A COMPILATION OF COST INFORMATION FOR

         CONVENTIONAL AND ADVANCED WASTEWATER

            TREATMENT PLANTS AND PROCESSES
                          by

                     Robert  Smith
          U.S. Department of the Interior
   Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Advanced Waste Treatment Branch, Division of Research
        Cincinnati Water Research Laboratory
                  Cincinnati, Ohio
                   December, 196?

-------
                                      UNITED  STATES
                             DEPARTMENT  OF THE INTERIOR
                    FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
                                    MEMORANDUM
IN REPLYING ADDRESS:

  OHIO BASIN REGION
  4676 COLUMBIA PARKWAY
  CINCINNATI, OHIO 45226
February 8, 1968
    TO:           FWPCA Regional Public Information Officers
                  U.S. Department of Hie Interior

    FROM:        Chief,  Office of Information
                  Ohio Basin Region, FWPCA
                  Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

    SUBJECT:      "A Compilation of Cost Information for Conventional and Advanced
                   Wastewater Treatment Plants and Processes," by Robert Smith
                   December 1967
        This memorandum transmits one copy of the subject report for your information
        Additional copies are available upon request*to this office.
                                   Gilbert M. Gigliotti
    ADDRESSEES:

        Kenneth Crotty,  Northeast Region
        Richard Hoffman, Great Lakes Region
        Edward Lee, South Centra! Region
        Everett Lemley, Middle AMantic Region
        Richdrd H .  Myers, Missouri Basin Region
        William R.  Shipp, Southeast-Region
      "•* Herbert Simison, Northwest Region

    cc  C . M. Rogers
        Erik Bromberg
        Regional Directors
        Laboratory Directors

-------
                                 FOREWORD








The cost associated with building and operating wastevater treatment plants




or individxial wastevater processes has always been difficult to estimate Tor




planning purposes.  This is particularly true if the cost of the process must




be related to the effectiveness of the process in removing water contaminants




such as BOD, nitrogen, or phosphorus.  Many cost studies are available from




the literature or from government sponsored research but the individual engi-




neer often has access to only a limited number of these studies.  Assumptions




made in these studies and the cost items included or omitted often vary with




the amount of effort invested in the study or the background and interests of




the person conducting the study.  A great deal of information is available,




however, and this report is an effort to bring together in one place most of




the useful information now available using a consistent set of assumptions and




omissions for the purpose of producing a working document useful to engineers




and scientists working in the field of wastevater treatment.

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
COST OF CONVENTIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS

     1. Primary Sedimentation Plants
     2. Activated Sludge Plants
     3. Trickling Filter Plants
COST OF ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES

     1. Solids Removal by Coagulation and Sedimentation
     2. Filtration Through Sand or Graded Media
     3. Ammonia Stripping
     h. Granular Carbon Adsorption
     5. Electrodialysis
     6. Microstraining of Secondary Effluent
     7. Aeration of Secondary Effluent
     8. Chlorination of Secondary Effluent
     9. Pipelines for Ultimate Disposal
CONSTRUCTION COST OF INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT, STRUCTURES,
  & CONSUMABLE ITEMS
REFERENCES
APPENDIX

-------
COST OF CONVENTIONAL WA3TEWATER TREATMENT PLAT-TS

     Total construction costs and operating and maintenance costs  were taken

from six principal sources.1"   Regression relationships from these six  sources

are shown in Figures 1, 2, 3, and H.  For the three types of conventional

plants, the total cost of treatment in cents per thousand gallons  is given in

Figures 5,6, and ~.  Field construction costs reported by Logan et al.  re-

present the total bonded cost for construction of the plant excluding ancillary

works such as interceptors, outfalls, or pumping stations.  Plant construction
                              O          3               ^4-
costs reported  in PHS No. 1229   and Velz3 and Diachishin  exclude ancillary

works and also  exclude preliminary expenses  such as engineering and legal  fees,
                                                              3                 2
land acquistion, interest during construction, etc.  Both Velz  and PH3 No. 1229

state that costs reported represent about 80$  of the total bonded cost for plant

construction.   Since the total bonded cost  for plant construction is required

in estimating  the total  cost  of  wastewater  treatment in cents per thousand

gallons the  construction cost data  given in references  2,  3, and  h  were multi-

plied by a  factor  of (1.25)  to make them equivalent to  the construction cost

data given by Logan et al.

      Logan1, Velz3, and  Diachishin  used the Engineering News Record  Construction

 Cost Index  to adjust all data collected to a specific  point of  time.  It  is

 generally conceded, however, that the ENR Construction Cost Index is  too  heavily

 weighted in favor of the cost of common labor.  Skilled labor which represents

 a significant part of the construction cost has not increased in cost at  as

 great a rate as common labor over the past 20-30 years.  The ENR  Building Cost
                                                         Y
 Index (Table A-l) or the PHS Sewage Treatment Cost Index  (Table A-II)  are

 believed to give a more realistic representation of the increase in construction
                                                                     7
 cost with time.  For this reason the PHS Sewage Treatment Cost  Index was used

 to adjust data from references  1, 2, 3, and k to June, 196? level.

-------
                                     - 2 -

     Total plant construction costs adjusted to June,  1967 taken from references
l-k are shown plotted in Figure 1.  The values given represent  national  aver-
ages.  The greater cost estimates are given by Logan  and Velz   and the  smaller
                                        2               k
cost estimates are given by PHS No. 1229  and Diachishin ;  the ratio of the
two is about (1.6) for the activated sludge plants.  For the primary  plants
the Logan  data is the greatest and Velz  data is the smallest;  the  ratio is
                            h                          2
about (1.7).  The Diachishin  data and the PHS No. 1229  data fall in between
these extremes.  Mean values for construction cost taken from Figure  1  are shown
plotted in Figures U and 5.
     Operating and maintenance data from three sources (references 1, 5, and 6)
are shown plotted in Figure 2.  The U.S. Department of Labor Average  Earnings
                                                                8 ,
for Nonsupervisory-Workers in Water, Steam, and Sanitary Systems  (Table A-IV)
was used to adjust all operating and maintenance costs to the June, 1967 level.
It can be seen from Figure 2 that the three sources agree well;  the  spread  is
only 10-20$.  Mean values from Figure 2 were used in preparing Figures  k and  5.
     Total construction cost for triakling filter plants taken from references
1, 2, 3, and k are shown plotted  in Figure 3.  An average of these data was
used In preparing Figure 7.  Operating and maintenance cost for trickling filters
from two sources are shown plotted in Figure k.  A mean  of this data was used
in preparing Figure 7.
     As shown  in Figure A-I from  Division of Pollution Surveillance,  FWPCA. the
cost of borrowing money to finance water treatment facilities has been increas-
ing over the last couple of years.  Since bonds are sold  on the open market,
the cost of borrowing money varies with the type of bonds sold and with the
financial rating  of the municipalitv  issuing the bonds.   k 1/2$ interest, be-
lieved to be an average conservative value,was used in computing the amoritiza-
tion cost of all  construction.  The correct amoritization period to use is also

