United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4101)
EPA812-R-97-002
January 1997
&EPA Drinking Water
Infrastructure Needs Survey
Modeling the Cost of
nfrastructure
'
'
<***-
Sk
.**5i
$&.
m
'.'
,,, . -
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey
Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
iL_n
January 1997
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Drinking Water Implementation Division
-------
DRINKING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS SURVEY
MODELING THE COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently completed the first
nationwide documented survey of community water systems' infrastructure needs. No prior
survey had made a comprehensive examination of the needs of water systems across the country.
EPA conducted this survey to provide local, state, and national policy-makers with
comprehensive information on the condition of drinking water infrastructure nationwide.
Four thousand community water systems participated in the Needs Survey, Sampled
systems included each of the nation's 794 large systems (serving 50,000+ people) and random
samples consisting of 2,760 medium systems (serving 3.301 - 50,000 people) and 537 small
systems (serving 3,300 or fewer people). Needs were also assessed for 92 of the 884 American
Indian and Alaska Native systems nationwide. Overall, 94 percent of the systems responded,
including all but ten large systems.
Many of the participating drinking water systems provided capital improvement plans or
engineering reports that documented the estimated cost of their infrastructure needs. However,
about half of the more than 35,000 reported needs lacked cost estimates. This document
describes the methodology for modeling these costs and contains the cost models developed for
the survey. The methodology in this document and the cost information in Appendix A were
developed through a workgroup process. This process included four workgroup meetings, which
have yielded several drafts of this document. The workgroup consisted of staff from twenty-one
States, the Indian Health Service, all ten EPA Regions, and EPA Headquarters.
Section 1.0 of this document describes the general approach for constructing cost models.
It discusses the sources of cost information and our general methodology for developing and
applying cost curves. Section 2.0 of this document discusses how this methodology was applied
in modeling source, treatment, storage, transmission and distribution, and other needs. Appendix
A contains the cost models that are discussed in Sections 1.0 and 2.0. The models are organized
by category of need.
Important Note; Although the cost models developed for this first-time survey of
drinking water systems* infrastructure needs allowed EPA to estimate total nationwide needs,
they took into account only a limited number of the factors that influence the cost of
infrastructure. The Needs Survey relied on the voluntary (and much appreciated) participation of
approximately 4,000 water system owners and operators across the country. EPA chose to limit
the types of design parameters for which information was gathered to minimize the burden on
these water system professionals. EPA also recognized that systems that have a documented
need, but not a cost estimate, may not have enough information on design parameters to justify
more complex models. Readers should note that the curves presented in this article are useful
and appropriate for development of national estimates. However, they are not appropriate for
budgeting specific projects for individual water systems.
Page 1
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
1.0 METHODOLOGY
1.1 Sources of Cost Information
The data used to develop our cost models reflect design, materials, and installation costs,
When collecting the data, we had to ensure that data were available for systems of all sizes,
including very small systems. Several sources of cost data were available to us. However, our
preferred data source for these models was information we collected from Needs Survey
respondents with documented cost estimates. Other sources of cost information included
engineering firms, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, and cost data from R.S, Means and the Hach catalog. In some
cases, cost information from EPA Regulatory Impact Analyses was also used.
Data Collected on Questionnaires
Costs reported on questionnaires were reviewed by States and by Cadmus analysts to
ensure that they were appropriate for building models. The following criteria were used to
determine if the data were appropriate:
« We used costs for projects associated with the types of need that we wished to
model. For example, one model was used for both packed tower aeration and low
profile aeration; therefore, cost data from both types of projects were used to
develop the aeration cost curve.
« Costs reflected complete project costs (i.e., design, materials, and installation
costs).
» Necessary modeling parameters had to be available. For example, we could only
use treatment projects for which the respondent provided the treatment capacity.
* The date of the cost estimate had to be provided so that we could adjust costs to
January 1995 dollars.
The project had to be representative of projects needed by other water systems in
the Survey.
For large and medium systems, we collected enough data from questionnaires to develop
cost models for most needs. Other sources of data were used for a limited number of needs for
which we did not collect enough data from Survey respondents.
For small systems, however, questionnaires did not yield enough cost data to
build robust cost models for all treatment technologies and categories of need. For some needs,
such as transmission and distribution, we used cost information collected from medium and large
systems as a source of data for small system cost models. For other needs, such as treatment,
data was collected from other sources as discussed below.
Page 2
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
Engineering Firm
An engineering firm supplemented Needs Survey data for some small system costs. This
firm has experience with projects for systems serving populations of 10,000 and fewer, with an
emphasis on populations under 3,300. The firm provided actual project cost information for the
small water system needs listed below. This information was used to verify the findings of the
Needs Survey, strengthen cost curves for small systems, and establish floors for the cost of some
technologies. Infrastructure needs for which data from the engineering firm were used include
the following:
Source:
Improved well
River intake
Eliminate well pit
» New well house
Well abandonment
Treatment:
Chlorine feeder with building
Powdered activated carbon feeder
Alkalinity/pH adjustment or corrosion inhibitors
Fluoridation
Storage:
Hydropneumatic storage tanks (installation and refurbishment)
Other:
Emergency power
Staff that conducted small system site visits reviewed the engineering-firm data to ensure
that the projects described and costed were typical of the small systems we surveyed.
State and FarmersJiome Loan and GranLPrograms
State Loan Programs provided another source of information on real-world costs. These
programs generally cater to small or financially needy systems and, in some eases, had
information in their files that helped us supplement our database with project costs. The
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources and the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources provided data for constructing cost curves. (Thank you.)
Pages
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
Our criteria for selecting loan programs from which we obtained information included the
following:
The program's records had to provide enough detail. We gathered information on
the exact type of infrastructure need, modeling parameters for that need, cost, and
the date of the cost.
* Cost estimates had to reflect complete project costs (i.e., design, materials, and
installation costs).
The project had to be representative of projects needed by CWSs in the Needs
Survey.
ERA Regulatory Impact Analyses
As part of the regulation development process, EPA identifies best available treatment
technologies and other appropriate treatment techniques for regulated contaminants. The Agency
also estimates costs for implementation of various technology options. This information is
compiled in Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs), which in turn are based on Technologies and
Cost documents.
