for services in this Agreement. It is agreed that after 90%
of the estimated compensation has been earned and if it appears that completion of the services
cannot be accomplished within the remaining 10% of the estimated compensation, SEH will notify
the Owner and confer with representatives of the Owner to determine the basis for completing the
work.
B. OTHER PROVISIONS CONCERNING PAYMENTS
1. Invoices will be prepared in accordance with SEH's standard invoicing practices and will be
submitted monthly to Owner by SEH, unless otherwise agreed.
2. Invoices are due and payable within 30 days of receipt. If Owner fails to make any payment due
SEH for services and expenses within 30 days after receipt of SEH's invoice therefor, the
amounts due SEH will be increased at the rate of 1.0% per month (or the maximum rate of
interest permitted by law, if less) from said thirtieth day. In addition, SEH may, after giving
seven days written notice to Owner, suspend services under this Agreement until SEH has been
paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and other related charges. Payments will be
credited first to interest and then to principal.
3. In the event of a disputed or contested invoice, only that portion so contested may be withheld
from payment, and the undisputed portion will be paid.
4. Should such taxes, fees or costs be imposed, they shall be in addition to SEH's estimated total
compensation.
Exhibit C -1 - 1 City of Hopkins
C. EXPENSES
The following items involve expenditures made by SEH employees or professional consultants on
behalf of the Owner. Their costs are not included in the hourly charges made for services and shall
be paid for as described in this Agreement.
1. Transportation and travel expenses.
2. Lodging and meal expense connected with the Project.
3. Fees, paid, in the name of the Owner, for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction
over the Project.
4. Report, plan and specification reproduction expenses.
5. Other special expenses required in connection with the Project.
6. The cost of special consultants or technical services as required. The cost of subconsultant
services shall include actual expenditure plus 10% markup for the cost of administration and
insurance.
The Owner shall pay SEH monthly for expenses.
D. EQUIPMENT UTILIZATION
The utilization of specialized equipment, including automation equipment, is recognized as
benefitting the Owner. The Owner, therefore, agrees to pay the cost for the use of such specialized
equipment on the project. SEH invoices to the Owner will contain detailed information regarding the
use of specialized equipment on the project and charges will be based on the standard rates for the
equipment published by SEH.
The Owner shall pay SEH monthly for equipment utilization.
h \civil\ proposal \hopkins \hopknO303 \exhcl hr doc
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
(Form 05/16/02)
Exhibit C -1 - 2 City of Hopkins
o ject # 01- CIP -U001
Protect Name Reconstruct sanitary sewer Lift Station #7
_.
Total
Useful Type Life Improvement
Category Utilities: Municipal Sanitary S
Priority n/a
Project Cost $200,000
Description
Lift Station #7. Valley Park (South end of 6th Avenue South)
Reconstruct and repair Lift Station #7
Justification
Reconstruction necessary due to safety concerns, to improve reserve capacity and general condition.
Prior Expenditure 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total
0 I Construction /Maintenance 200,000 200,000
Total Total 200,000 200,000
ill
Prior Funding Sources 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total
0
SF - Sanitary Sewer Fund 200,000 200,000
Total Total 200,000 200,000
Operational Impact/Other
Projected schedule: Lift Station #7 .
2003: Plans and specifications
2004: Bid and construction
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
pi ty of Hopkins, MN
71
2004 thru 2008
Contact PW Director
Department Public Works: Utilities
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
Design Report
Lift Station No. 7 Replacement
Hopkins, Minnesota
SEH No. A-HOPKNO301.00
May 2003
z5E1 r I
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC
Multidisciplined.
Single Source.
SfH
May 1, 2003
Steven Stadler, City Engineer
Mike Lauseng, Utility Superintendent
City of Hopkins
1010 1st Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Dear Steve and Mike:
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
architecture engineering environmental • transportation
RE: Lift Station No. 7 Replacement
Design Report
Hopkins, Minnesota
SEH No. A- HOPKNO301.00
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) has completed the preliminary design report for the
replacement of Lift Station No. 7 and evaluation of the existing lift station facilities. We have done
a preliminary design of a new pump station using two pumps and a preliminary design of a new
pump station using three pumps. We have also reviewed the existing pumping records, conducted
an inflow measurement and pump /down tests to verify the cycle time, running time and capacity of
the existing station and compared this data to the SCADA records supplied by the City.
Braun Intertec Corporation has conducted ultrasonic thickness measurements of the existing steel
pump station drywell housing the pump equipment to determine thickness of the steel as well as a
geotechnical investigation by taking soil borings to determine bearing capacity, anticipated
settlements, backfill requirements and engineering recommendations for the new facility.
This report includes the results of Braun Intertec Corporation and our preliminary layout of the new
Lift Station No. 7 using submersible pumps and rehabilitation of the existing lift station that will be
used as a "back up" facility.
SEH has completed an opinion of probable costs for the various improvement options as well as a
life cycle cost analysis for the different pumping solutions. Future energy costs and miscellaneous
annual costs are calculated into a capitalized present day value based upon a selected interest rate.
This report provides the City with engineering solutions and options that shows our findings and
recommendations needed by the City to proceed with a final design and preparation of the bidding
documents for the selected design needed for construction.