-------
         CONSTRUCTION COST-DOLLARS PER MGD
                        for
PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANTS AND ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANTS
                    adjusted to
                    JUNE, 1967
                                 Activated Sludge Treatment
              gPrimary Treatment
                                                 J.A. Logan
                                      	 PHS Publication No. 1229   (2)
                                      	C.J. Velz                  (3)
                                      I	A.N. Diachishin
             1                       10

        Plant Size,  millions of gallons per day
100
1000

-------

                                  OPERATING AriD MAINTENANCE COST-DOLLARS/YEAR PER MGD
                                                           for
                                  PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANTS AND ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT
                                                       adjusted to
                                                       JUNE, 1967
                                                                                  Sludrae Treatments
                                                        Primarv Treatment
                                                                                             m
                                                                                     J.A. Logan et al.
                                                                                	P.P. Rowan et al.
                                                                          —	— C.L. Swanson
.01
                                                                                              100
                                                                                                                      1000
                                        Plant Size, millions of gallons per day

-------
•
                                                             :         '• •' •'. ••'••'• ! s M
                                                             iWi. 4:11 .1: J^N ! B
                                          ^ CONSTRUCTION COST-DOLLARS PER MGD -
                                                          for
                                                TRICKLING FILTER PLANTS
                                                      adjusted to
                                                      JUNE, 196T

                                                                                         J.A.  Logan
                                                                       	   PHS Publication No. 1229 (2)
                                                                                         C.J. Velz                (3)
                                                                                         A.N. Diachishin          (k)
                                                  1                       10

                                         Plant  Size,  millions of gallons per day
100
                                                                                                                         1000

-------
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST-DOLLARS/YEAR PER MGD
                        for
              TRICKLING FILTER PLANTS
                    adjusted to
                    JUNE. 1967
                                                  aTiiSi i                [
                                                              J.A. Logan et al.
                                                    	P.P,, Rowan et al.
               1                      10

        Plant Size, millions of gallons per  day
100
1000

-------
                                   PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANTS
                  Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                             vs.
                                        Design Capacity
100
                                                                      4   567891
                                                                                        10.
              Cost Adjusted to June, 1967
                                  5   67891

                                             10.0
                         Design Capacity,  millions of gallons  per  day

                     C = Capital Cost, millions  of dollars
                     A = Debt  Service, cents per  1000 gallons(U 1/2$ - 25 yr.)
                 0 8s M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons
                     T = Total Treatment  Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

-------
                         ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANTS

        Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                   vs.
                              Design Capacity
  c
  H
  b

  jj
  2
  ,--
  n
  -
  i
  c
  e
  t
  c

 1
 £

50.0
10.0
 1.0
             Cost Adjusted to June. 196?
                                                                     100.
                                                                     10.0
                                                                ---  i.o
                                                                            -

                                                                            .

                                                       4   5  678910
                                                                     0.1
      1.0                           10.0

              Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
                                                                 100.
          C = Capital Cost, millions of dollars
          A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallonsfU 1/2% - 25 yr.)
      0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons
          T = Total Treatment Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

-------
                         TRICKLING FILTER PLANTS
        Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                   vs.
                             Design Capacity
                                                                   10.0
                                                                   1.0
1.0
                                                  3    4  5678910
                                                                         r-
                                                                         ^

                                                                         -


                                                                         •_
    1.0
                   10.0                          100.
Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
           C =  Capital  Cost,  millions  of dollars
           A =  Debt  Service,  cents  per 1000  gallons (1*  1/2$ -  25 yr.)
       0 & M =  Operating  and  Maintenance Cost,  cents per  1000 gallons
           T =  Total Treatment  Cost, cents per  1000 gallons

-------
                                    - 3 -





subject to various interpretations.  For example, the amoritization period can



be taken as the maturation period for the bonds.  The amoritization period might



also be taken as the maturation period for the plant or structure.  This pre-



sents difficulties, however, because the useful life of equipment and structures



varies sharply with the nature of the depreciating item.  For example, a con-



crete tank might have a useful life of hO years while equipment which moves or



fouls such as sludge scrapers or aeration equipment might have a useful life



of less than 20 years.  To avoid this complexity, the amoritization period was



taken as the maturation period of the bonds which was found to average about 25



years from data collected by the Division of Pollution Surveillance, FWPCA.





COAGULATION AND SEDIMENTATION



     Cost estimates for r-oagulation and sedimentation after lime addition (Figure



8) were based primarily on references 10 and 11.  Chemicals required were taken



as 300 mg/1 of hydrated lime and 50 mg/1 of ferrous sulfate.  The installed cost



of Infilco Densators and associated chemical feeders are shown in Figure A-IV.



Recovery of the settled lime by recalcination was assumed so that no lime dis-



posal charges were incurred.  The cost of purchasing lime in the Washington, B.C.



area was found to be 3l8.50 per ton.  Amoritization was based on retiring the



loan in 25 years at h 1/2% interest.  If the settled sludge is to be disposed of



by pipeline this cost can be estimated from Figure 17, and added to the values



given in Figure 8.





FILTRATION THROUGH SAND OR GRADED MEDIA



     The capital cost of  sand filters operated  at k gpm/sq. ft. (which is about



twice the normal rate of  2 gpm/sq,,  ft. used in  water purification plants) were


                           12        13                   1^
taken from Orlob & Lindorf,   Koenig,   and Rehm & Plautz.    Operating and

-------
             SOLIDS REMOVAL BY COAGULATION & SEDIMENTATION
       Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost,  Debt Service
                                  vs.
                             Design Capacity
                                                                   1.0
            Cost Adjusted to June, 1967
                                                                   0.1
                                                                        c
                                                                         -
                                                                         i
.10
                                                  3   4   5678910
   0.01
      1.0                          10.0
             Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
100.
            C = Capital Cost,  millions of dollars
            A = Debt Service,  cents per 1000 gallons(4 1/2 - 25  yr.)
        0 & M = Operating and  Maintenance Cost,  cents per 1000 gallons
            T = Total Treatment Cost,  cents per  1000 gallons

-------
            FILTRATION THROUGH SAND OR GRADED MEDIA - UGFM/SQ FT


          Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                      vs.