In the Needs Survey, curves based solely on RIAs are used only for technologies that are
needed infrequently.
1.2 Developing Cost Curves
We used the Needs Infrastructure Cost Curve System (NICCS) to develop cost models.
This data system stored information necessary to generate cost curves (equations) that allow us to
estimate costs of projects for which no cost estimates were provided. Our general methodology
for developing these cost curves was as follows:
Select the independent observations. For each infrastructure need, we selected
observations from the Needs Survey, engineering firms, and state loan programs
using the criteria described in Section 1.1.
* Adjust project costs to January 1995 dollars. To adjust costs to January 1995
dollars, we used the Construction Cost Index (CCI) found in the Engineering
News-Record (ENR), the consensus choice as the authority on construction costs.
Because State cost data were presented from different years, the CCI was applied
for the month and year presented in order to convert the estimated needs to
January 1995 dollars. For example, if a system reported that a cost of $100 of
unmet need was estimated in March 1984, we used their CCI to adjust to January
1995 dollars. The CCI factor for March 1984 is 4118 and the CCI factor for
January 1995 is 5443. In order to convert the $100 of March 1984 dollars to
Page 4
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
January 1995 dollars, we would multiply $100 by 5443/4118 to yield $132 in
January 1995 dollars.
* Normalize project costs based on regional differences in construction costs.
Needs Survey cost curves reflect construction costs in an "average" city. We used
the Site Work Index from the R.S. Means Company to adjust provided costs to a
common dollar value. To use the Means Index, we divided costs by the index for
the associated location.1
» Develop the Independent Cost Curve by performing regression analysis on the
observations. The linear regression technique used in most of the Needs Survey
cost models estimates the linear relationship between a desired output (dependent)
variable such as capital cost and a known input (independent) variable such as
design flow. Through the use of the linear regression technique, an assumption is
made that the dependant variable is a linear function of the independant variable.
Linear regression was applied to the logarithms of input and output variables.
Where appropriate, we derived second order logarithmic equations.
The curve that resulted from the four steps above is referred to as the "independent cost
curve."
Determine an adjustment factor to the RIA Cost Curve, where applicable:2 For
treatment needs for which we used cost curves based on RIA data, we derived an
adjustment factor for the cost curve using the following methodology:3
Calculate an adjustment factor for each observation. The adjustment
factor is the difference in percentage terms between the value of the
observation and the value predicted by the RIA curve. For example, if the
RIA curve predicts a cost of $100 at 1 MGD, and an observation at 1
MGD costs $150, the adjustment factor for that observation is 150%, or
1.5.
Average the adjustment factors to derive an overall adjustment factor.
Adjust the curve based on the adjustment factor. (This is a vertical shift.)
The resulting curve is known as the "modified RIA curve."
1 Although we applied location factors to costs used for constructing cost models, we will not apply these factors
when we use costs provided by respondents to estimate State needs. For example, if respondent X provided a cost
of $100 (in January 1995 dollars), and the location factor in respondent X's town was 0.9, we will use respondent X's
cost of $100 when we estimate State needs, but we used $111 (100/.9) to build our cost models.
2 Adjusted RIA curves were used for GAC and membrane technologies.
3 For some treatment needs, we did not collect enough data to adjust the RIA curve.
PageS
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey . Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
For some types of projects, infrastructure is purchased in unit quantities. Distribution and
transmission mains, water meters, and backflow prevention devices are examples of equipment
that are priced and purchased per unit. Cost models for these types of projects were based on
average costs. These models were developed by applying location factors to cost observations
and then averaging the adjusted cost observations within a particular equipment size category.
For example, the cost estimate for 2-inch water meters was developed by averaging the adjusted
cost estimated for 2-inch water meters that were submitted on questionnaires.
1.3 Applying Cost Curves
The methodology used to apply the cost curves was straight forward:
For the design parameters reported for the uncosted project, EPA determined the
cost predicted by the Needs Survey cost model for an "average" water system.
For example, the filtration model, shown as Exhibit 1, predicts a cost of about
$1.8 million for a 1.0 MOD (3,800 M3/d) plant.
» To account for regional variability in construction costs, the "average" predicted
cost was adjusted using the location factors described above. The adjustment
would increase the cost in regions where construction costs are typically higher
than average and decrease the cost in regions where they are typically lower.
2.0 COST CURVES
Appendix A includes cost curves for source, treatment, storage, transmission and
distribution, and "other" needs. These cost curves reflect data from the Drinking Water
Infrastructure Data System (DWIDS) and other sources as described in Section 1.0. The costs in
Appendix A are presented in January 1995 dollars.
2.1 Source
We developed cost models for the following source needs:
* New well or wellfield
Improved well
Well pump
» New surface supply
» Improved surface supply
» Install untreated water storage4
4 While an independent cost curve was developed from reported costs for installing untreated water storage, sufficient
data were unavailable to develop an independent equation for the cost of upgrading untreated water storage.
Consequently, reported costs for upgrading untreated water storage were combined with data on the cost of upgrading
finished ground level water storage. These combined data were used to develop a model for refurbishing ground level
Page 6
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
Abandon well
Eliminate well pit
Well house
For new and improved wells and well pumps, cost models are a function of well capacity.
The cost of installing untreated water storage is modeled as a function of storage capacity. For
surface supplies, however, Needs Survey questionnaires did not provide reliable data on capacity.
Therefore, we modeled surface supply needs as a function of system population. This method
yielded reasonably accurate results because new sources tended to be larger for larger systems.
2.2 Treatment
We developed cost models for the following treatment needs:
Filtration
Disinfection
* Upgrade disinfection
« Upgrade filters
* Upgrade disinfection and filters
Upgrade other treatment infrastructure
Aeration
Granular activated carbon
Ion exchange
Lime softening
Membrane technologies
Treatment for iron and manganese
* Activated alumina
* Corrosion control for lead and copper
Waste handling and treatment:, mechanical
« Waste handling and treatment: non-mechanical
« Waste handling and treatment: direct discharge
Powdered activated carbon
* Fluoridation
Process control
For each treatment need, we collected information (where applicable) on the type of
treatment, design capacity, contaminant of concern, concentration, and raw water source.5 Most
equations are a function solely of design capacity. We made this assumption in part to simplify
storage upgrades; refurbishing elevated storage, refurbishing ground-level storage, and refurbishing hydropneumatic
storage. This curve is discussed in Section 2.3, "Storage."