Please review this report to ensure we have fulfilled all of your requirements.
erely,
David C. Halter, P.E.
Client Service Manager
h \c ivil\ projects \hopkinslhopkn0301 \I.s report.doc
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Your Trusted Resource • Equal Opportunity Employer
Richard C. Potz
Project Manager
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the
the State of Min sots.
David C. Halter, P.E.
Date: c— /— 3
Reviewed by:
C.,
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200
Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301
952.912.2600
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
architecture engineering • environmental • transportation
Lift Station No. 7 Replacement
Design Report
Hopkins, Minnesota
SEH No. A- HOPKNO301.00
May 2003
Lic. No.: 14657
Richard C. Potz, Project Manager 1 ate
• Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer
Conclusion
As a result of our studies and investigation, we have concluded that:
1. There is a need for this project to maintain a reliable sanitary sewer lift station serving
southern Hopkins, Minnesota.
2. The new pump station options presented in this report provide five solutions for the
improvements to the sanitary sewer Lift Station No. 7.
3. All of the proposed solutions will provide an improvement to the city pumping system at the
Lift Station No. 7 site, but the alternate of rehabilitation of the existing system without
construction of a new facility may or may not provide for the same long term solution desired
because of the additional 20 year lift expected from the in- ground steel drywell.
4. If a new lift station is to be constructed, the lowest initial cost is $648,700 for the
construction of a new Lift Station No. 7, plus adding the cost of rehabilitation of the existing
station. The 2 -pump option or the 3 -pump option is within a 1% initial cost differential and
within a 1% Life Cycle Cost (LCC) differential.
5. The LCC analysis revealed that the lowest alternate as well as the initial cost investment is
the rehabilitate the existing lift station.
6. The LCC analysis base cost of rehabilitation of the existing pump station revealed that the
station if rebuilt with new pumps and piping, wet well level control, new coatings inside the
dry well and new magnesium anode packs will serve the City of Hopkins for many years.
Recommendations
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
atiliteccure - engtheering environmental • aransporiaefon
Executive Summary
1. The City Staff and Council should review this report.
2. SEH believes that either the new 2 or 3 pump option can serve the City for the anticipated
20 -year or longer anticipated life.
3. The City may want to perform the rehabilitation of the existing lift station at a later date, if
either new lift station option is constructed, the existing engine - generator will be used to
provide an energy source as a backup to the new station if there is an interruption of power
supplies by Xcel Energy.
4. The costs presented herein for rehabilitation of the existing lift station are based upon a
contractor performing all the work. If City forces perform the work the costs may be reduced
by 30% to 40 %.
Design Report A- HOPKNO301.00
City of Hopkins Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer
Letter of Transmittal
Title and Certification Page
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Authorization 1
1.2 Background 1
2.0 Existing Facilities 2
2.1 Existing Lift Station 2
2.2 Existing Lift Station Flow 2
2.3 Existing Lift Station Dry Well Condition 3
2.3.1 Information and Data Obtained 3
2.3.2 Discussion of Information and Data Obtained 4
2.4 Existing Control Building 4
2.5 Existing Foundations 5
2.6 Existing Control System 5
2.7 Existing Lift Station Electrical Equipment 6
3.0 Proposed Improvements 7
3.1 Hydraulics 7
3.2 New Lift Station — 2 Pump Option 7
3.3 New Lift Station — 3 Pump Option 8
3.4 Existing Lift Station Rehabilitation 8
4.0 Proposed Electrical Control System Improvements 10
5.0 Proposed Control Building Addition 13
6.0 Proposed Building Foundations 14
7.0 Project Construction Costs 15
7.1 New Submersible Lift Station 2 Pump Option 15
7.2 New Submersible Lift Station 3 Pump Option 15
7.3 Rehabilitation of Existing Lift Station 16
8.0 Operation and Maintenance Costs (O &M) 17
8.1 Pump Maintenance Costs 17
8.2 Electrical O &M Costs 17
8.3 Engine — Generator O &M Costs 17
8.4 City O &M Costs 18
SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
Design Report
City of Hopkins
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
Table of Contents
A- HOPKNO301.00
• Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer Page i
8.5 Electrical Power Costs 18
9.0 Life Cycle Cost Analysis 19
Table 1
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
atcliilecltne ett,gitteeting - enuitutttn.etatul - cIun4UIluliutt
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Tables
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Motor Starters 12
List of Appendices
Appendix A Braun Intertec Ultrasonic Thickness Report dated 11/22/02
Braun Intertec Geotechnical Evaluation Report dated 12/26/02
Smith and Loveless Installation Instructions
Preliminary Drawings — Site Plan, 2 Pump Option and 3 Pump
Option and Building Addition
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Design Report A- HOPKNO301.00
City of Hopkins Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. • Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer Page ii
May 1, 2003
Design Report
City of Hopkins
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Authorization
This design report was authorized by the City Council on October 15,
2002. That authorization was based upon a proposal submitted to Mike
Lauseng and Steven Stadler on September 27, 2002.
1.2 Background
The City of Hopkins Lift Station No. 7 was constructed in 1970. This lift
station consists of a separate concrete wetwell and a steel pre -built Smith
and Loveless package type lift station placed on a concrete slab below
grade. Above the steel lift station is a control building housing the
controls, motor starters, SCADA equipment and an engine - generator
with an automatic transfer switch.