                                 Design Capacity
  10.
=
c
•:•
-


li.o
•

-
-


I
 o.i
           Cost Adjusted to June,  196?
                                                      1.0
                                                                       0.1

                                                           c
                                                           -







                                                           -
                                                           r-
                                                           -
                                                           -
                                                           -
                                                          -
                                                          •H
                                                          P
                                                     3    4   5678910
                                                      .01
         1.0
                     10.0

Design Capacioj., millions of gallons per day
                                                                    100.
              C = Capital Cost, millions of dollars

              A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallons^ 1/2% - 25 yr.)

          0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

              T = Total Treatment Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

-------
                                    - k -





maintenance cost was taken from the same three sources by subtracting  the  cost



of chemicals.  Amoritization charges vere computed on the basis of retiring



the bonds in 25 years at U 1/2% interest.





AMMONIA STRIPPING



     The capital cost of cooling towers for ammonia stripping was taken from



Bauraan   and the cost of power and operating and maintenance labor was taken



from Smith and Chapman.    Amoritization charges were based on 25 years and



h 1/2$ interest.  It should be noted that the removal of ammonia by this pro-



cess is strongly dependent on ambient temperature ranging from greater than



95$ removal  in the  summer to a lower limit of 50-60$ removal when the tempera-



ture is below zero  degrees Centigrade.





GRANULAR CARBON ADSORPTION PROCESS



     All cost data  for the granular carbon adsorption process were taken from



reference  no. IT.   The loss of carbon  as a result of regeneration was taken as



7 1/2$.  Amoritization charges were based on 25 years at U 1/2$ interest.





ELECTRODIALYSIS


                                                                                18
     Cost  data for  electrodialysis was taken from Ionics Inc. Publication No. V2


                                               19
and  a paper  recently published by C.A. Brunner.    Amoritization charges were



based on 25  years and  h  1/2$  interest  and no cost for brine disposal was in-



cluded.  The cost of brine  disposal will depend on the location of the plant



and  the disposal means  available.   Cost estimates for  disposal by pipelines



are  shown  in Figure 17.   Normally the  brine stream is  about 10$ of the in-



fluent  stream.

-------
                        AMMONIA STRIPPING PROCESS

        Capital Cost,  Operating & Maintenance Cost,  Debt  Service
                                   vs.
                             Design Capacity
        LLJ I I !
        Cost Adjusted to June
                                                                    1.0
                                                                    0.1
                                                                          -
                                                                          :
                                                                          -
                                                                          -
                                                                          :
                                                                          ^
                                                                          -

o.i
                                                      4   5  6  7  8 9 10
                                                                    0.01
                                  10.0                          100.

              Design Capacity, millions  of gallons per day
            C  =  Capital Cost,  millions of dollars
            A  =  Debt  Service,  cents per 1000 gallons(U 1/2$ - 25 yr.)
       0  & M  =  Operating and  Maintenance Cost,  cents  per  1000 gallons
            T  =  Total Treatment Cost,  cents  per  1000 gallons

-------
                              GRANULAR CARBON ADSORPTION PROCESS
                  Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                             vs.
                                        Design Capacity
100.
                                                                          5   67891
 10.
  c
  V
  H
  "
  I
  C
                        1.0
  1
 1-0
               Cost Adjusted to June. 1967
iFigure 11
   .._ .._.
—	I—h-
0.1
                                      67891

                                             10.0

                        Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day

               C = Capital Cost, millions  of dollars
               A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallons(4 1/2$  - 25 yr.)
           0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost,  cents per 1000 gallons
               T = Total Treatment  Cost, cents per  1000 gallons

-------
                               ELECTRODIALYSIS


         Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service

                                    vs.

                               Design Capacity
100

  10
I
-


g
..
—

H

7
-
-
c
c
        IM-L Cost Adjusted to June, 1967  -
                                                                        -

                                                    3    4  5  6789 1C
       1.0
10.0
100.
               Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
         C = Capital Cost, millions of dollars

         A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallons^ 1/2$ - 25 yr.)

     0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

         T = Total Treatment Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

-------
                                    - 5 -




MICROSTRAINING OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT


                                                                         20
     The cost of raicrostraining was taken from an estimate made by Bodien



for a 10 ragd plant receiving secondary effluent similar to that found at  the



Lebanon, Ohio Sewage Treatment Plant (27 mg/1 suspended solids).  A filter-



ability index of 17 and a Mark I screen was used as the design basis.  The



slope of the capital line was arbitrarily taken as 9/10.  The microstrainer,



which operates with a head which varies from zero to six inches of water  is



easily overloaded as a result of high suspended solids in the influent stream.



The quality of the effluent from the microstrainer also varies with the con-



centration of suspended solid of the feed and the nature of the solids.  Ade-



quate design procedures for sizing Microstrainers for use on secondary effluent



are needed.





AERATION OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT


                                        21
     Cost estimates by Roesler and Smith   are based on building an aeration



tank downstream of an activated sludge plant.  The tank was assumed to be con-



crete with typical aeration equipment.  Additional blowers were provided to



supply the air needed.  Electrical power was assumed to cost one cent per kilo-



watt hour.  The costs shown in Figures lU and 15 are for water at 20 C.  If



the temperature is increased to 30°C the cost estimates shown in Figures 1^



and 15  should be multiplied by a factor of about two.





CHLORINATION OF SECONDARY  EFFLUENT



     The design basis of 15 minutes contact time and 8 mg/1 of chlorine re-


                                    22
cotanended by the Ten State Standards   was used in making this cost  estimate.



The cost of chlorine was taken  as  n.O  cents per pound.