5 The Needs Survey questionnaire did not collect information on specific treatments for secondary contaminants. The
questionnaire gathered information only on the contaminant(s) of concern. Our model assigned treatment technologies
based on the contaminant or set of contaminants identified and design capacity of the treatment facility,
Page 7
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
modeling procedures. We also assumed, for installation or replacement of disinfection, a
standard minimum cost of $68,862.6 Our small system engineers suggested this as the minimum
costs borne by a very small system installing disinfection.
2.3 Storage
Cost models have been developed for the following storage needs:
* Elevated storage
« Ground-level finished-water storage
Hydropneumatic storage
» Refurbish elevated storage
Refurbish ground-level storage
« Refurbish hydropneumatic storage
Needs Survey respondents provided ample cost estimates for elevated and ground level
storage. Data on the cost of hydropneumatic tanks was obtained from an engineering firm.
Because our Needs Survey Table of Codes did not include separate codes for hydropneumatic
storage, it is defined as ground-level storage with capacities of 12,000 gallons or less (except for
clear wells). This assumption is based on recommendations from our small system site visit
staff.
2,4 Transmission and Distribution
Transmission and distribution needs represent the largest category of need. Many factors
influence the costs of water mains. These factors include pipe length and diameter, pipe
materials, pipe transportation costs, pressure rating, depth at which they are buried, soil type7,
traffic, urban versus rural location, and environmental concerns. To minimize the burden on
respondents, however, the survey questionnaire collected information only on the factors that
most affect transmission and distribution costs.
Needs Survey respondents were asked to provide pipe length and diameter information
and to indicate whether needs were for transmission or distribution. These parameters served as
inputs to the models. The models also considered the geographic area in which the water system
is located. Geographic area was an important determinant of cost because it served as a surrogate
for weather conditions that favor construction in the South, the depth at which a pipe is buried
6 As for other estimated costs, this minimum figured was adjusted for regional differences in construction costs using
the Site Work Index from the R.S. Means Company (see Section 1.2), Consequently, the actual figures used varied
slightly above and below $68,862.
7 As suggested by the workgroup, we investigated methodologies for reflecting the influence of different soil types
in our models for transmission and distribution costs. We checked several sources, including United States
Geographical Service (USGS) soil type databases, American Water Works Association and National Rural Water
Association resources, and engineering firms that install transmission and distribution lines. We were unable to locate
a source of soil type data that could be used with our database.
Page 8
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
and other factors that vary by geographic area. Frost depth data from Means Construction Cost
Guide served as a basis for defining the geographic area, because weather conditions and depth
of bury are largely influenced by frost depth. States in the North are characterized by a
maximum penetrable frost depth of greater than the national median of 36 inches and states in the
South have a maximum penetrable frost depth of less than 36 inches. Figure 1 shows the
geographic areas to which states were assigned.
Appendix A includes bar graphs showing costs for transmission and distribution by pipe
diameter and by geographic area. These models estimate cost per linear foot. The costs reflect
the average cost per foot reported by diameter, pipe type (transmission or distribution), and
geographic region (North or South).
Cost difference between transmission and distribution decreased as the pipe diameter
increased. Therefore, transmission and distribution costs were combined in the same model for
pipe diameters between 18 and 24 inches which are shown on the bar graph for transmission.
We speculate that the costs begin to converge at larger diameters because trenching and pipe
costs have a more significant impact on cost than appurtenances.
As the bar graphs show, transmission and distribution costs were consistently lower in the
South, even after adjusting the observations based on location indices. (Without this adjustment,
the differences would be even more dramatic.) The variance of cost data reported by respondents
was generally lower when the North and South were examined individually, rather than
combined. This implied that geographic region was a key determinant of cost. This difference is
likely due to differences in depth at which pipe must be buried, but also to urban versus rural and
other site-specific conditions.
For pipe diameters larger than 24 inches, variations in cost based on geographic area
become less significant. The Needs Survey model for larger main sizes used one unit cost for
each pipe size, regardless of whether the piping was for transmission or distribution, or whether
it was located in the North or South. Although the data do not allow one to draw definitive
conclusions, it is likely that trenching costs do not increase as significantly as pipe costs as
diameters become larger.
Construction of large-diameter mains is often very expensive. Therefore, the costs
associated with pipes with diameters of 48 inches or greater were important because of their
impact on total national need. Because the Needs Survey did not yield enough data to build cost
models for these pipe sizes, these costs were estimated on a case-by-case basis. In preparing cost
estimates, we contacted all systems that reported uncosted needs for 48 inch or larger piping. If a
system had either prepared a cost estimate or completed the construction project since submitting
its questionnaire, we used the new cost data. If the system did not have actual costs or
Page 9
-------
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey
Modeling the Cost of Infrastructure
documented estimates, we gathered as much information as possible about the project8. Experts
in water supply design and construction and experts from water system reporting the need or the
engineering firm doing the design work were consulted. Advice from all parties was used to
establish an acceptable range of construction costs for each project. Based on best professional
judgement, and guided by a conservative approach favoring the lower end of the range, we then
assigned cost estimates to each project.
Figure 1
Regional Classification (North and South) for Transmission and Distribution
2.5 Other Needs
Needs in the "Other" category for which we were able to model costs include laboratory
needs, computer and automation needs, and emergency power. Flow capacity is generally not a
useful modeling parameter for these needs. Therefore, costs for these needs are modeled based
on population. Because they are based on population, these models show some variability.
However, we believe they represent average costs for the needs they address. Use of these
curves allows us to predict need within our target precision.
We were not able to model costs for needs associated with land acquisition for planned
facility construction because of the wide variability of the price of land. In addition, projects that
were designated as "Other" (Code 6O), with no further description in the questionnaire, cannot
be modeled. If these projects were provided without costs, needs were not modeled for them.