The lift station site is at the southeast corner of 8 Street South and 6
Avenue South. A bituminous access driveway services the site from this
intersection for maintenance personnel. The lift station is located on
City owned property, which eliminates site space issues encountered for
the new lift station construction. The discharge of the wastewater is thru
a 14 -inch forcemain north along 6 Avenue South to a discharge point at
5 Avenue South and Hennepin County Road No. 3. A majority of the
forcemain was replaced with a new 14 -inch ductile iron pipe in 1989
when a new trunk storm sewer was installed along 6 Avenue South.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 952.912.2600 952.912 2601 FAX
Design Report
Lift Station No. 7 Replacement
Prepared for City of Hopkins
Your Trusted Resource
A HOPKNO301.00
Equal Opportunity Employer Page 1
Design Report
City of Hopkins
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301
952.912.2600 952.912.2601 FAX
2.0 Existing Facilities
2.1 Existing Lift Station
The existing lift station is a wetwell/drywell type with a separate
concrete wetwell and a separate steel pre -built drywell housing the
pumps and valves. The Smith and Loveless steel pre -built lift station
was built in 1970 and has served the City well. The original electrical
controls that were located in the lower portion of the unit have been
replaced with new controls in the control building. The existing lift
station has an engine /generator that provides power to operate the lift
station in case of power failure. A major concern was if the steel drywell
which houses the suction piping from the wetwell to the pumps, the
pumps, discharge piping including check valves and gate valves has
corroded to a point where the cost might be excessive to see the benefits
of rehabilitation. The operation staff with the City of Hopkins desires to
rebuild the existing station with new pumps, piping and valves after the
new lift station is operational and use it for back up. When power is lost
to the new lift station, the flow will back -up into the existing wetwell
and be pumped by the rehabilitated existing lift station, which will be
powered by the existing engine /generator. The existing lift station could
also be used as a back up if a pump is out for repairs or when extremely
high flow conditions are encountered.
2.2 Existing Lift Station Flow
We have reviewed the existing SCADA data and conducted inflow and
pump down tests on November 19, 2002. The on -site tests on this date
revealed an incoming flow of 350 gallons per minute (gpm). The pump
down tests revealed that Pump No. 1 was discharging 2,025 gpm and
Pump No. 2 was discharging 2,444 gpm. Mr. Lauseng stated that a new
impeller had been installed on Pump No. 2 and he has a replacement
impeller on -site for Pump No. 1.
We then calculated the cycle time for the existing pumps and run time
for the existing facility knowing the wetwell size and start/stop pump
control differential. The results of these calculations revealed that:
Pump No. Starts/Day x Run Time per Start = Run Time per Day
1 75.8 x 1.7 min. = 2.1 hours
2 75.8 x 1.3 min. = 1.6 hours
If we use an average inflow of 450 gpm instead of 350 gpm as measured
on 11/19/02 the results indicate that:
Your Trusted Resource
A HOPKNO301.00
• Equal Opportunity Employer Page 2
Design Report
City of Hopkins
Pump No. Starts/Day x Run Time per Start = Run Time per Day
1 92 x 1.77 min. = 2.7 hours
2 92 x 1.4 min. = 2.1 hours
We then reviewed the SCADA print out supplied by the City for Lift
Station No. 7 for July, August, September and October. We discounted
mid -July due to abnormally high amounts of rain. This was verified. by
reviewing climatologically data from the Twin Cities and Chanhassen
recording stations. The following cycle time and run times revealed
that; the number of starts per day was 73 with an average of 2.2 hours
run time per day per pump.
The preceding analysis confirmed our field measurements along with the
SCADA print out that has shown that the inflow average is close to 350
gpm. This flow data was used for sizing of the new pump station and
operation costs.
The existing pumps when new were sized to provide a design flow of
2,500 gpm. Pump No. 2 measured output of 2,444 gpm is within 2% of
the original design point.
2.3 Existing Lift Station Dry Well Condition
One of our primary tasks was to determine if the existing steel dry well
structure at Lift Station No. 7 has corroded and at to what extent and at
what location of the steel structure. We then could determine what repair
and expense would be required to continue using the existing facilities.
If a determination is made that the rehabilitation costs to repair the
structure for many more years of use is excessive because of corrosion,
then the rehabilitation costs of the existing facility and use as a "backup"
lift station would be a costly endeavor. Also, if rehabilitation is taken out
of the picture, then the existing control building expansion that is needed
to house the new electrical control and switch gear for the new Lift
Station would still be required, because the existing control building that
houses the transfer switch, existing engine generator and SCADA
system would be used until the new station is put on line.
Ultrasonic testing was completed on November 18, 2002 on the 1970
Smith and Loveless steel structure to determine what is the actual steel
thickness compared to the thickness when it was installed. Attached, as
an Exhibit is the Braun Intertec findings.
2.3.1 Information and Data Obtained
The existing steel pump station (Smith and Loveless) is constructed with
3/8 -inch thick steel plates (walls and floor plates) and with 1/4-inch thick
riser tube. The entire pump station is supported on three 10 WF 60
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 3
Design Report
City of Hopkins
beams which in turn are anchored on a concrete slab at elevation 851.5
to counteract uplift.