-------
                      MICROSTRAINTNG OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT
           Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                      vs.
                                Design Capacity
 10.0
.•
-
-
BE
-
1
O
 .1.0
 :
-
:
:
fi
0.10
          Cost Adjusted  to June,  196?
                                                     Figure 13
                                                     ttttl
                                                                      1.0

    0.10-S
                                                                           -
                                                                           .
                                                                           -
    0.01
                                                        4   5  6 7 8  9 10
                                    10.0

                 Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
100.
              C = Capital Cost, millions  of  dollars
              A = Debt Service, cents  per 1000 gallons(k  1/2%  - 25 yr.)
          0 & M = Operating  and Maintenance  Cost,  cents per  1000 gallons
              T = Total Treatment  Cost, cents per  1000 gallons

-------
     AERATION OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT TO RAISE D.O. FROM 1.0 mg/1 to U.O mg/1


            Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service

                                        vs.

                                  Design Capacity
.

E
r
--
I
    1.0
-.-
0)
   0.10
-•
-.-
:
.
   0.01
            Cost Adjusted  to June.  196?
                                                                       •-1.0
                                                     0.10
                                                          4  5 6  7 8 9 1C
                                                     0.01
          1.0
                   10.0                           100.


Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day

                                                                               :
                                                                               •

                C = Capital  Cost,  millions  of  dollars

                A = Debt  Service,  cents per 1000 gallons(U 1/2%  - 25 yr.)

            0 & M = Operating  and  Maintenance  Cost,  cents per 1000 gallons

                T = Total Treatment  Cost, cents per  1000 gallons

-------
     AERATION OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT TO RAISE D.O. FROM 1.0 tng/1 to 6.0 mg/1

           Capital Cost, Operating & Maintenance Cost, Debt Service
                                       vs.
                                 Design  Capacity
   1.0
DC

C
EC
t
DO

fi
I
'

 '

^
C
C
-•
I
&
            Cost Adjusted to June, 196?
                                                                    =t:  1-0
                                                                        0.10
                                                                               -
                                                                               -:
                                                                              i-
                                                                              -:
                                                                              •-

                                                                               :

                                                                               ;
                                                                               !
                                                                               :
                                                                               K
                                                                               •^
                                                                               -
                                                                               P
                                                                               -
                                                                         0.01
                                       10.0
                                                                     100.
                   Design Capacity,  millions of gallons per day
                 C = Capital Cost, millions of dollars
                 A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallons(U 1/2$ - 25 yr.)
             0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons
                 T = Total Treatment Cost, cents p«r 1000 gallons

-------
                       CHLORINATION OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT


            Capital Cost,  Operating & Maintenance Cost,  Debt  Service

                                       vs.

                                 Design Capacity
  10.0
  1.0
                                                 rr:^^^^^:  0.10

 -

 -

-
i
£0.1
 0.01
            Cost Adjusted to June,  1967 	
                                                                       1.0
                                                                       0.01
                                         ..
                                         I
                                         EC
                                                                              :
                                                                              c

                                                                              -
                                                                              :

                                                                              ..

                                                                              -
                                        ~
                                                                              -
                                                                              -
                                                                              :
                                                                              •
                                                                              -
                                          •
                                         ;-
                                         I
                                                                7 8 9 10  0.001
        1.0
10.0
                                                                   100.
                 Design Capacity, millions of gallons per day
              C = Capital Cost, millions of dollars

              A = Debt Service, cents per 1000 gallons(^ 1/2$ - 25 yr.)

          0 & M = Operating and Maintenance Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

              T = Total Treatment Cost, cents per 1000 gallons

-------
                                    - 6 -





PIPELINES FOR ULTIMATE DISPOSAL



     The cost of building and operating pipelines as shown in Figure IT was



computed from relationships given in the Office of Saline Water R&D Report


        2^
No. 257.    The capital cost includes the construction cost of the pipe and



the capital cost of pumping stations.  It was assumed that one pumping; station



would be installed for each UOO ft. of dynamic head.  Only frictional drop



was considered and this was taken as eight  feet of water per mile for pipe



sizes greater than 1.0 mgd and 20 feet of water per mile for the 0.1 mgd size.



Operating and maintenance cost vas taken as 0.25$ per year of the total capital



cost.   In most cases, however, the major part of  the total cost was amoritiza-



tion charges which were computed on a 30 yr. -3  lA$ interest basis.  The cost



of electrical power was assumed to be one cent per kilowatt hour.





CAPITAL COST OF IHEIVTDUAL EQUIPMENT, STRUCTURES, AND CONSUMABLE ITEMS



     Most of the cost estimates for  individual components of  conventional waste-



water treatment plants  now available were  developed by  George S. Russell  work-



ing  in  collaboration with Lynn, Hatfield,  and Logan  at  Northwestern University



under a research grant  from the Public  Health Service.   The  original  cost  esti-



mates were  obtained  from Dr. W.R.  Lynn,  now at  Cornell  University,  and  plotted



versus  the  most  significant  design parameter.  For  example,  the cost  of settling



tanks was plotted  versus overflow area  and the cost  of  aerators was plotted versus



the  volume  of the  aerator.   These plots are shown in Figures 18-28.



      From the work of Russell the capital cost of heating equipment for the



 digester was found to "be represented by the following relationship:



         Capital Cost, dollars = $5000+ $i*0(Digester Volume,  cu. ft./3.000)



 The cost of constructing sludge drying beds was found to be $2.23 per sq. ft.



 The cost of improvements in the plant site  can be represented by the following



 equation:

-------
                   COST OF PIPELINES FOR ULTIMATE DISPOSAL



              Capital Cost & Total Cost versus Design Capacity
 1000
   100
DO

E
:
CM

a   10

«
a
•
                                Amoritization at 30 yr.  - 3

                          •Capital Cost, millions of dollars

                          'Total Cost,  cents/1000 gallons pumped


                                                            tfl
                                                         Figure 17
                                                                1
                                            100
                                                                             B


                                                                             fc
                                                                             :
                                                                             -•


                                                                             -
                                                1

                                                 :

                                                i



                                                 :
                                                -



                                            10  3
                            4  5  f
                                                            5  67891
                                                                        1.0
         0.1
           1.0


Pipeline Capacity, mgd
                                                                    10.

-------
                                       Figure if
9_
8_
7_
6.
5_
3_
2.5_
2_

g

7

6
b
4


1.5
1
! L
w
to
H
,— 	
O
R :






--

.:::
77"


8





























. .


.-

-
B -







-: -: ;
: ;



1 . ! 1




;
\S
A ,

V _i




I
1
—. 	 : 	 ' '

- 	 	



,





	



: ;
"


: :







-S
S
\^
"^




:.-'-- :-'
-




~





•




^P
'

















xH
f>







i 1

" ~






;^x

: : :
.:,


g
i * •
. .


::-

-:\

~






X


.







••-

•
~^~





X







:::


-—
•
--•



























x'








::.: j




COST OF PRELIMINARY TREATMENT
INCLUDING
1. Screen Chamber
2. Grit Chamber
3. Overflow and Bypass
Chamber
k. Par shall Flume
versus
PLANT SIZE, mgd
EE5;;:EEE£=: 	 | .

1.5
2 2,5 3

1
.
4

b


" . •



X'













:


--
6


=

X
H

:::




-:






- fft


— ~
^


;;
x



•
-;


::1
Z7~
--

— ' —

- -








.-.;

~
8


n











|


— i

~£





g
.--


rr
.; .
S 1
Plant Size, mgd
                            R.  Smith   July

-------
                                                Figure 193
   COST OF PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION TANKS
                 versus
             SURFACE AREA
      Estimates by Russell  & Axon
      January I960 ENR Index = 812
    (Dollars/sq.  ft.)  = $13-^ + $5-2 (lOOO/sq. ft.)
     r i ! i • r r i T T r T I T I 7T 1 1 ', T"l T r ' ' I-T-   ——-f	: >.', J-FZ-TI I 1 1 I 1  i i 4 -I fc ' • - 14	J_—
Stirface Area. Thousands  of  sq.  ft.
                                         R.  Smith   July 1965 f

-------
         COST OF AERATORS AND HIE GALLERY
          Estimates by Russell & Axon
         January 1960  ENR Index = 812
                                =
                                                    WFigure 20
CAPACITY,

-------
                                                   Figure 21 tp
          COST OF FINAL SETTLING TANKS
                   including
           FLEES, VALVES AND FITTINGS
               SLUDGE WASTE RMP
                SLUDGE COLLECTOR
          Estimates by Russell & Axon
         January 1960 ENR Index = 812
                        =  $12.60 + $5-35 ( 1000/sq. ft.)
Surface Area. Thousands of Sq. Ft.
I   I    ..-. ,-. .,,<..:•••.- I •••—•! I :	-I'*. r ' ' I I ' '
                                           R. Smith   July 1965 1

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST FOR BLOWER INSTALLATION
                 versus
              BLOWER CAPACITY

Including  1.  Blowers
           2.  Air Headers & Piping
           3-  Blower House
                                                                    Figure 22
                   , cfm/1000
Blower Capacity
R. Smith   July 1Q65 ;

-------
                                                                       ^Figure 23==
                                 OOST OP ACTIVATED SLUIXS

                                       RETURN PUMPS

                               Estimates by Russell & Axon

                                Jan I960 ENR  Index = 812



 CO


\\A
 H
 w
                                                          -•_.
 CO
 w

 §

*P



      -»-i_L_j.
                                                                       ;:
                                 Plant Size, mgd
                                                                  R. Smith   July 1565  I

-------
     COST OF DI(ESTERS
           versus
      DlffiSTER VOLUME
Estimates by Russell & Axon
January 1960 ENR Index = 812
                             $1.04 + $10.70(1000/cu.ft.)
                              ($/cu.ft.)
   Thousands of Cubic Feet
Digester Volume,
R. Smith   July 1965

-------

-------
                                                                                Figure 26
2,5.

                                          COST OF CHLORINE CONTACT TANK AW CHLORINATOR
                                                              versus
                                                            PLANT SIZE
                                                      (15 min. contact time)
                                                      Estimates by Russell  &  Axon
                                                      January I960 ENR Index  = 8l2
          1.5    ~2~~  2.5   3     4    5   6  7  8 9 10

                                                1.0
1.5    2   2.5  3     4
                                     10
                                         Plant Size,  mgd
                                                                     R. Smith    July

-------
                                    Figure 27

J- =:==S::= ::::[; iliiiiiiiiiii i::: : :
6. i^Siiii=li=:li;;;;i!i;;;ii«:li ;
1
3- K - - . . ' — : ••:::::-
f_,
2.5_ H — - -
r~f ~
o :
p
o .
to _::::.-:••;:: :::—]::: ::
JH -- - 	 — --
10- -102_^ £
£ M EEEgg:|::::|:=^^.
7" o 	 ' 	 *" — ~~
6. £ '- _--—
§ -yy^:::::-;:^--" ~;".;
^H : - "b •:.-•-!-.: 	 | 	
4. 43 : 	 > 	 -••• " 	 	
O 	 	 :— ; 	 	 	 	
2.5. S
E 	 — r-. 	 ^-.-i-^-ir-- —
j-j-t+hi^ - iii i jl i
— _
"Ullli BU^
	 .Ill — 1 — C
1 rrm^' M:,J- 	 ;• -
1 1.5 2.5
1
JUl!l||lii||!l;!|IIHttt|l|l||||l;|i|I^UJ
COST OF CONTRC
:;;;^ INCLUDING
1. Excavatioi
2. Building (i
3. Laboratory
h. Shop
versus
PLANT SIZE
§'-- • 	 ftT ^^t 	
1-H-tttt^t! =f~ 4i-:4:— J-- : -~ j-r- r; j - - -jrr .-- LL:
! ijj.j! ir1- r^rrr: ~ ~ ?rrr: rrrr — rr rrr n—
	 ..._ 	 j
Hff rt: :::T:~ ::Tr:;;| — :-'~": :-:- :::1-^'
LPiifflHi^M
II 1 1 g i B J ( 1 1
MHw4 1 hJ — I r"r
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
l.(
^m
nfiMtwmrW
)L HOUSE
i @ $3/cu.yd.
§ $1.50/cu.ft.
r
~v;.r— EZ
	 _l- -
::E±::::
_L
- -~ -..:. v
ip::
1.

".ID 	
-0^
nn

:.: g

d . .
2
H .
L...::
	
§§t

:::::: ::

	
	 -T—
.5

- ••-! - T
— —- - RTT "H — r
: |g E
•
'• ' ' — •
1 : i ; — - - —
3 4

III [1
1 : ' ' 1 1 I '
jj. n^.—^. - : ; _
	 , 	 M-i— — i L—
B SSn:} ffi

.. 1 1 , ..
-KT

5 6

g
^
:-• : -.
., — ^
	
..



J


8










.0
Plant Size, ragd
                             R. Smith   July

-------
m
                                                         Fig
ure


             LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR JRIMARY AND
             IRIMARY WITH ACTIVATED SLUDCE PLANTS
                           versus
                         PLANT SIZE
             Estimates by Russell  & Axon
                                                   R. Smith   July 1965 .