8 Information gathered included the following: the reliability needed for the mains, environmental concerns which
might drive costs upwards, bedding requirements, depth of bury, pressure rating of pipe, right of way costs, traffic
problems, problems with maintenance of service during construction, road crossings, railroad track crossings, and
restoration required after construction.
Page 10
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
Appendix A
Table of Contents
-------
Source
New Well or Wellfield
Improved Well
Well Pump
New Surface Supply
Improved Surface Supply
Install Untreated Water Storage
Abandon Well
Eliminate Well Pit
Well House
Treatment
Install or Replace Filtration Plant
Install or Replace Disinfection
Upgrade Disinfection
Upgrade Filters
Upgrade Disinfection and Filters
Upgrade Other Treatment Infrastructure
Aeration
Granular Activated Carbon
Ion Exchange
Lime Softening
Membrane Technologies
Treatment for Iron and Manganese
Activated Alumina
Corrosion Control for Lead and Copper
Waste Handling and Treatment: Mechanical
Waste Handling and Treatment: Non-Mechanical
Waste Handling and Treatment: Direct Discharge
Treatment with Powdered Activated Carbon
Fluoridation
Process Control
Storage
Install Elevated Storage
Install Finished Ground-Level Storage
Install Hydropneumatic Storage
Refurbish Elevated Storage
Refurbish Ground-Level Storage
Refurbish Hydropneumatic Storage
Transmission and Distribution
Transmission Lines Installation or Replacement
(6 - 24 Inches)
Distribution Lines Installation or Replacement
(6 - 24 Inches)
Transmission Lines Installation or Replacement
(30 - 42 Inches)
Water Meters
Backflow Prevention Devices
Pumping Station
Hydrants
Lead Service Line Replacement
Refurbishment of Transmission and Distribution
(6 - 30 Inches)
Other
Laboratory Capital Costs
Computer and Automation
Emergency Power
-------
SOURCE
-------
Equation 2
New Well or Wellfield
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 1C (New Well)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <5-459375+ °-608161
x = Capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
2 117-5.WK4-05/10/96
100,000,000 ,=
10,000,000 =
1,000,000
C/J
+~»
(/)
O
O
Q.
03
O
100,000 -
10,000
1,000
0.01
r
NewWellorWellfield
Estimated Capital Costs
Independent Data
Independent Fit
0.10
1.00 10.00
Flow (MOD)
100.00
1,000.00
RA2: Log = 0.36
| Number of observations equals 268
-------
Equation 7
Improved Well
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 1K (Improved Well)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
Small systems:
Large systems:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and engineering firm (provided floor)
Data from survey respondents
wnjcnever is
$8,418 or Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (
higher
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <4.
x = Capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
7 117-5.WK4-05/10/96
10,000,000
1,000,000 =
tn
o
O
"ro
4'
'a.
ra
O
100,000
10,000 -
Improved Well
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
0.01
RA2: Log = 0.30 i
Number of observations equals 851
0.10
1.00
Flow (MGD)
10.00
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
100.00
-------
Equation 5
Well Pump
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 1F (New Pump, Existing Well)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <4-
x = Capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
5 117-4.WK4-05/16/96
1,000,000 pr
100,000
o
O
"ro
*ti
'a.
(0
O
10,000
1,000
Well Pump
Estimated Capital Costs
100
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00
Flow (MGD)
10.00
100.00
RA2: Log = 0.59 "
Number of observations equals 93
-------
Equation 7 a
New Surface Supply
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 1B (New Surface Supply)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents and data from State loan programs
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <3-872688 + a480157 *'°910(X))]
x = Population served
-------
1A 117-3.WK4-05/16/96
1,000,000,000 r=
100,000,000
10,000,000 =
w
*-*
w
o
O
1
Q_
ro
O
1,000,000 =
100,000
10,000 I ' I I ' "n
10 100
I RA2: Log = 0.19
Number of observations equals 1561
New Surface Supply
Estimated Capital Costs
I I I I III! I I I I I INI I I I I I III
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Population
-------
Equation 1b
Improved Surface Supply
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 11 (Improved Surface Supply)
Table 1, Code 1J (New or Improved Spring Collector)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (4-17868 + °301529
x = Population served
-------
1B 117-4.WK4-05/16/96
100,000,000
10,000,000 =
1,000,000
CO
o
O
"ro
4*
'o.
03
O
100,000
10,000
Improved Surface Supply
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
Independent Data
Independent Fit
10,000
1,000,000
J L_L_LLliil
100,000,000
1,000
100,000
Population
10,000,000
RA2: Log = 0.10 b
Number of observations equals 192|
-------
Equation 9g
Install Untreated Water Storage
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 4D (Raw Water Storage: installation or replacement)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All systems:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 P^MS* 0.239837-
x = Storage capacity in millions of gallons
-------
9G 117-4.WK4-05/14/96
100,000,000
10,000,000
o
O
I
Q.
03
O
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
Install Untreated Water Storage
Estimated Capital Costs
.»
f Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00 10.00 100.00
Storage Capacity (MG)
1,000.00 10,000.00
RA2f Log = 0.29 '
Number of observations equals 29
-------
Source Needs With Unit
i.
Costs
-------
Infrastructure Need
Needs Survey Code
Source of Cost
Estimate
Cost Estimate
Abandon Well
Table 1, Code 1L
Engineering Firm
$4,968
Eliminate Well Pit
Table 1, Code 1D
Engineering Firm
$11,799
Well House
Table 1, Code 1E
Engineering Firm
$71,070
-------
TREATMENT
-------
Install or Replace Filtration Plant
Equation 23
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 1 (Must filter)
Table 3, Code 11 (Conventional filter plant)
Table 3, Code 12 (Direct filter plant)
Table 3, Code 13 (In-line filter plant)
Table 3, Code 14 (Slow sand filter plant)
Table 3, Code 15 (Diatomaceous earth filter plant)
Table 3, Code 16 (Cartridge filter plant)
Table 3, Code 24 (Coagulation/Filtration)
Table 3, Code 25 (Direct filtration)
Table 3, Code 39 (Coagulation/Filtration)
Table 3, Code 46 (Coagulation/Filtration)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and State loan programs
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit fCost= io(a253533 + 0'652253*l09lo(x) + ao7665*(l°9lo(x)A2))l
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
23 117-4.WK4-05/14/96
10,000,000,000 r=
1,000,000,000
100,000,000
V)
o
O
15
-*
'a.