Soil boring ST -3 was taken in the vicinity of the existing lift station and
although boring ST -3 does not go as deep as 851.5 feet, boring ST -1 and
S1 -2 indicate that the existing steel lift station bottom slab is located and
its bearing at the sandy lean clay (glacial till) encountered at this depth.
The glacial till is identified as moderately corrosive.
Ultrasonic test taken inside the pump station to determine the thickness
of steel plates indicate that the bottom plate has severe surface corrosion.
The thinnest measured thickness was .30 inches at one spot and
generally the thickness appear to be between .32 and .35 inches or 16%
to 10% of the original plate thickness of .375 has corroded. The lift
station wall plate thickness, ceiling plate thickness as well as riser tube
plate thickness are essentially 3/8 -inch (.375) thick and 1 /4 -inch (.25)
thick as originally specified.
Engineering data from Smith and Loveless (included in Appendix A)
indicates that the void under the station floor or areas between the
1OWF60 beams is to be filled with concrete. Also, this data indicates
that the pump station should have two or more magnesium anode packs
for steel corrosion protection.
2.3.2 Discussion of Information and Data Obtained
It appears that the only observable and ultrasonic measured plate
thickness reduction is at the surface of the bottom plate of the station.
We recommend that the existing plate is cleaned and a new 3/8 -inch
plate be welded on top of the existing plate to compensate for the surface
corrosion. Although we don't know if the supporting beams below the
bottom plate are corroded or have been encased in concrete or whether
the anode packs have been installed, as indicated per Smith and Loveless
specifications (included in Appendix A). We are of the opinion that;
since only surface rust was observed in a few spots on top of the bottom
plate and since the majority of the steel thickness measured is equal to
the original, then we assume that the beams should exhibit minimal
corrosion and that by being encased in concrete should also protect them
from corrosion. Therefore, the uplift restraint elements should be
adequate. Please note that these assumptions and conclusions are based
from what was tested and Smith and Loveless (included in Appendix A)
on how the pump station was constructed and in no way we can
guarantee the pump station from a potential failure related to corrosion,
weld failure, etc. (Please see attached exhibit from Smith and Loveless.)
2.4 Existing Control Building
The existing Control Building is a 20' x 20' masonry load bearing wall
construction with a precast concrete plank roof deck. The exterior walls
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 4
Design Report
City of Hopkins
are a monolithic 8" CMU (Concrete Masonry Unit) load- bearing interior
surface with a 4" face brick exterior veneer. The face brick veneer is laid
up in a common running bond with an interlocking header course every
6 vertical course. No cavity wall air space or inner wall insulation was
provided with this type of monolithic masonry wall construction. The
roof consists of a 6" thick, hollow core precast concrete roof planks
bearing 8" CMU /face .brick veneer exterior walls. A built -up roofing
system over 3" roof insulation was installed a few years ago, with a 16"
high, prefinished fascia/gravel stop runs around the perimeter of the roof
edge.
The Control Building has 2 sets of exterior doors. The existing west door
is a 3' -0" x 7' -0" hollow metal, painted steel door in a painted hollow
metal steel frame.
The south door is a pair of 3' -0" x 7' -0" (6' -0" clear opening) hollow
metal painted steel doors in a painted hollow metal steel doorframe.
The existing Control Building does not meet the current Minnesota
Energy Code in terms of wall insulation for a heated building.
Attempting to retrofit the existing exterior walls with an applied
insulation would be impracticable and cost prohibitive. However, the
overall exterior envelope (exterior walls and roof construction) of the
existing Control Building in conjunction with the proposed addition can
be brought within limits of the Minnesota Energy Code.
2.5 Existing Foundations
The metal lift station and the existing wet well are supported by a
common reinforced concrete mat foundation. This mat foundation is 28'
long x 20' wide x 2.5' thick. Which provides bearing and resists uplift
forces for the metal lift station and wet well.
The control building foundations , system features reinforced concrete
grade beams that support the bearing and non bearing masonry walls.
The concrete grade beams in turn are supported by footings on the same
elevation as the mat foundations.
The existing foundation system is in our opinion and based on the fact
that, we did not observe any cracking on the control building walls is
quite capable in supporting the dead loads and uplift stresses.
2.6 Existing Control System
Lift Station No. 7 is controlled and monitored by an Allen- Bradley SLC
5/03 programmable controller. The SLC 5/03 processor is in current
production and will not become technologically obsolete or unsupported
for several years. The SLC 5/03 communicates with a host computer at
City of Hopkins headquarters over a radio frequency link with a
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system that is in
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 5
•
•
Design Report
City of Hopkins
place. The SCADA system appears to work well, having generated
reports regarding pump start/stop times for the two existing 75 HP
pumps.
No modification or replacement of existing control system equipment is
required for continued successful operation of Lift Station No. 7.
2.7 Existing Lift Station Electrical Equipment
Electrical service is provided by Xcel Energy. Service is 277/480 volt,
400 ampere, three phase. The available fault current is 10,300 amperes
and the utility transformer is rated 112 KVA. Maximum demand as
billed by Xcel Energy is 54 KW.
Existing electrical equipment consists of incoming service entrance
equipment, automatic transfer switch, 150 KW standby power generator,
controls for two 75 HP pump motors and a SCADA system. The 75 HP
pump motor starters are equipped with power factor correction
capacitors.