-------
                                    - 7 -
        Capital Cost, dollars = $U*00(mgd)°* 75
Construction cost for sludge thickeners and elutriation tanks were taken from

the personal file of Mr. C. Swanson of FWPCA.  These are shown below where ATHM

is the surface area of the thickener in sq. ft. and AE is the surface area of the

sludge elutriation tanks in sq. ft.



       UKIT PROCESS                      CAPITAL COST, dollars

Sludge Thickeners                  (l8.8 + 9.1/exp(ATHM/13,300))ATHM

Sludge Elutriation                 (l8.8 + 52.0/exp(AE/6000))AE
   Tanks



All cost estimates supplied by Russell and Swanson are keyed to prices in St.

Louis, Mo. in January, 1960.  This corresponds to a value of 105.23 for the PHS

Sewage Treatment Construction Cost Index.  Since the PHS index was 119.11 for

June, 1967 these cost estimates should be multiplied by 1.13 to adjust them to

the national average level for June, 1967.  The cost of influent pumps was ob-

tained from a manufacturer and applies to May, 19^5 •


     In using these data to synthesize the total cost of complete plants it was

found that the  following additional costs expressed as a percentage of the total

construction cost were necessary to make the synthesized cost for the complete

plant agree with reported values from operating plants.


                1. Contractor's Profit	10$
                2. Contingencies and Omissions	15$
                3. Land Acquisition                          2$
                k. Engineering	6-12$


Representative  engineering costs as a  function of the total construction cost is

 shown  in Tables A-VI and A-VH and Figures A-II and A-III.

-------














                                                   1





                               w


































                                                             I

                                                                -^


                        COST OP IBFLUENT PUMPS
                                versus
                          FLOW CAPACITY (mgd)


-






                                            '

11






                          /

                                                                                                               B


                                                                                             Figure 29







                                                           20 feet  nominal Head
                                                           Price Includes Pump, Motor, Baseplate and Coupling
                                                                         •4
                                                                            s
                                                                       ...   !













                                         Pump Capacity, mg

                                                   ill













-------
     It was also found that if the equipment and structures are sized  on the

reported average performance of the processes;  extra capacity must  be pro-

vided for cleaning and maintenance.  Extra capacity can be provided  by multi-

plying the computed average size required by an Excess Capacity Factor.  The

values used for Excess Capacity Factors will depend on the specific  design

problem, but average representative values are given in the following  list:
          UNIT PROCESS
     Preliminary Treatment
     Primary Settling
     Aerator
     Air Blowers
     Final Settler
     Sludge Return Pumps
     Control House
     Thickener
     Digesters
     Sludge Elutriation
     Vacuum Filter
     Incinerator
     Sludge Drying Beds
     Chlorination
     Plant Site Preparation
EXCESS CAPACITY FACTOR
         1.0
         2.0
         1.2
         1.5
         2.0
         2.0
         1.0
         1.5
         2.0
         1.5
         1.0
         1.0
         1.0
         1.0
         1.0
     The cost of hauling by truck in Cincinnati was found to vary from l£ cents

per ton-mile for a two mile one-way trip to 3«5 cents per ton-mile for a U5 mile

one-way trip.  The cost of barging sludge to sea was found to be $3«50 per ton for

a 225 one-way trip from the Washington, B.C. area or about 1.6 cents per ton-mile.

     The following table supplied by Koenig ^ shows the average price paid for

chemicals  in water plants:

-------
-  9  -
Distribution of Unit Prices
Superv. labor, large, dollar s/hr
Superv. labor, small, dollar s/hr
Op & Maint labor, large, d.ollars/hr
Op & Maint labor, small, dollar s/hr
General labor, dollar s/hr
Elec. energy, large, cents/KWH
Elec. energy, small, eents/KWH
Oil, cents/gas/gal
Alum, large, cents/lb
Alum, small, cents/lb
Alkali, large, cents/lb, h.l. equiv.
Alkali, small, cents/lb, h.l. equiv.
Chlorine, large, cents/lb
Chlorine, small, cents/lb
Carbon, cents/lb
No. of
Points
14
6
14
13
9
14
11
5
13
11
11
10
14
12
10
Dist'n
Type
log
log
log
log
log
la-
log
log
log
log
arith
arith
log
log
arith
Value of
Factor at
10$
1.73
1.35
1.65
1.31
1.04
.65
• 98
9.8
2.37
3-31
.68
.35
4.15
9.10
8.50
50<£
3-35
2.12
2.40
1.75
1.58
• 92
1.48
12.
2.65
3.89
1.14
2.40
5.20
12.50
11.80
90#
6.51
3.35
3.50
2.30
2.40
1.30
2.22
18.2
3.00
4.50
1.60
4.10
9.10
17.50
15.20
or
ratio
1.67
1.42
1.34
1.23
1.39
1.32
1.36
1.40
1.09
1.13
1.32
1-53
1.62
1.30
i
1.29

-------
                                 REFERENCES
 1.   Logan,  J.A.,  Hatfield,  W.D., Russell,  G.S.,  and  Lynn, W.R.,  "An Analysis
     of the  Economics of Wastewater  Treatment," Journal Water Pollution
     Control Federation, Vol.  314-, pp.  860-<°82 (1962).

 2.   "MODERN SEWAGE TREATMENT  PLANTS - How  Much Do They Cost?," Public Health
     Service Publication No. 1229, U.S. Govt. Printing  Office  (196M .

 3-   Velz,  C.J.,  "How Much Should Sewage Treatment Cost?," Eng . News Record,
     lUi,  16, p.  316 (Oct. 191*8).

 h.   Diachishin,  A.N., "Hew Guide to Sewage Plant Costs," En.g. News Record,
     159,  15, P-  316 (Oct. 1957)

 5.   Rowan,  P.P., Jenkins, K.L.,  and Ilovells, D.H., "Estimating Sewage Treat-
     ment  Plant Operation and  Maintenance Costs," Journal Water Pollution
     Control Federation. Vol.  33, No.  2, pp. 111-121  (Feb. 1961).

 6.   Swanson, C.L., "Unit Process Operating and Maintenance  Costs for Con-
     ventional Sewage Treatment Processes," Internal  FWPCA Memorandum (Aug.
     1,
 ^ .   "Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index," Public Health Service
     Publication Ho. IQoQ (1963) .

 8.   "Employment and Earnings and  Monthly Report on the Labor Force," U.S.
     Department of Labor, Bureau of LaLor Statistics,  Vol. 13, No.  9 (March
     1967) .

 9-   "Fundamentals of Municipal Bonds," Investment Bankers Association of
     America, French-Bray Printing Co. (May
10.  Smith, R., "Capital and Operating Cost Estimates for Phosphate Removal
     at the Washington, D.C. Blue Plains Sewage Treatment Plant," FWPCA Memo
     to Record (Aug. 1966).

11.  Smith, R., "Status of Cost Information on Phosphate Removal," FWPCA Memo
     to Record (July 1, 19*37).

12.  Orlob, Gerald T. and Lindorf, Marvin R., "Cost of Water Treatment in
     California," Journal AWWA (Jan. 195'°') •

13-  Louis Koenig Reseat:") (San Antonio, Texas), "The Cost of Water Treatment
     by Coagulation. Sedimentation and Rapid Sand Filtration," U.S. Public
     Health Service, Contract No. p6-b5-120 (Jan. 1966).

lU.  Rehm, Leo F. and Plautz, William H., "Various Costs of Clarification,
     Filtration, and Lime Softening,: Proceedings of the Eighth Sanitary Eng-
     inee-ing Conference, conducted by the Illinois State Department of Public
     Health and the University of xllinois. pp. 109-121.

-------
15-  Bauman, H. Carl, "Fundamentals of Cost Engineering in the Chemical In-
     dustry,'' Reinhold Publishing Corp, New York (196U) .

16.  Smith, C.E., and Chapman, R.L., "Recovery of Coagulant, Nitragen Removal,
     and Carbon Regeneration in Waste Water Reclamation," Final Report of Pro-
     .iect Operations, Dept. of Interior FWPCA Grant WPD-85.

17-  Allen, J.B., Claphaa, T.M., Joyce, R.S., and Sukenik, V.A., "Use of Gran-
     ular Regenerable Carbon for Treatment of Secondary Sewage." Report to Public
     Health Service, Dept. HEW Contract PH ; 6-63-2^3 by Pittsburgh Activated
     Carbon Co. (October 1,
18.  "Large-Scale Electrodialysis Data with Applications Examples in Southern
     California," Ionics Inc. Publication Wo. 72 (April 1, 1965).

19.  Brunner, C.A., "Pilot-Plant Experience in Demineralizati on of Secondary
     Effluent Using JILectrodialysis," Journal Water Pollution Control Federation
     Research Supplement, Vol. 39, No. 10. Part 2.
20.  Bodien, D.G. »M Stenburg, R.L., "Microstraining Effectively Polishes Acti-
     vated Sludge Effluent," Water and Wastes Engineering, Vol. 3, No.  9 (Sept.
     1966) .

21.  Roesler, J.F., and Smith, P., "Cost of Aeration of Secondary Effluent,"
     FWPCA Memo to Record (Sept. 11,
22.  "Recommended Standards for Sewage Works," Adopted by Great Lakes-Upper
     Mississippi River Board of State Sanitary Engineers (May 10, 1060) .

23.  "Manual of Procedures and Methods for Calculating Comparative Costs  of
     Municipal Water Supply from Saline and Conventional Water Sources in
     Texas," Office of Saline Water, R. & D. Report No. 257.

-------
APPENDIX

-------
                                    Table A-I





                   ENGINEERING NEWS-RECORD BUILDING COST INDEX
U.S. Average
(Base : Year
Year
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
I960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
Jan.
356
393
406
425
436
458
480
502
517
536
55^
563
571
584
604
616
635
660
Feb.
356
398
406
425
437
459
483
502
516
537
555
563
573
585
604
621
641
661
Mar.
360
399
407
425
437
460
483
501
516
540
555
563
575
586
606
622
643
663
Apr.
363
400
408
426
437
46l
486
501
517
543
556
565
576
586
607
621
649

May
364
401
410
426
438
462
487
503
519
544
560
569
579
588
609
621
652

June
373
401
412
426
440
464
489
504
521
548
561
570
580
590
612
626
656
675
1950 to 1967
1913 = 100)
July
378
400
4l4
435
444
468
489
50V
524
552
563
572
583
596
615
628
657

Aug.
383
400
422
437
456
478
491
517
526
554
562
571
586
602
616
630
659


Sept .
393
400
424
436
454
479
500
516
535
556
563
571
586
602
617
633
660
686

Oct.
397
403
425
436
455
480
500
517
537
555
561
571
585
604
617
634
659


Nov.
390
404
426
436
456
479
500
517
535
554
561
571
584
602
616
633
659


Dec.
391
406
425
435
457
479
500
516
535
553
562
570
584
603
617
634
658


Annual
Average
375
401
416
431
446
469
491
509
525
548
559
568
580
594
612
627


Source: Engineering News-Record

-------
                    Table A-IT

  SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX*
                        for
                     1958-1967
Time                              National Average

August 1958                           101.50

August 1959                           103.65

August I960                           104.96

August 1961                           105.83

August 1962                           106.99

August 1963                           108.52

August 1964                           110.5U

August 1965                           112.57

August 1966                           116.92

June   196?                           119•11

* Public Health Service Publication No.  1069

-------
                                               Tatle A-IH

                          THE HANDY-WHITMAN INDEX FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANTS

                                        North Central Division
                                             1950 to 1967
                                        (Base:  Year 1936 - 100)




Large Treatment Plant
Small Treatment Plant



Large Treatment Plant
Small Treatment Plant
1950

» &
? I

199 210
203 213

1961
» g
? t
H H
313 315
313 315
1951

09 d
? t

221 225
226 229

1962
» g
? 1
H H
317 324
316 322
1952

s §

227 235
230 235

1963
» &
? t
H H
324 330
322 327
1953

0 0
P £

236 2i*6
237 246

1964
» g
? t
H H
332 3^0
329 336
195^

0 d
P t

246 251
2U7 251

1965
» g
P t
H H
341 350
338 346
1955

0 d
P t

253 258
252 257

1966
» g
? f
H H
353 368
350 362
1956

0 p
P t

267 275
268 276

1967
» g
? 1
H H
367 380
36l 374
1957
f. c_i
0 P
P t

280 288
283 289




1958
SH ^H
0 d
? f

289 296
290 296




1959
C-l GJ
» ?
P t
H H

300 311
300 309




I960
C-| C_i
0 ?
P t
H *— '