03
O
10,000,000
1,000,000
Install or Replace Filtration Plant]
Estimated Capital Costs I
100,000
f Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
I RA2: Log = 0.76 |
| Number of observations equals 2341
0.10
1.00 10.00
Flow (MOD)
100.00
1,000.00
-------
Install or Replace Disinfection
Equation 21
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 7 (Disinfection of Ground Water)
Table 3, Code 8 (Booster Chlorination/Disinfection)
Table 3, Code 23 (Oxidation)
Table 3, Code 35 (Chlorine)
Table 1, Code 6S (Zebra Mussel Control)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
higher
Data from survey respondents and data from engineering firms
Data from survey respondents
$68,862 or Independent Fit [Cost = 10
whichever is
Independent Variable:
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
21 117-4.WK4-06/03/96
o
0
Q.
(0
o
1,000,000,000 f=
100,000,000 =
10,000,000
1,000,000
100,000 =
10,000 =
Install or Replace Disinfection
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
^ Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
P " RA2: Log = 0.37 b
[Number of observations equals 106|
0.10
1.00 10.00
Flow (MGD)
i i i i nil il i i i i ii
100.00 1,000.00 10,000.00
-------
Equation 17
Upgrade Disinfection
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 3 (Filtered Water System Must Upgrade Disinfection: Surface water or ground water under the direct
influence of surface water)
Table 3, Code 10 (Unfiltered, Water System Must Improve Disinfection)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equations for Assigning Costs:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Independent Variable:
Not Applicable
Data from survey respondents
Below 0.65 MGD, Assume Installation of Disinfection
Independent Fit [Cost* io(4-472894 + 1'337454*lo91°M-0-20221 *('°gi°MA2)>]
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
17 117-2.WK4-05/14/96
100,000,000 pr
10,000,000
1,000,000 =
CO
o
O
Q.
03
O
100,000
10,000
1,000
0.1
Upgrade Disinfection!
Estimated Capital Costs I
*"!
£ Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
1.0
10.0
Flow (MGD)
100.0
_JJ_LJ
1,000.0
RA2: Log = 0.47 j
Number of observations equals 651
-------
Equation 18
Upgrade Filters
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 4 (Filtered water system must upgrade filters)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
18 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
100,000,000 pr
10,000,000
o
O
"(5
-->
'CL
ro
O
1,000,000
100,000 -
Upgrade Filters
Estimated Capital Costs
10,000
^ Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.1
1.0
10.0 100.0
Flow (MGD)
1,000.0
.LJJJJJJ
10,000.0
" ~RA2: Log = 0.34
Number of observations equals 136
-------
Equation 19a
Upgrade Disinfection and Filters
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 5 (Filtered water system must upgrade disinfection and filters)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All systems:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <5-425385 + °-747241 *'°aio(x»]
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
19A117-2.WK4- 05/14/96
100,000,000
10,000,000
V)
to
o
o 1,000,000
Q.
CO
o
100,000
10,000
0.1
Upgrade Disinfection and Filters
Estimated Capital Costs
1.0
10.0
Flow (MGD)
100.0
" RA2: Log = 0.31 " 1
Number of observations equals 1081
^ Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
1,000.0
-------
Equation 20
Upgrade Other Treatment Infrastructure
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 6 (Filtered water system must upgrade other infrastructure)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (5-184341 + o.3
x = Treatment Capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
20 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
Upgrade Other Treatment Infrastructure
Estimated Capital Costs
100,000,000 pr
10,000,000
1,000,000 =
U)
o
O
"ro
CO
O
100,000
10,000 =
1,000
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00 10.00 100.00
Flow (MGD)
1,000.00 10,000.00
RA2: Log = 0.16
Number of observations equals 1021
-------
Equation 24
Aeration
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 20 (Packed Tower Aeration)
Table 3, Code 21 (Low Profile Aeration)
Table 3, Code 40 (Packed Tower Aeration)
Table 3, Code 41 (Low Profile Aeration)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and State loan programs
Data from survey respondents
Independent Curve [Cost= 10 (5-62787 + °-76637*Iog10(x))]
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
24 117-4.WK4-05/10/96
100,000,000
10,000,000
o
O
15
4-1
'o.
TO
O
1,000,000
100,000 -
10,000
0.01
Aeration
Estimated Capital Costs
f Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.10
1.00
Flow (MGD)
10.00
100.00
RA2: Log = 0.58
Number of observations equals 641
-------
Equation 25
Granular Activated Carbon
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 22 (Granular Activated Carbon)
Table 3, Code 42 (Granular Activated Carbon)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: Not applicable1
. Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Source of EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Curve:
Small systems: Not applicable1
Medium and large systems: Technology and cost document for Phase VSOCs (Sept. 1991)
Equation for Assigning Costs:
Small systems: Not applicable1
Medium and large systems: Adjusted EPA RIA Curve
t= 1 47 * (10 (5-924799 + a664035*lo91°(x) +°-100747*(log10(x)A2)-0.022464 *(log10(x)A3))\i
Independent Variable: x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
1Systems with small sources (design flow rates of 0.65 MGD or lower) are assumed to install aeration for VOC
contamination and construct new wells for SOC contamination.