All electrical equipment appears to be in very good condition, with no
wear or deterioration evidenced. No observed damage was noted due to
corrosive atmosphere building conditions or any leaks. All equipment
was reported in good working condition during a site visit.
No modification or replacement of existing electrical equipment is
required for continued successful operation of Lift Station No. 7.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 6
•
•
Design Report
City of Hopkins
3.0 Proposed Improvements
3.1 Hydraulics
Using the previously discussion on flows and operational data supplied
by the City, SEH did a computer assisted hydraulic analysis of the pump
head requirements for the design flow of 2,500 gpm firm capacity
required. A hydraulic analysis was done for a single pump if a two -
pump type station as built and two pumps if a three pump type station is
built to meet this requirement. An additional pump would also be
provided to meet the firm capacity requirements as one pump could be
out of service.
3.2 New Lift Station — 2 Pump Option
The two pump lift station option will use two 90 horsepower pumps with
each pump capable of delivering 2,466 gpm against a total dynamic head
(TDH) of 96 feet.
When two of these pumps are operating, the output will be 3,300 gpm
against a 114 -foot TDH. The proposed pump station will be located
west of the existing facility as shown on the site plan attached in the
appendix. The submersible pumps are to be located in a 10 -foot by 14-
foot structure sized to provide for a maximum of 10 pump starts per hour
with one pump in operation. The sump will also have an inlet
chamber/baffle arrangement sized to provide for uniform flow to the
pump, eliminate most air entrainment, surface vortices due to falling
inlet flow, minimize submerged vortex motions under the pump and
promote proper approach flow to the pumps. The inlet baffle will also
minimize swirling flow at the pump inlet caused by counter rotation in
the sump opposite of the impellor rotation.
The new lift station has been designed to provide for an average of 58
starts per day with an average running time of 1.8 hours per day per
pump.
The discharge piping will be routed through a valve manhole with check
valves to prevent flow from backing through the pumps and gate valves
for positive line closure to facilitate maintenance on each check valve
and pump discharge line.
The new forcemain discharge will be connected to the existing 14 -inch
forcemain using a "wet tap" process so that the existing forcemain will
not have to be shut down. A new 14 -inch gate valve will also be
inserted into the existing forcemain towards the existing lift station from
the tee connection. These valves in the 14 -inch forcemain will allow the
lift stations to be isolated for rehabilitation and repair.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 7
3.3 New Lift Station — 3 Pump Option
The three -pump option lift station will use 60 horsepower pumps in lieu
of the two 90 horsepower pump in the 2 -pump option. Each pump can
deliver 1,850 gpm at a TDH of 81 feet each. Two of these pumps
operating at the same time will deliver 2,740 gpm at 98 feet TDH, thus
meeting the 2,500 gpm design flow. If all three pumps are operating they
can deliver 3,225 gpm. The three pump option will use submersible
pumps constructed in a 12 foot by 12 foot concrete structure sized to
hold the pumps, piping and provide storage so that the pumps will not
exceed 10 starts per hour with one pump out of service. Like the 2 pump
option, the sump will incorporate an inlet chamber/baffle arrangement
sized to provide uniform flow to the pumps and eliminate most of the air
entrainment and vortex motions under the pump.
The 3 pump lift station has been designed to provide an average of 23
starts per day per pump with the 3 pumps alternating with each pump
running one -half hour per day. Also, we have calculated that two pumps
will need to run together approximately 12 times a day and the two
pumps will operate 0.8 hours per day. The three submersible pumps
pump discharges will also be routed through a valve manhole where the
check valves and gates valves will be placed. The 3 -pump station
discharge piping will be connected similar to the 2 -pump station option
to the existing 14 -inch forcemain.
• 3.4 Existing Lift Station Rehabilitation
The ultrasonic tests conducted by Braun Intertec revealed that corrosion
has occurred on the floor. We propose to place a new steel floor welded
over the existing and placement of new Magnesium Anode packs. A test
box for monitoring the current flow in each of the anodes surrounding
the buried structure will also be included.
In order to remove the existing lift station from service, the contractor
will complete the installation of the new facility and place it in
operation. Separate valves will be placed on the forcemain junction
where the discharge piping from the existing station and the new station
join. These valves will completely isolate all backflow into either
station so that reconstruction/rehabilitation maintenance work can occur.
The valves can be placed by "hot tapping" the valve from the new
station and valve insertion into the existing forcemain from the existing
station or by placing a bypass pipeline by making two "hot taps" then
installing the two new valves.
We have provided a cost to rehabilitate the structure, new pumps, valves
and piping inside the Lift Station and using the existing electrical
switchgear and generator. The existing lift station control uses a bubbler
system in the wetwell. We recommend replacing this system with a new
control system that incorporates a multilevel probe to sense the wetwell
Design Report A- HOPKNO301.00
City of Hopkins Page 8
•
level, thereby eliminating the continued operation of the air compressor.
The rehabilitated facility will serve as a back up to the new lift station.
When a power failure occurs, the incoming flow will be automatically
diverted to the existing wetwell and lift station. The automatic control
system in the existing station will recognize the rising level in the
wetwell, start the engine - generator and run the two existing 75 HP
pumps.
The existing pumps are a Smith and Loveless designation 8D5 using
1200 RPM 75 horsepower wound rotor motors, close coupled to the
pump. This pump is no longer manufactured. The current motors were
installed in 1992 and appear in excellent condition.
We attempted to find a new pump that will fit the space and piping
configuration but a new pump and motor that will meet the space
restriction and the required 2,500 gallons per minute discharge would
require a 100 horsepower (HP) 1800 RPM motor. A new 100 HP motor
will require additional power supply, motor control wiring and place
additional restrictions on the existing engine- generator.
After discussion with City public works personnel, a decision was
reached to size the new pumps for the existing lift station rehabilitation
so that the maximum horsepower would be 75. We then did a search for
a pump that will fit the space requirements and be capable of pumping a
minimum of 2,000 gpm at 1200 RPM and use the existing motors.
Smith and Loveless has proposed a new pump that will fit the existing
station and will allow using the existing 75 horsepower 1,200 RPM
motors. This new pump with a 16 1/4-inch impeller should deliver 2,300
gpm at 87 feet of head. New suction gate valves, reducers and elbows,
pump stand, discharge gate and check valves and piping is proposed to
be installed and painted.
Design Report A- HOPKNO301.00
City of Hopkins Page 9
Design Report
City of Hopkins
4.0 Proposed Electrical Control System Improvements
If, after a new lift station is constructed, the existing lift station remains
in service as a backup unit then the existing 150 KW standby power
generator will remain in service.
The new lift station will contain either two 90 HP pumps or three 60 HP
pumps. Controls for the new pumps will be located in a building
addition on the west side of existing lift station. Building addition will
provide 10' -0" new interior building space to the west. Installing new
electrical equipment inside the building rather than in panels attached to
the building exterior results in a system more easily maintainable, less
prone to vandalism and aesthetically pleasing.
The proposed load and existing load will be supplied from existing
electrical service. Not all pumps can be run simultaneously from
existing electrical service. Using automatic controls to prevent
overloading the existing 400 amp service, we can run a combination of
new and existing pumps from Xcel Energy. This could be 2 - new 90
HP and 1 - existing 75 HP pump, 3 - new 60 HP and 1 - existing 75 HP
pump, 1 - new 90 HP and 2 - existing 75 HP pumps or 2 - new 60 HP
and 2 - existing 75 HP pumps.
The existing standby generator can run some pumps if needed while
other pumps are run by Xcel Energy. Alternately, a new 800 ampere
electrical service can be installed if needed to run all new and existing
pumps simultaneously from Xcel Energy.
The existing 480 volt, 400 ampere, three phase automatic transfer switch
will remain in service to automatically start the standby generator in
event of normal power failure, disconnect the normal utility power
source from the building and connect the standby generator power to the
building electrical system.
Motor starting requirements have been discussed with Xcel Energy, the
electrical utility serving this facility. Xcel Energy states that the City of
Hopkins will be permitted to start all existing and proposed pumps using
full voltage, across the line starters provided that the pumps are not
simultaneously started. The requirement for non - simultaneous starting
is easily satisfied by programming the SCADA system to require ten
seconds between any pumps starting.
Standby electrical power is supplied from the generator. The existing
generator has sufficient capacity to run any one of the following pump
combinations:
2 - existing 75 HP pumps
2 - new 60 HP pumps
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 10
Design Report
City of Hopkins
1 - new 90 HP pump
1 - existing 75 HP pump and 1 - new 60 HP pump
The existing generator cannot run two new 90 HP pumps. If it is
determined that above pumping capacity is inadequate during a power
outage, then additional generation capacity is required.
The pump motor controls can be configured such that pump motor loads
will not overload the standby power generator.
The existing SCADA system is expandable to meet the needs of new
pumps. Two input/output slots are available for future use in the Allen -
Bradley SLC 5/03 processor chassis. Use of high density terminal
blocks will allow existing SCADA system panel to accommodate the
additional inputs /outputs. If more than two input/output modules are
required, a remote input/output chassis can be installed in the new
building addition.
It is recommended the existing air bubbler system used for level control
be replaced with a non - pneumatic system such as float switches or a
multi -level liquid probe. Use of these options will result in a system
with lower maintenance costs and increased reliability.
One additional recommended input is a float switch in existing dry pit.
Other recommended inputs to be considered include intrusion switches
for all doors to alarm if unauthorized building entry occurs.
Existing radio communications between the SCADA system and a host
computer at City of Hopkins headquarters requires relocation of the
existing antenna. Antenna relocation is not a significant expense. No
other communication system changes are anticipated.
Three options were considered for existing and new motor controls.
Options include:
Magnetic starters, full voltage (currently used with existing 75
HP pumps)
Soft start starters
Variable frequency drives
Advantages, disadvantages and installed cost for each type of motor
starter are summarized in the following table.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 11
•
Table 1
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Motor Starters
Type of Motor
Starters
Advantages
Cost $1000's
Disadvantages 3 - 60 HP 2 - 90 HP
Magnetic Starters,
full voltage
Soft Start Units
Variable
Frequency Drives
Least maintenance
Most reliable
Less mechanical stress when pumps are
started.
Less mechanical stress when pumps are
started.
Allows pumps to be run at any speed from
10% - 100%.
Future energy savings is possible.