310 317
311 317




Source:  Handy-Whitman Index of Water Utility Construction  Costs

-------
                                            Table A-IV

                   NONSUPERVISORY-WORKER AVERAGE HOURLY  EARNINGS -  IN DOLLARS*

                    Water,  Steam, and Sanitary Systems Nonsupervisory Workers
                                          1958 to 1967
                          Average Earnings by Month in Dollars  per  Hour
 Annual
Average
Year Jan.
1958 1.96
1959 2.0?
I960 2.11
1961 2.25
1962 2.28
1963 2.37
1961). 2.1+2
1965 2.49
1966 2.6l
1967 2.76
n.a. means not
'-Source: U.S.
Feb.
2.00
2.06
2.12
2.27
2-30
2.38
2.hh
2.51
2.65
2.79
Mar.
1-97
2.05
2.12
2.26
2.30
2.37
2.H3
2.50
2.63
2 . 76
Apr . May
1.96 1.96
2.02 2.03
2.11+ 2.13
2.27 2.26
2.32 2-31
2.37 2.35
2.1+1+ 2.M+
2.51 2.51
2.67 2.66
2 . 79 2 . GO
June
2.00
2.0>+
2.15
2.26
2-33
2.37
2.H
2.S2
2.65
2. CO
July
2.00
2.06
2.18
2.29
2-3l|-
2.38
2.1 !-!+
2.55
2.69
n.a .
Aug.
2.00
2.08
2.18
2.27
2-32
2.38
2.1+3
2-55
2.67
n.a .
Sept.
2.02
2.09
2.18
2.29
2.3^
2-39
2.U5
2.56
2.70
n.a .
Oct.
2.03
2.10
2.21
2.29
2.33
2.^0
2.1+5
2.55
2.72
n.a .
Nov.
2.08
2.13
2.23
2.30
2-37
2.1+2
2.1+8
2-59
2.7!+
n.a .
Dec.
2.05
2.09
2.22
2.29
2.36
2.^3
2.1+7
2.58
2.71+
n.a .
Dollars/ Hour
2.00
2.07
2.17
2.27
2-33
2.38
2.1+1+
2.51+
n.a.
n.a.
available
Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics,
Employment and
Earnings



Statistics for the United States,  191+8-67 (Vol.  13 No.~9~J

-------
                             Table A-V
                   TABLE OF AMORTIZATION FACTORS

                    20, 25, and 30-year periods
               Three to five percent interest rate
Interest
Rate
3 %
3-1/2
k
U-l/2
~i
Amortization Factor*
20 years
.06722
. 0^036
.07358
.0~6< £
.OPO2U
25 years
•057U3
.06067
.06i;01
.067U4
.07095
30 years
.05102
.05U37
.057^3
.06139
.06505
* Annual payment necessary per $1.00 of debt for number of years shown
  to repay the debt.

  Source:  Marks' Mechanical Engineers' Handbook, Sixth Edition, McGraw
           Hill Book Company,  Inc.

-------
                           TsT^c A-VT

                RECOMMENDED MINIMUM BASIC FEES
            Ohio Society of Professional Engineers
General Engineering Projects - Schedule 1

Intercepting, Relief, Storm or Sanitary Sewers

Pumping Stations

Ground or Underground Water Storage Facilities

Water Intakes and Sewage Outlets

Water, Sewage and Industrial Treatment Plants
Minimum Fees - Schedule 1
     Cost of Construction

Less than $100,000 - Payroll costs plus a percentage

$100,000 to $500,000 - Base fee of 12% of $100,000
                       Plus 7-5$ of amount over $100,000

$500,000 to $1,000,000 - Base fee of &.k% of $500,000
                         Plus 6% of amount over $500,000

$1,000,000 to $5,000,000 - Base fee of 7.2% of $1,000,000
                           Plus 5-5# of amount over $1,000,000

$5,000,000 to $100,000,000 - Base fee of 5-8U# of $5,000,000
                             Plus 5-25# of amount over $5,000,000

For alterations to above type projects, add 30# - 50$ to fees shown above.

-------
                          Table A-VH

                         FEES FOR PRO!

As Published By The Missouri Society of Professional Engineers


 ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION               BASIC MINIMUM FEE*

 $ 750,000 to 1,000,000                           5-75 %

   500,000 to   750,000                           6.25 %

   UOO 000 to   500,000                           6.75 %

   300,000 to   U00,000                           7-00 %

   250,000 to   300,000                           7-25 %

   200,000 to   250,000                           7-75 %

   150,000 to   200,000                           8.25 %

   100,000 to   150,000                           8.75 %

    50,000 to   100,000                          10.00 %

    25,000 to    50,000                          11.00 %

    10,000 to    25-000                          12.00 %

 Less than       10,000                    Cost Plus 100$
 * Basic  fee  shall be not less than the maximum calculated
   under  the  next lower total project cost bracket.

-------
  5.0
  NET   INTEREST COST
ALL WATER 8 SEWER BONDS

  Federal Water  Pollution
  Control  Administration
  4.5

o
                                                 Revenue
   3.5
                                          A

   3.0
                                                  General
                                                Obligation
                                                                           ,-rure A-I
                                            1  1
                                           1  1
                                      1  1
1  1
1  1
1964
                                        1965
                                                                            1966
                                              All data  for  current  year  are  provisional

-------
                               COMPLEX CHEMICAL PROCESS PLANTS
                                             and
                                        PILOT PLANTS
                                 WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
INSTALLED COST IN MILLIOHS OF DOLLARS
                    Source:  Bauman,  "Fundamentals  of Cost Engi-
                             neering  In The Chemical Industry,"
                             Reinhold Publishing Corp.,  New York
                             (1964).

-------
   TYPICAL ENGINEERING CHARGES IN KANSAS

                                 Percentages do not include resident
                                 inspection.
                                                 Figure A-HI
Net Construction, Cost, thousands of dollars
                    10O
                                 Chart taken from "Directory & Guide",
                                 1962-1963 Addition, published by the
                                 Consulting Engineers Section of the
                                 Kansas Engineering Society.

-------

CAPITAL COST FOR INFILCO DENSATORS   .MJ
    DOLLARS versus AVERAGE  PLOW
                                                                     Figure A-IV
Plant Size, millions of gallons per day
R. Smith U/U/67

-------