-------
25 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
1,000,000,000
100,000,000
U)
"w
o
O
"co
-£J
'a.
ro
O
10,000,000
1,000,000
100,000
0.1
Granular Activated Carbon
Estimated Capital Costs
I
9 Independent Data
.... RIA Curve
_ Mod. RIA Curve
1.0
10.0
Flow (MOD)
100.0
1,000.0
RA2: Log = 0.67
Number of observations equals 271
-------
Equation 33
Ion Exchange
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 30 (Ion Exchange)
Table 3, Code 45 (Ion Exchange)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and data from State loan programs
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (5-988658 + °-623783 *|0910
-------
33 117-2.WK4-05/14/96
100,000,000
10,000,000
o
o
16
*-«
'a.
en
O
1,000,000
100,000
0.01
Ion Exchange
Estimated Capital Costs
J L
I I I I I I I
4) Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.10
1.00
Flow (MGD)
10.00
100.00
I ~~RA2: Log = 0.90 j
[Number of observations equals 9|
-------
Equation 28
Lime Softening
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 31 (Lime Softening)
Table 3, Code 43 (Lime Softening)
Source of EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Curve:
Small systems: Median value from the following technology and cost documents:
Arsenic (Sept. 1993), Lead and Copper (April, 1991), Phase V lOCs
(Jan. 1990), and Nickel (Supplement, March 1987)
Medium and large systems: Median value from the following technology and cost documents:
Arsenic (Sept. 1993), Phase Vlb lOCs (Sept. 1993), Lead and Copper
(April, 1991), Radionuclides (May 1992), Phase V lOCs (Jan. 1990),
Nickel (Supplement, March 1987), and Cadmium (June 1986)
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes: EPA RIA Curve
rCOSt= 1 0 <6'060976 + °-754593 * Iog10(x) + 0.108899 * (log10(x)A2) - 0.036097 * (log10(x)A3))i
Independent Variable: x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
28 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
1,000,000,000
100,000,000
^B
(/}
ts
0 10,000,000
B
Q.
CO
o
1,000,000
100,000
O.I
I I I I I 1 1 1
Lime Softening
Estimated Capital Costs
f,ff
t,ff''
i i i i i 1 1 1
t,**
f/*
fl''
fs'
\ I I I I 1 1 1
r,''
fl''
s'
L I L I I I I I I
f**
i i i i i 1 1 1
.... RIA Curve jj
31 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1,000.00
Flow (MGD)
-------
e
Equation 29
Membrane Technologies
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 32 (Membrane Technology: Reverse Osmosis, Micro-Filtration)
Table 3, Code 33 (Electrodialysis Reversal)
Table 3, Code 44 (Reverse Osmosis)
Table 3, Code 47 (Electrodialysis Reversal)
Table 1, Code 6C (Desalinization)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: Data from survey respondents
Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Source of EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Curve:
Small systems: Median value for reverse osmosis from the following technology and
cost documents: Arsenic (Sept. 1993), Lead and Copper (April, 1991),
Radionuclides (May 1992), Phase V lOCs (Jan. 1990), Nickel
(Supplement, March 1987), and Cadmium (June 1986)
Medium and large systems: Median value for reverse osmosis from the following technology and
cost documents: Arsenic (Sept. 1993), Lead and Copper (April, 1991),
Radionuclides (May 1992), Phase V lOCs (Jan. 1990), Nickel
(Supplement, March 1987), and Cadmium (June 1986)
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes: Adjusted EPA RIA Curve
rCost= 1 04 * MO (6'335860 + a789454*lo910(x) + 0-046908*(|og10(x)A2)-0-00323*(|°g10(x)A3)h'i
Independent Variable: x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
29 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
1,000,000,000 ,=
100,000,000
V)
o
O
Q.
ro
O
10,000,000
1,000,000
100,000
0.1
Membrane Technologies
Estimated Capital Costs
9 Independent Data
.... RIA Curve
_ Mod. RIA Curve
1.0
10.0
Flow (MGD)
100.0
1,000.0
F RA2: Log = 0.70 ~k
[Number of observations equals 19; Multiplier equals 1.04|
-------
Equation 34
Treatment for Iron and Manganese
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 3, Code 36 (Manganese Green Sand Filtration)
Table 3, Code 48 (Manganese Green Sand Filtration)
Table 3, Code 68 (Iron)
Table 3, Code 69 (Manganese)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and data from State loan programs
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 (
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
34 117-4.WK4-05/14/96
100,000,000 c
10,000,000
in
to
o
O
15
4»
'a.
OJ
O
1,000,000 -
100,000
Treatment for Iron and Manganese
Estimated Capital Costs
I
10,000
f Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.001
0.010
0.100 1.000
Flow (MGD)
10.000
100.000
RA2: Log = 0.53 b
Number of observations equals 801
-------
Equation 31
Activated Alumina
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 34 (Activated Alumina)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: NA
Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Source of EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Curve:
Small systems: Median value from the following technology and cost documents: Arsenic
(Sept. 1993) and Phase V lOCs (Jan. 1990)
Medium and large systems: Median value from the following technology and cost documents: Arsenic
(Sept. 1993) and Phase V lOCs (Jan. 1990)
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes: EPA RIA Curve
FCost= C\ 0 (5-630002 + 0-622989 * logtO(x) + 0.121090 * (log10(x)A2) - 0.003476 * (log10(x)A3))\i
Independent Variable: x = Treatment capacity in milfions of gallons per day
-------
31 117-3.WK4-05/16/96
1,000,000,000 <=
100,000,000 =
10,000,000
o
o
CL
05
O
1,000,000
100,000 =
Activated Alumina I
Estimated Capital Costs |
10,000
I I I II I II
.,..'-"'
I I I I I 1 1 1
I I I I I 1 1 1
/""
tf**
I I I I II II
fs'
\ I I I I I II
01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1,000.00
9 Independent Data
.... RIA Curve
nt Datalj
Flow (MOD)
I Number of observations equalsT||
-------
Equation 39
Corrosion Control for Lead and Copper
Needs Survey Codes:"
Table 3, Code 50 (Alkalinity Adjustment)
Table 3, Code 51 (pH Adjustment)
Table 3, Code 52 (Corrosion Inhibitors)
Table 3, Code 53 (Calcium Hardness Adjustment)
Table 3, Code 55 or 56 (Corrosion Control - Treatment Unknown)
Table 3, Code 37 (Corrosion Control for Asbestos)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and data from small engineering firms
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (4-801033 + a425743 *|091°M>]
x = Treatment capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
39 117-5.WK4-05/14/96
10,000,000
1,000,000
V)
«
O
O
"co
-£J
'o.
ro
O
100,000
10,000 -
Corrosion Control for Lead and Copper
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
Independent Data
Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00 10.00
Flow (MOD)
100.00 1,000.00
RA2: Log = 0.25 j
Number of observations equals 801
-------
Equation 44
Waste Handling and Treatment: Mechanical
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 94 (Waste Handling and Treatment: Mechanical)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 <3-504391 + a492286 *|0910(X))]
x = Population served
-------
44 117-2.WK4-05/14/96
Waste Handling and Treatment: Mechanical
Estimated Capital Costs
100,000,000
10,000,000 -
o
O
1
Q.