Pumping rate can be set to match influent
rate so number of pump starts is minimized.
Pumps cycle on and off 7 6
frequently.
Pumps cycle on and off 18 14
frequently.
Initial cost is highest. 39 36
Maintenance cost is
highest.
Since Xcel Energy will permit the use of full voltage magnetic starters,
their use is recommended as the least cost, most reliable type of motor
control.
Future energy savings using variable frequency drives is possible if
influent rate increases to the point where at least one pump is required to
run full time. In some applications, variable frequency drives can be
used to lower utility demand charges. For Hopkins Lift Station No. 7, it
is improbable that variable frequency drives will lower utility demand
charges.
Design Report A- HOPKNO301.00
City of Hopkins Page 12
• 5.0 Proposed Control Building Addition
•
Design Report
City of Hopkins
The proposed addition will be of a 20' x 10' brick veneer, CMU
masonry facility. The proposed exterior walls will consist of an 8" load
bearing CMU, 2" cavity wall insulation, 2" air space and 4" face brick
veneer. The face brick is to match the existing exterior Control Building
in color, texture and coursing (header course every 6 vertical course).
The roof for the addition will align with the existing building and consist
of 6" thick hollow core concrete roof planks with a built -up roofing
system over 3" of rigid roof insulation. The roof edge fascia/gravel stop
will match the existing profile and color.
A new 3' -0" x 7' -0" painted hollow metal steel door and frame will be
located in the west wall in the northwest at the northwest corner of the
addition. The new and existing doors are to be painted for color and
matching appearance. .
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 13
Design Report
City of Hopkins
6.0 Proposed Building Foundations
The proposed addition will feature reinforced grade beams supporting
the new bearing and non bearing walls. The grade beams will also
support the floor slab.
The grade beams will in turn be supported by new concrete columns
(caisson type), drilled to the glacial till for bearing. The grade beams
will also be attached to the existing columns where new proposed
addition interfaces with existing control buildings.
At the interface of new masonry walls to existing masonry walls a
control joint will be designed to accommodate expansion and
contraction movements as well as settlement considerations.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 14
• 7.0 Project Construction Costs
Design Report
City of Hopkins
The Engineer's opinion of probable construction cost is divided into the
major component of work for the 2 pump and 3 pump station alternates,
as well as, a construction cost for the existing lift station rehabilitation.
The cost estimate has been prepared using the Geotechnical Evaluation
report prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation dated December 26, 2002.
A copy of this report is included in the Appendix.
7.1 New Submersible Lift Station 2 Pump Option
This opinion of probable cost includes 10% contingencies and 18% A/E
costs.
• Lift station structure $280,000
■ Valve manhole structure $7,500
• Pumping equipment, valves and hatches $119,000
• Piping inside structures $7,200
• Site work and yard piping -inlet and outlet $140,000
■ Building addition $35,000
• Electrical and control $60,000
Total Alternate Project Cost $648,700
7.2 New Submersible Lift Station 3 Pump Option
This opinion of probable costs includes 10% contingencies and 18% A/E
costs.
• Lift station structure $290,000
• Valve manhole structure $9,400
• Pumping equipment, valves and hatches $105,000
• Piping inside structures $9,000
• Site work and yard piping -inlet and outlet $145,000
• Building addition $35,000
• Electrical and control $62,000
Total Alternate Project Cost $655,400
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 15
Design Report
City of Hopkins
7.3 Rehabilitation of Existing Lift Station
This cost estimate is for the rehabilitation of the existing lift station to be
used as a back -up to a new lift station.
This opinion of probable costs includes 10% contingencies and 18% A/E
costs.
• Remove existing pump, piping and valves $4,200
• New anode packs and new floor $5,800
• New pumps, valves and piping $78,900
• Painting floor and piping $2,200
• Electrical and controls $2.600
Total Rehabilitation Cost $93,700
If the new station is not constructed, the opinion of probable cost in
Article 7.3 will increase because of construction of bypass pumping for
the duration of the rehabilitation time by $50,000 for installation of
valves, bypass line and temporary pumping from the existing wet well.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 16
•
Design Report
City of Hopkins
8,0 Operation and Maintenance Costs (O &M)
8.1 Pump Maintenance Costs
The estimated pump maintenance costs for the pumps include a service
by Electric Pump once a year to change oil, run a meg test on the motors
and inspect for wear, to verify seal condition and replace if required, to
check circuits and to check motor over - temperature sensors. We, also,
made the following assumptions over the 20 year anticipated life of the
station:
1. The impellers will need replacement.
2. The pumps will require two complete rebuilds to replace seals,
bearings and inspection in the shop.
3. The pumps will need to have the wear rings replaced about every
4 years.
The budget maintenance cost for the two 90 HP pumps will average
$2,000.00 per year. This cost is broken down into in annual $900.00
service contract for remove pumps, inspect and change oil. The
$1,100.00 annual costs is the prorate share for impeller replacement,
tear -downs and wear rings.
The budget maintenance cost for the three 60 HP pumps will average
$2,525.00 per year. This cost is broken down into an annual $900.00
service contract for removing pumps, inspect and change oil. The
remainder is the prorated share of non - annual cost.
8.2 Electrical O &M Costs
We have assumed that we are going to use across the line motor starters
and assumed that replacement of the contacts will be required about
every 7 years at a cost of $750.00. The control system will require
periodic verification and calibration by the system integrator,
replacement of the control probe in the wet well and back -up floats. We
estimate a $500.00 annual cost to do control maintenance work.
8.3 Engine — Generator O &M Costs
We are assuming that the existing engine - generator will be kept in
service to run the new and /or the rehabilitated existing pump station. If
the decision is made to not rehabilitate the station, the engine - generator
will be used to power one 90 HP motor in the 2 -pump option station and
two 60 HP motors in 3 -pumps option station. The engine - generator also
has the capability to run one new 60 HP pump and one existing 75 HP
pump or two existing 75 HP pumps. In either case, the engine - generator
should be kept in service. The O &M costs for the engine generator are
as follows:
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 17
Design Report
City of Hopkins
Fuel — assume minimum 2 hours per month under load =
$40.00 /month.
Annual maintenance = $4,000.00 if under contract with Ziegler.
The maintenance cost includes an annual engine oil change and
oil analysis, batteries every 2 years and every 3 years an engine
coolant flush, new hoses, t -stat and check - out run under load.
8.4 City O &M Costs
After discussions with the City pubic works personnel a decision was
made not to include the City O &M costs. The costs for the operation and
maintenance are difficult to estimate. Public works personnel believe the
City operation personnel will spend the same time at the station
irregardless of which type of station is constructed. -
8.5 Electrical Power Costs
The electrical power charges from Xcel Energy will be a two component
electrical bill: demand charges and energy charges. Xcel reports a
average monthly demand charge of $400.00. It shall be noted that this
monthly demand charge is higher in June through September and lower
the rest of the year. The energy charge per kilowatt hour (KWH) is
$0.31/KWH. The energy costs per hour to run each pump assuming the
motors are 90% efficient and/or under full load is as follows:
60 HP motor and pump = $1.54/hour
75 HP motor and pump = $1.95/hour
90 HP motor and pump = $2.31/hour
If we use the 2 pump option with the 90 HP pumps we have calculated
the average monthly energy charge bill will be $653.00. If the 3 pump
option is used with the 60 HP pumps, the average monthly energy
charge will be $545.00.
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 18
• 9.0 Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Design Report
City of Hopkins
A life cycle cost analysis of the proposed new 2 -pump or 3 -pump station
options has been prepared to assist in the evaluation process. The life
cycle cost (LCC) process is a way to analyzing the cost over its entire
lifespan, however, it does not guarantee a particular result but enables
the design team and the City to make a reasonable comparison between
alternate solutions using best available data. The LCC process is a
comparison of initial costs (construction costs), energy costs, operation
costs, maintenance and repair costs. Maintenance costs are based upon
predicted annual expenditures and recurring non - annual costs such as
pump seal replacement. The expected operating lifetime of the project
used for the LCC evaluation of the project life is 20 years. In the LCC
analysis all future anticipated costs are discounted to convert them into
equivalent present day values. The discounting process reflects the time
value of money. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)
guidelines discount rate is 5.6 %, which represents the long -term
expected value of money (interest rate) above and beyond the general
rate of inflation. This discount rate is based primarily on the expected
performance of long -term treasury bonds. By using the LCC investment
decision for this project, the City decision making can be made easier.
Generally, the project with the lowest life cycle cost is the preferred
alternative. Often a base case is required to evaluate the economic
merits of a project. For this project the base case would be:
A. A do nothing alternate which means no improvements and
operate the existing system, or
B. Improvement of the existing system with new pumps and piping.
We have selected improvement of the existing system as a base case.
The object of the LCC analysis is to choose the most cost - effective
approach from the alternatives so the least long -term cost of ownership
is achieved. The LCC analysis helps to identify equipment and alternate
selection based on total costs rather than initial purchase price. The usual
figure of merit is net present value (NPV). NPV is a financial tool for
evaluating economic value added. It is the present value of an
investment's net cash flows, minus the initial investment for a given
discount rate hurdle. The present values for each year of the project are
summed for the net present value. For an entire project, the life cycle
cost numbers requires a positive NPV. Bigger positive NPV's are better.
NPV numbers prioritize the projects to select the winner from the
alternatives, so you buy right rather than only buying cheap.
SEH has performed a life cycle cost analysis. A copy of the input, details
and comparative analysis outputs are included in the Appendix. Five
alternatives life cycle cost analysis was performed. The alternates are
listed below and ranked in ascending order with the lowest initial cost
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 19
•
Design Report
City of Hopkins
listed first. The lowest LCC as well as the initial cost for rehabilitation
of the existing station was used as a "Base Case."
Lowest LCC
Comparative Present -Value Costs of Alternatives
(Shown in Ascending Order of Initial Cost, *= Lowest LCC)
Life Cycle
Alternative Initial (PV) Co'll(PV) /-'
Rehabilitate Existing 75FiP'Pumps without backup $143,700 $380,735*
C -2 pumps (90 HP each) without backup — – 6�- 6 �48
x >7 $868,413
D -3 pumps (60 HP each) without backup $65 - $859,104
A -2 pumps (90 HP each) with backup $742,400 $965,074
B -3 pumps (60 HP each) with backup $749,100 $955,725
A- HOPKNO301.00
Page 20