03
O
1,000,000
100,000 -
10,000
licall
£ Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
10,000
1,000
1,000,000 100,000,000
100,000 10,000,000
Population
"" RA2: Log = 0.29 b
Number of observations equals 1031
-------
Equation 45
Waste Handling and Treatment: Non-Mechanical
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 95 (Waste Handling and Treatment: Non-Mechanical)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 <4-324186 + o.245823-iogio(x))]
x = Population served
-------
45 117-2.WK4-05/14/96
Waste Handling and Treatment: Non-Mechanical
Estimated Capital Costs
100,000,000 r=
10,000,000 -
.-
to
O
O
I
Q_
OJ
O
1,000,000 -
100,000
10,000
4) Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
100
10,000
1,000
100,000
Population
1,000,000 100,000,000
10,000,000
RA2: Log = 0:09" ~" ~k
Number of observations equals 821
-------
Equation 46
Waste Handling and Treatment: Direct Discharge
Needs Survey Code:
Table 3, Code 96 (Waste handling and treatment: direct discharge to wastewater treatment plant)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 <5-447705 + a°48099*|0910(X))]
x = Population served
-------
46 117-2.WK4-05/14/96
Waste Handling and Treatment: Direct Discharge
Estimated Capital Costs
100,000,000
10,000,000
V)
55
o
O
"co
4'
'a.
ro
O
1,000,000 -
100,000 -
10,000
£ Independent Data
Independent Fit
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
Population
1,000,000
10,000,000
100,000,000
RA2: Log = 0.02
Number of observations equals 19
-------
Treatment Needs With
Unit Costs
-------
Infrastructure Need
Needs Survey Code
Source of Cost
Estimate
Cost Estimate
Treatment With Powdered
Activated Carbon
Table 3, Code 26
Engineering Firm
$133,929
Fluoridation
Table 1, Code 6R
Table 3, Code 81
Engineering Firm
$105,984
Process Control
Streaming Current
Monitors
Table 3, Code 97
Hach Catalogue
$9,653
Particle Counters
Table 3, Code 98
Hach Catalogue
$9,539
Turbidity Meters
Table 3, Code 99
Hach Catalogue
$2,288
-------
STORAGE
-------
Equation 9b
Install Elevated Storage
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 4F (Elevated Finished or Treated Water Storage: installation or replacement)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (ao07209 + °-699518 *'°910(X)- °-03719 *('°91°MA2»]
x = Storage capacity in millions of gallons
-------
9B 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
10,000,000
1,000,000
o
O
i
Q.
TO
O
100,000
10,000
Install Elevated Storage
Estimated Capital Costs
0 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
[" " RA2: Log = 0.65 k
[Number of observations equals 4761
0.10
1.00
Storage Capacity (MG)
10.00
100.00
-------
Equation 9a
Install Finished Ground-Level Storage
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 4H (Ground-Level Finished or Treated Water Storage: installation or replacement)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 <5-816691 + °-696766 *|091°M)]
x = Storage capacity in millions of gallons
-------
1,000,000,000 r=
o
o
o
"ro
*-»
'a.
03
O
100,000,000
10,000,000 =
1,000,000
100,000
Install Finished Ground-Level Storage!
Estimated Capital Cost as a Function of Capacity I
10,000
0 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00 10.00 100.00
Storage Capacity (MG)
1,000.00 10,000.00
RA2: Log = 0.70 |
Number of observations equals 5211
-------
Equation 9e
Install Hydropneumatic Storage
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 4K (Install Hydropneumatic Storage)
(for capacities < 12,000 gallons)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
» AH system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from engineering firms
Not applicable
Independent Fit [Cost = 10(2'427336 +°-«*
x = Storage capacity in gallons
-------
9E 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
1,000,000
OT
O
o
1
Q.
(C
O
100,000
10,000
100
RA2: Log = 1.00
Number of observations equals 5
Install Hydropneumatic Storage
Estimated Capital Costs
0 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
1,000 10,000
Storage Capacity (Gallons)
100,000
-------
Equation 9d
Refurbish Elevated Storage
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 4G (Elevated Finished or Treated Water Storage: upgrades or rehabilitation)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (5-242833 + °-472704 *Iog10(x))]
x = Storage capacity in millions of gallons
-------
9D 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
10,000,000
1,000,000
w
o
o
15
*-*
'a.
CO
O
100,000 -
Refurbish Elevated Storage
Estimated Capital Costs
10,000
Q Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
0.01
0.10
1.00
Storage Capacity (MG)
10.00
100.00
RA2: Log = 0.24
Number of observations equals 157
-------
Equation 9c
Refurbish Ground-Level Storage
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 4E (Raw Water Storage: upgrades or rehabilitation)
Table 1, Code 41 (Ground-level Finished or Treated Water Storage: upgrades or rehabilitation)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (5.14262+ o.eo7i88*iogio(x)-.09347
x = Storage capacity in millions of gallons
-------
9C 117-3.WK4- 05/16/96
Refurbish Ground-Level Storage!
Estimated Capital Costs I
100,000,000
10,000,000 -
1,000,000
(A
o
o
"CD
£j
'a.
CO
O
100,000
10,000
1,000 I -II I I III
0.01 0.10
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
I I I I Illl I I I I I I III I I I I Mill J I I I I I III I LJJ_L
1.00 10.00 100.00 1,000.00 10,000.00
Storage Capacity (MG)
I RA2: Log = 0.38
[Number of observations equals 216|
-------
Equation 9f
Refurbish Hydropneumatic Storage
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 4L (Refurbish Hydropneumatic Tank)
(for capacities between 2,500 and 12,000 gallons)1
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from engineering firms
Not applicable
Independent Fit [Cost = 10 (2-502908 + °-559217 *|0910
-------
9F 117-3.WK4-05/14/96
100,000
"to
o
o
'o.
CO
O
10,000
1,0
Refurbish Hydropneumatic Storage 1
Estimated Capital Costs |
X
i i i i i i i i
/^
i i i i i i i i
00 10,000 100,00(
Storage Capacity (Gallons)
I RA2: Log = 0.96 |
I Number of observations equals 3 1
0 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
-------
TRANSMISSION
AND
DISTRIBUTION
-------
Transmission Lines Installation or Replacement
6 - 24 Inches
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 2B (Installation or Replacement of Transmission Lines)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: Data from survey respondents
Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Determinants of Cost:
Pipe diameter
Length of piping
Region (North or South)
-------
Transmission Lines-Installation or Replacement
6-24 Inches
140
120
100 -
137.71
o
20
0
6 Inch 8 Inch 10 Inch 12 Inch 14 Inch 16 Inch 18 Inch 20 Inch 24 Inch
5/28/96
-------
Distribution Lines Installation or Replacement
6 - 24 Inches
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 5A (Distribution System: Replacement of Distribution Lines for Compliance with the Total Coliform
Rule)
Table 1, Code 5F (Asbestos Cement Pipe)
Table 1, Code 6J, 5A (Replacement of Distribution Lines for Fire Protection)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: Data from survey respondents
Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Determinants of Cost:
Pipe diameter
Length of piping
Region (North or South)
-------
Distribution Lines-Installation or Replacement
6 - 24 Inches
140
120 -
100 -
135.28-
137.71
o
20
6 Inch 8 Inch 10 Inch 12 Inch 14 Inch 16 Inch 18 Inch 20 Inch 24 Inch
5/28/96
-------
Transmission Lines Installation or Replacement
30 - 42 Inches
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 2B (Installation or Replacement of Transmission Lines)
Table 1, Code 5A (Distribution System: Replacement of Distribution Lines for Compliance with the Total Coliform
Rule)
Table 1, Code 5F (Asbestos Cement Pipe)
Table 1, Code 6J, 5A (Replacement of Distribution Lines for Fire Protection)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems: Data from survey respondents
Medium and large systems: Data from survey respondents
Determinants of Cost:
Pipe diameter
Length of pipe
-------
Transmission Lines-Installation or Replacement
30 - 42 Inches
350
300
North and South]
30 Inch
36 Inch
42 Inch
5/28/96
-------
Water Meters
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 6K (Water Meters)
Table 3, Code 87 (Water Meters)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Determinants of Cost:
Meter diameter
Means Facilities Cost Data, 1994
Means Facilities Cost Data, 1994
-------
Water Meters
$12,000
$10,000
$8,000
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
$-
Cost Per Unit
Domestic 2"
3"
4"
6"
8"
10+"
5/28/96
-------
Backflow Prevention Devices
Needs Survey Codes:
Table 1, Code 6L (Backflow Prevention Devices)
Table 3, Code 88 (Backflow Prevention Devices)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Determinants of Cost:
Diameter
Means Facilities Cost Data, 1994
Means Facilities Cost Data, 1994
-------
Backflow Prevention Devices
I Cost Per Unit
$188 $213 $372 $438
I
2/3" 1" 1.5" 2"
3" 4" 6" 8" 10+"
5/28/96
-------
Equation 13
Pumping Station
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 6M (Pumping Station)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 (5-14608 + °-543203 *'
x = Pumping capacity in millions of gallons per day
-------
13 117-3.WK4-05/15/96
100,000,000
10,000,000 -
1,000,000
o
o
a.
ro
O
100,000 -
10,000
1,000
0.01
Pumping Station
Estimated Capital Costs
9 Independent Data
Independent Fit
0.10
1.00
-10.00
Flow (MGD)
i i i i 1 1 nl i i i i 1 1 n
100.00 1,000.00 10,000.00
RA2: Log = 0.32
Number of observations equals 4621
-------
Distribution Needs With
Unit Costs
-------
Infrastructure Need
Needs Survey Code
Source of Cost
Estimate
Cost Estimate
Hydrants
Table 1, Code 5H
Average From Needs
Survey Respondents
$1,405/hydrant
Lead Service Line
Replacement
Table 1, Code 5B
Table 1, Code 5E
Average From Needs
Survey Respondents
$1,199/line
Refurbishment of
Transmission and
Distribution (6 - 30 Inches)
Table 1, Code 5D
Table 1, Code 5G
Table 1, Code 5L
Average From Needs
Survey Respondents
$34.86/foot
-------
OTHER
-------
Equation 11
Laboratory Capital Costs
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 6B (Laboratory capital costs for labs owned by system)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 <-°-83293 +1-592137 *|0910(X) -°-07682 * <'°91°MA2»]
x = Population served
-------
11 117-3.WK4- 05/28/96
100,000,000
10,000,000 =
1,000,000
V)
o
0
"ro
t-^
ro
100,000
10,000
Laboratory Capital Costs
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
1,000
RA2: Log = 0.51 b
[Number of observations equals 87 1
10,000
100,000 1,000,000
Population
10,000,000 100,000,000
-------
Equation 14
Computer and Automation
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 6N (Computer and automation)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 <2-337969 + °-6045i6
x = Population served
-------
14 117-1 .WK4-11/14/95
100,000,000 pr
10,000,000
1,000,000
o
O
o
100,000
10,000 -
1,000
100
RA2: Log = 0.38 k
Number of observations equals 6051
Computer and Automation
Estimated Capital Costs
9 Independent Data
Independent Fit
1,000
10,000 1,000,000
100,000
Population
10,000,000
100,000,000
-------
Equation 16
Emergency Power
Needs Survey Code:
Table 1, Code 6V (Emergency Power)
Source of Cost Observations:
Small systems:
Medium and large systems:
Equation for Assigning Costs:
All system sizes:
Independent Variable:
Data from survey respondents and data from engineering firms
Data from survey respondents
Independent Fit [Cost= 10 (
x = Population served
-------
16 117-3.WK4-05/15/96
100,000,000
10,000,000
1,000,000
V)
o
O
Is
'a.
05
O
100,000
10,000
Emergency Power
Estimated Capital Costs
1,000
1,000 100,000
100 10,000 1,000,000
Population
9 Independent Data
_ Independent Fit
J I I II Mil I I I II II
10,000,000
100,000,000
RA2: Log = 0.44 j
Number of observations equals 1901
-------
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (4101)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |