APPENDIX A – BACKGROUND INFORMATION DRAFT Task Order No. 14-05 Appendix A

Task Order No. 14-05
Septage Receiving Site Feasibility Study
Appendix A
DRAFT
APPENDIX A – BACKGROUND INFORMATION
June 2015
I
EN
LN
N
X
LEN
MA
R
T
E
TL
OU
CLA
UD
EC
DC
IEL
F
LL
MI
T
I CK
OV
XX
UR
CT
PI
KE
Y
WA
LS
FAL
G
NE
SB
T
STO
ER
S
HES
LE
E
DR
EL
DR
R
K CI
D
N
BI
O
PH
-LIN
NR
CT
RU
EY
LL
VA
N
LVI
-O
BOB
LL
MI
CO
RO
LE
DA
LL
MI
N
RU
!
(1
ER
CA
Sewer Pipes
1
Existing Colvin
Run Site
PS
Wastewater
Pump Stations
!
(
"
)
Data Source: Fairfax County GIS
0.1
0.2
Miles
Septage Receiving Site
Feasibility Study
Petitioner Locations
GP
IKE
DR
0.05
UR
ILL
0
SB
TH
¯
LEE
US
RP
IEW TER
C
LO
SCENIC V
SF
AR
M
WA
Y
OU
TLE
T
DIFFICULT RUN
Parcels
Petitioner
Households
Map By: Hazen, Map Date: 06/04/2015
SEPTI
C SYSTEMS BY PARCEL, 2014
BEACH
A
RO
MILL
D
BEACH
RO AD
MIL
L
SE
N
RO AD
EC
A
R
ALGONKIAN
E
WALK
RO AD
D
BEN
BU
RO AD
ER
RIV
SPRIN
PW
G VAL
E
ROAD
LE
ES
RG
D
ROA
PI
K
E
GEORG ETOWN
ROAD
PIKE
D R AN
RO AD
E SV ILLE
SPRINGVALE
R
WALKE
WI
HL
E
N
K WAY
PA
R
UE
COLV
R
N
LI
G
NT
Y
FA
X
HILL S
R
RO
HILL
EY
K
PI
AD
OL
D
E
U
BE
LE
WI
LA
NS
H
RO
D
E
U
E
MA L C
AD
RO
D
AD
R
PA
R
K
IDY
R
EE
T
LW
OO
D
RO
A
D
LA
ST
CE
D
AR
MO
ME
I
ST
CU
A
RO
EY
D
CO U
A
RO
X
D
I DG
BR
L
D
OA
CK
R
SH
D
E
EV
E
AY
HIG HW
R IN G S RD
OW RO AD
E
SL
EP
YH
SP
O
L EE
AD
RO
R
D
RO
A
HIGHWAY
D
RO
A
IN
EA
D R
RA
VE
U R N ROAD
OX
RO
AD
SID EB
IN
M
PT
RO
BU
ON
R
KE
E
ROAD
EDSALL R OA
EA
GU
AD
RO
DWA
Y
CO
NPIK
RO
D
RO A
CLIFTON
DR IVE
N
RU
BU
LL
E
TUR
ROAD
RO AD
DRIV
R
AD
GU
RO AD
LE
RV
IL
TE
CE
N
RU
N
BU L
L
BRADDOCK
BRADDO CK
ZIO N
RIVE
IC K
AD
RO
H E AD
PO PES
LE
L
CK
BA
POS T OF
F IC
AD
ON
D
RO A
RO
T
MP
CO
PE
L
NS
WO
RT
H
D
RO
A
RO AD
PAR KWAY
E
Y
D
NT
LITT
CHA
CO
U
BR
CK
IA
A
RO
R OA D
O
A DD
IELD
ROAD
X
FA
LEE
IR
FA
BRADDOCK
NEW
Y
HWA
HIG
LN
M
WAK E F
RO AD
LI
NC
O
ARR
E
JOHN
DO CK
TH
PIKE
MA
P
PL L
BR AD
U
SO
IA
MB
LU
CO
AD
S HIR
LEE
E RO
D
LE
Y
L
NDA
GA
TE
T
RO
A
PIK
E
GE
A
ANN
S
PO
OFFIC
E
IA
CO LUM B
H UM
ME
STO NE
RU
N
D
YR
AR
IN
STREET
RG
EM
LTWAY
CAPITAL BE
MAIN
SBU
S
KE
D OR G
R
I V E MA
SO
E
N
D
CAR
LI N
RO
A
D
R OA
LE
DA
LL
WS
NA
N
LO
PICK
E
OX
WEST
LEE
GA
L
AN
TT R
O AD
RO AD
D
RO A
D
OL
GLE
N
AY
HW
HIG
PR O SP E
R IT
AYVE
NU
E
TREE
AR
Y
PO P
L
LLOW
IR
FA
PI
BULL
RD
CAR LIN
E
PK
W
G FE
D
R
OLD
P
RO AD ICKETT
E
LE
RO
A
T
PA Y
NR
K
PI
STRIN
KES
LA
HE
IC
DRK
D
RO
A
BOULEVARD
ARLING TON
RG
AR
K
DR
POPLAR
N DALE ROAD
ROAD
TREE
BLVD
ON
BU
D
AD
TO
N
S
WIL
AN
NA
OA
K
LEE
ES
LE
A
RO
RO
HI G
HW
AY
HIGHWAY
N
OW
P
FAI
R VI E W
IAL
D
AN
T
IE
RO
HIGHWAY
LEE
AD
NE
LA
W
ES
TF
BLAKE
D
RO A
GR AH
AM
MIL
L
LA
R D KE
DR
ES
FO
WA
PL
JE
RM
LE V
AR D
LD
S
BO U
ON
ME
MO
R
A
RO
RO AD
WEST STREET
AD
RO
Y
LE
VA
L
AN
T
AS
PL
E
ET
AC
KS
Y
AD
LY
K
IN
LE
E- J
NE
RO
L
SU
DD
OC
A
CH
KW
AY
E
STR
BR
A
W
AL
AD
PA
R
RO
VA
L
E
NTY
M
IL
AY
W
RK
PA
L
A
RI
O
S
L
NUT
X
FA
OX
RO
AD
ST
WE
IR
FA
FO
A
RO
N
D
LW
GALLO
RO
M
OL
HA
YC
L
VA
D
NE
WA
Y
OO
WS
M
AP
LE
R O AD
AV
EN
LE
RO
A
AD
LA
ID
Y
AD
RO
RO A
D
HO
US
E
STREET
E
RE
EET
RO
BY
S TR
CENT
REVIL
RT
LS
FAL
L
VA
IAL
HI G
H
CO
U
AT
LA
WY
ER
S
SULLY
OL
D
RO
A
ROAD
ME
MO
R
R
KI
O
RS
RD
D
ON
AR
AG
M
AD
M
YE
MI LL
A
RO
AC
KS
RO
Y
IT
E
GR
LL
MI
H U NTER
X
FO
LE
E- J
D
AD
ST
D
E
WE
W
LA
RO
A
IV
DR
BY
R OAD
BRIDG E
N
CH AI
GO SNELL
X
O
ROAD
T
ES
W
RO AD
ERS
LAWY
R
KI
IVE
U SE ROA D
RK
E
AD
R
TPA
ES
W
HO
D
UR
T
DR
IV
AD
CO
N
RO
AD
RO
HU
N
OL
D
RO
AD
L
EN
A
ATION
TE
R
AP
TR
RD
A
RO
AR
RO
N
IN TE R
RO AD
VIL L
E
LL
DO
DO
MIN
IO
ID G
E
D
ILL
E
ON
DIS
MA
IN
BR
RO
A
D
SV
LS
W
IN
BO U
ARD
L EV
CH AIN
OLD G E RD
BRID
RG
V A LL
CHA
BA
L
EY
LE
BU
SUN R
I SE
ES
LE
I VE
DR
CAP
ITA
L
RE
S
L
PIKE
RO AD
T
D
OA
TO
N
X
GEO
RG E
TO W
N
Y
S U N SE
PA
R
R
D
LT
WA
IS E
RO
A
KW
AY
MO
ST NRO
RE E
ET
RO A
D
L
BE
FA
IR
D
RO
A
LE
IL
TR
EV
E
CE
N
E
RG
IV
DR
SU N
DR
IV
E
STATION
LE
PAR KW
AY
IAL
L
LE Y
VAL
RO
A
M
C
R
MEMO
TO N
IL
M
G TON
TO
L
MI
L
WASHI N
G
BROWNS
ROAD
S
LL
HI
AND
ACCESS SUNSET
DULLES
ROAD
WA S H
IN
FO
RG E
GEO
PIK
E
MILL
PA
RK
WA
Y
TO
WN
N
ND
ON
D
IO
TE R
HU N
HE
R
A
RO
IN
M
ON
DO
CO
U
COLVI
N RUN S
ITE
ON
O
GE
R
ME
D
OL
CA
AD
BA
RON
RO
AD
N
RU
E
ST
RO
IN
E
EN U
AV
TO W
LST
E
AV
R ESTON
K
UE
R
PA
AVE N
PA
R
K WA
Y
E
AD
D
A LL
E DS
RO
AD
KE
LA
HU
L
AY
ELTW
IN
GT
ON
AV
EN
U
A
CAPIT
B
NT
RO
AD
OR
RO AD
E
G
IN
LL
RO
AY
W
BELLE VIEW
VD
BL
NS
TR
T
EE
ST
R
LANE
D
BOULEV
AR
IAL
IEL
LOCKHE
ED
OR
YF
HA
LA
H
EM
AD
AD
RO
OA
D
S
RO AD
RO
TON
KE
LA
CH
E
BL ST E R
VD
W
D
M
MA
N
I C KER
O
ST
A
RO
N
YD
E
NG
KI
WAY
CO
N HILL
H ARRISO
KE
OL
D
PAR
K
S
NE
T
KE
BE
A
S
N
HU
AY
AD
M
S
KIN G
AD
RO
EN
E
ILL
BLVD
WAS H
I NGTO
N
PA
W
RK
RO
KE
LA
AD
HW
Y
L
FORT
X
O
RO
H
HW Y
FRAN CONI A- SPRINGFIELD
D
U
BE
R
RO AD
IL
CO
UN
TY
R
BU
CL
IF
K I NGS
R OBE RT
N
S
PK
WY
B LA
RO AD
FRANCO NIA
IG
E
EE
T
H
RG
ST
R
D
ON
GE O
FA
X
HM
R IC
DR
FI E LD
RING
SP BLVD
H
FA
IR
NE
KEE
C O MM ER CE
STR EET
ND
ROA
D
E
SE
RO
O LD
MI LL
STREET
AD
RO
D OR N
PK
W
Y
L
TE
VAN
RE
E
AVE NU
C
L
PE
HA
CE NT
KE
A
S
AMHERST
R
BU
N C O NI
G
FRA
D
RA
PH
ROAD
RO
A
RO
CLI FTO N
ON
RS
ROAD
EL
AP
CH
LE
E
OA D
FAIRFAX
PAR KWA
Y
CO UNTY
SH
S
RO
OX
M
HA
R OA D
AD
D
P
TO
L
OD
WO
ER
'S
ER
RK
PA ANE
L
D
OL
L
HA
RO LLIN G
FO R D
E
YAT
R
WOLF
RS ON
E
RO
AD
RUN
DE
HE N DE
PA R K WAY
LS
S HO A
AD
HE N
N
LA
OA
RO
AD
D
CO L
L
ING
WO
OD
RO A
D
RO A
D
L
O
ME
M
LE
Y
SHI
R
AD
RO
NA
CE
LO RTON
RO
ROAD
NOMAN COLE S
ITE
AD
RI C
H
AD
RO
MO
ND
HIG
HW
AY
FU RN AC E
ST
O
N
RO
AD
SEPTAGE RECEIVING STATIONS
GU
N
ST
O
N
RO
AD
SEPTIC SYSTEMS OCTOBER 2014
INTERSTATES; TOLL ROADS
AC
PO TOM BLVD
VI EW
PARKWAYS; MAJOR ARTERIALS
COLLECTORS
0
1
2
4
6
8
Miles
Source: Fairfax County GIS and Mapping, Wastewater Management and Fairfax County Health Department.
HI
MT
GU
N
W
E
OA
D
R
O ES
HO
OX
FU
R
Legend
ND
RI
A
AD
MO
V ERNO
N
IA
M EM O R
L
GH
AY
W
AS
H
IN
G
T
N
O
H
R IC
VERNON E
VI EW DRIV
K
IC
AD
RO
POH
K
RO
HUN
T
R OA D
O
HW
G
HI
GEO R
G
RO
AD
AY
OLD
RB
RO
W
GH
HIG HWAY
STREET
MO UNT VERN
ON
AD
E
LV
P TO N
HI
VERN O N
RO
SI
H AM
AY
FO RT
RO AD
AH
R OO K
MT
BE U L
RB
K
IC
LV
E
KL
SI
C
BA
AL
BA
N
TE
LE
RO
GR
AD
AP
H
R
R OA
N
M EMO RIAL
PAR
KW
AY
Task Order No. 14-05
Septage Receiving Site Feasibility Study
Appendix B
DRAFT
APPENDIX B – HAULER SURVEY RESULTS
June 2015
Septage Receiving Facility Survey
Fairfax County Department of Public
Works and Environmental Services
Wastewater Collection Division
The Fairfax County Department of Public Works and Environmental Services is currently working with
the consulting firm of Hazen and Sawyer to conduct a study of the County’s septage receiving program.
The purpose of this survey is to gather input on how potential changes to the program may affect your
business. Please review and respond to the below questions and return the completed form to Ellen Hall
at Hazen and Sawyer via mail, fax, or email by March 27, 2015. We will also be conducting follow-up
telephone calls. Thank you very much for your time and assistance. Your input will help us to design a
program that best meets the needs of your business and all County residents.
Reply to:
Hazen and Sawyer
c/o Ellen Hall
4035 Ridge Top Rd.
Fairfax, VA 22030
p. 703-218-2034
f. 703-218-2040
[email protected]
Direct general inquiries to:
Jonathan Okafor or Tom Russell
Wastewater Collection Division
Fairfax County Department of Public Works and
Environmental Services
6000 Freds Oak Road
Burke, VA 22015
p. 703-250-2700
[email protected]
[email protected]
1. What type of waste do you haul? (Check all that apply)

Domestic Septage

Commerical Septage

Grease Trap Waste

Portable Toilet Waste

Landfill Leachate

Other: (Please specify)
_________
2. Which site(s) do you use now, and how many trucks do you use?

Colvin Run
No. Trucks ______________
Size of Largest Truck (gallons) ______________

Noman Cole
No. Trucks ______________
Size of Largest Truck (gallons) ______________
Septage Receiving Survey  March 2015
1
3. In the future, do you expect your hauling activity in Fairfax County to increase,
decrease, or remain the same?

Significant increase
 Slight increase
 No change
 Decrease
4. How important is it to your business to have septage receiving in Fairfax County?


Not important
Somewhat important

Very important
5. How important is it to your business to have septage receiving at or near the Colvin
Run site?


Not important
Somewhat important

Very important
6. How important is it to your business to have septage receiving at or near the Noman
Cole site?


Not important
Somewhat important

Very important
7. If no septage receiving were provided in Fairfax County, how much would this
negatively impact your business?

No impact
 Slight impact
 Some impact
 Significant impact
8. Where do you currently pick up the majority of your loads for disposal at Fairfax
County facilities?

Great Falls/Hunter Mill area

Clifton area

Gunston/Lorton area

Loudoun County

District of Columbia

Other: (Please specify)
___________
9. If no septage receiving were provided in Fairfax County, where would you discharge?

Blue Plains (District of
Columbia)

Broad Run (Loudoun County)

H.L. Mooney (Prince William
County)

UOSA (Centreville)

Other: (Please specify)
___________

Unknown
Septage Receiving Survey  March 2015
2
10. If you currently use the Colvin Run site and it were to be permanently closed, how far
would you be willing to travel to an alternate site?

2 miles


5 miles
10 miles
 15 miles

20 miles or more
11. How would a fee per truckload comparable to fees charged by other jurisdictions
affect your decision to discharge waste at Fairfax County sites?

No impact
 Slight impact
 Some impact
 Significant impact
12. How much would a fee per truckload affect the costs to the homeowners and
businesses that you work with?

No impact
 Slight impact
 Some impact
 Significant impact
13. How familiar are you with Fairfax County regulations regarding procedures for
septage disposal at Colvin Run and Noman Cole? (Chapter 67-1 of the Fairfax County
Code)


Not at all

Somewhat
Very
14. How much do reduced hours of operation at septage receiving facilities affect your
decision for choosing which site to use?

No impact
 Slight impact
 Some impact
 Significant impact
15. What time of day would you prefer to use a site? (Rank from 1 [most preferred] to 4
[least preferred]. Please provide only one ranking per period--do not repeat the same
ranking for different periods).
__
Morning
__ Afternoon
(6 AM – 12 PM)
Septage Receiving Survey  March 2015
(12 PM – 6 PM )
__ Evening
(6 PM – 9 PM)
__ Night
(9 PM – 6 AM)
3
16. What characteristics/facilities make a site easy to use? (For example, easy access
from a major road, washdown facilities, etc.)
[Add your comments here.]
17. What characteristics/facilities make a site hard to use? (For example, having to turn
the truck around, long wait times, etc.)
[Add your comments here.]
18. Additional Comments / Concerns:
[Add your comments here.]
Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this survey. Your feedback is valued and very much
appreciated!
Septage Receiving Survey  March 2015
4
Hauler Survey Results Summary
What type of waste do you haul?
Waste Type
30%
21%
36%
11% 2%
Domestic Septage
Commercial Septage
Grease Trap Waste
Portable Toilet Waste
Landfill Leachate
Other
In the future, do you expect your hauling activity in Fairfax County to increase,
decrease, or remain the same?
Projected
Changes in
Business
38%
No Change
52%
Slight Increase
10%
Significant Increase
How important is it to your business to have septage receiving at the Noman Cole site, the
Colvin Run site, and in Fairfax County in general?
Importance of Having Septage Receiving in Fairfax County
Noman
Cole
Colvin Run
Fairfax
County
39%
17%
29%
7%
7% 7%
Not Important
32%
76%
86%
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Where do you currently pick up the majority of your loads for disposal at Fairfax
County facilities?
Origin of Waste
Discharged in
Fairfax County
29%
21%
16%
12%
9%
Great Falls/Hunter Mill Area
Clifton Area
Gunston/ Lorton Area
Loudoun County
District of Columbia
Other Locations (In Fairfax)
14%
If no septage receiving were provided in Fairfax County, where would you discharge?
Alternative
Discharge
11%
Locations (If
Fairfax Closed)
Blue Plains
19%
Broad Run
3%
31%
H.L. Mooney
11%
UOSA
Other
25%
Unknown
If you currently use the Colvin Run site and it were to be permanently closed, how far
would you be willing to travel to an alternate site?
Distance Hauler
Companies
Would Travel to
an Alternate Site
15%
2 Miles
31%
5 Miles
10 Miles
23%
15 miles
4%
27%
20 Miles or More
How would reduced hours of operation or a fee per truckload comparable to fees charged by
other jurisdictions affect your decision to discharge waste at Fairfax County sites?
Impact of Potential Changes on Deciding to Use a Site
Reduced Hours
of Operation
10%
Fee/Truckload
14%
28%
17%
48%
41%
No Impact
Slight Impact
41%
Some Impact
Significant Impact
How much would a fee per truckload affect the costs to the homeowners and businesses that
you work with?
Fee/Truckload
Impact on
10%
Customer
No Impact
7%
34%
Slight Impact
48%
Some Impact
Significant Impact
How familiar are you with Fairfax County regulations regarding procedures for
septage disposal at Colvin Run and Noman Cole? (Chapter 67-1 of the Fairfax County
Code)
Level of
Awareness of
Fairfax County 7%
Septage
Regulations
24%
Not at all
69%
Somewhat
Very
What time of day would you prefer to use a site? (Rank from 1 [most preferred] to 4
[least preferred].
70%
19%
43%
32%
4% 7%
Priority
1
7%
Priority
2
18%
Preferred Hours
of Operation (1
High, 4, Low)
20%
12%
24%
Morning
44%
16%
12%
Afternoon
24%
48%
Evening
Night
Priority
3
Priority
4
Task Order No. 14-05
Septage Receiving Site Feasibility Study
Appendix C
DRAFT
APPENDIX C – COMMUNITY OUTREACH
MATERIALS
June 2015
6/4/2015
Department of
Public Works and
Environmental
Services
Wastewater
Collection Division
Septage Receiving Program
Informational Meeting
December 15, 2014
Meeting Objectives
• Provide a general understanding of what the septage receiving
program is and why it is needed
• Describe the study scope developed in response to the petition
received
• Obtain community input regarding the existing Colvin Run site
2
1
6/4/2015
Meeting Agenda
1. Introductions
2. Fairfax County’s Wastewater Collection System and Existing
Septage Receiving Program
3. Scope of the Septage Receiving Study
4. Feedback on the existing Colvin Run Site
5. Next Steps
3
Wastewater
Collection
Sewered Area
Sewered Area
•
Pipes collect wastewater from
individual homes and businesses
Unsewered Area
•
•
•
•
No pipes connecting individual
homes and businesses to the
system
Relies on septic tanks
Waste that collects in septic tanks
must be pumped out and hauled
to a septage receiving station at
least once every five years
Other sources of septage include
portable toilets and restaurant
grease traps
Septage
Receiving
Station
To Treatment
Facility
Unsewered Area
4
2
6/4/2015
Existing Septage Receiving Program
Why did Fairfax County establish a septage receiving program?
• Need to serve all Fairfax County residents and businesses, including those in unsewered areas
• About 21,000 customers in the County do not have access to public sewer and are served by
individual household septic systems
• Address concerns with uncontrolled/illegal use of manholes
What is a septage receiving station?
• A place for hauled sewage to be disposed of in a safe and controlled manner
• Haulers must obtain a permit to use the site
• Conduct monitoring
Why must a septage receiving station be near me?
• Want a site close to the area where the waste is generated
• Shorter trips to the receiving station means less truck traffic on the roads and less cost
5
Existing Colvin Run
Site
• In operation since late 1970s
• Adjacent to Difficult Run
Pump Station and major
sewers
• Easy access from Route 7,
access controlled
• Receives 6,000 trucks per
year or an average of 18 per
day
• Convenient location to serve
unsewered portion of Great
Falls
DIFFICULT RUN PUMP STATION
6
3
6/4/2015
Existing Noman
Cole Site
• Located on treatment plant
site
• In operation since early
1980s
• Easy access from Route 1,
access controlled (gate
guard)
• Receives 4,000 trucks per
year or an average of 14 per
day
• Convenient location to serve
unsewered areas in Clifton
and Lorton
7
Study Scope
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Collect data on existing program
Meet with residents
Survey haulers
Survey neighboring municipalities regarding their programs
Conduct geographic analysis and site visits to identify potential site
alternatives
6. Perform site screening, including cost/benefit analysis of existing and
potential alternative sites
7. Consider fee structure
8. Select most feasible option for implementation
8
4
6/4/2015
Community Input –
Colvin Run Site
Preliminary Site Screening Criteria
• Input Received to-date
• Screening Criteria
• Potential Improvements
Access to sewer with sufficient capacity and flow
Ability to accommodate the largest truck used by current
commercial haulers as well as a typical Class A RV
Ability to provide security, tracking, and pH monitoring
Cost (capital and operating)
Electrical and utility accessibility
Impacts on community (traffic, noise, appearance, etc.)
Impacts on haulers
Land use/zoning of adjacent area
Land use/zoning of site
Major road access
Parkland/historic resource impacts
Wetlands, Streams, and Floodplain impacts
9
Next Steps
• Survey haulers
• Study siting options
• Evaluate options
• Meet again in Spring 2015 to review evaluation with community
• Pump station improvements also coming in 2015
For Further Input: please contact Padam Sethi by January 15
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 703-250-2700
10
5
Task Order No. 14-05
Appendix D
Septage Receiving Site Feasibility Study
DRAFT
APPENDIX D – COST ESTIMATES
June 2015
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility - Site 1, Existing Colvin Run Site
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
DIVISION 1
Start-up and Testing
Quantity
Units
Equipment/materials (2015)
1
LS
$5,243.27
1111
1
CY
LS
$314.60
$18,246.60
$315
$18,247
$18,247
1
200
LS
SY
$1,048.65
$6.95
$1,049
$7
$1,049
$1,391
1200
1
1
LF
EA
LS
$4.64
$185.40
$524.33
$5
$185
$524
$5,562
$185
$524
311
311
CY
CY
$15.73
$10.49
$16
$10
$4,892
$3,261
14000
350
300
SF
CY
LF
$3.15
$31.46
$78.65
$3
$31
$79
$44,044
$11,011
1200
1200
750
750
1
1
750
SY
SY
LF
LF
LS
LS
LF
$15.45
$7.72
$52.43
$52.43
$524.33
$5,243.27
$48.98
$15
$8
$52
$52
$524
$5,243
$49
Division #2 Subtotal =
$18,540
$9,268
$39,325
$39,325
$524
$5,243
$36,737
$239,127
DIVISION 3
Cast-in-place concrete
Concrete Truck Pad
Concrete Curb
Concrete Slab on Grade
Concrete Wet Wells
111
60
100
2
CY
LF
CY
EA
$524.33
$796
$573
$796
$2,028
Division #3 Subtotal =
$88,356.00
$34,380.00
$79,600.00
$4,055.24
$206,391
DIVISION 4
Masonry- Exterior Walls (Brick and Block)
2200
SF
$41.95
$42
Division #4 Subtotal =
$92,282
$92,282
DIVISION 2
Demolition -Building
Demolition Equipment
Demolition -Site work
Clear and Grub (moderate)
Remove Pavement (up to 4")
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Silt Fence
Inlet Protection
E&S Maintenance
Earthwork
Excavation
Backfill
Aggregates
Subgrade Preparation
Stone Subbase
Steel H Piles
Pavement
Bituminous Top Course (2")
Top Course (over 2") (Add 1")
Curb and Gutter
Trench Drain
Final Grading
Landscaping
Fencing w/ Two Gates
DIVISION 5
Labor
Total Unit Cost
$5,243
Division #1 Subtotal =
Total Cost
$5,243
$5,243
References/Comments
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility - Site 1, Existing Colvin Run Site
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
Grating
Aluminum Hatch
Miscellaneous Metals
Quantity
25
25
1
Units
SF
SF
LS
Equipment/materials (2015)
$41.95
$52.43
$2,097.31
Total Unit Cost
$42
$1,152
$2,097
Division #5 Subtotal =
Total Cost
$1,049
$28,811
$2,097
$31,957
3000
10
1
SF
LF
LS
$26.22
$10.49
$6,291.93
$26
$10
$6,292
Division #7 Subtotal =
$78,649
$105
$6,292
$85,046
DIVISION 8
Single Door and Frames
1
EA
$6,291.93
$6,292
Division #8 Subtotal =
$6,292
$6,292
DIVISION 9
Painting
1
LS
$10,000
$10,000
Division #9 Subtotal =
$10,000
$10,000
DIVISION 10
Signage
Fire Extinguisher
1
1
LS
LS
$262.16
$209.73
$75
$60
$337
$270
Division #10 Subtotal =
$337
$270
$607
DIVISION 11
Muffin Monster - Sewage Grinder (JWCE Model 30005-008)
Lakeside Raptor Unit
1
1
EA
EA
$38,800.23
$390,600
$5,550
$58,590
$44,350
$449,190
Division #11 Subtotal =
$44,350
$449,190
$493,540
DIVISION 13
Deep Bed Carbon System
1
EA
$95,951.92
$16,500
$112,452
Division #13 Subtotal =
DIVISION 15
24" Pipe Connection
HVAC
75
1
LF
LS
$100,000.00
DIVISION 16
Electrical
1
LS
DIVISION 17
Instrumentation
1
LS
DIVISION 7
Roofing
Downspouts
Joint Fillers, Sealants, Caulking
Labor
$1,100
$455
$100,000
Division #15 Subtotal =
$34,125
$100,000
$134,125
$95,321.50
$95,321
Division #16 Subtotal =
$95,321
$95,321
$63,547.66
$63,548
Division #17 Subtotal =
$63,548
$63,548
Subtotal =
Contingency
$112,452
$112,452
30%
Subtotal =
$1,580,000
$474,000
$2,050,000
References/Comments
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility - Site 1, Existing Colvin Run Site
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
Contractor Overhead & Profit
General Requirements
Mobilization/Demobilization
Insurance/Bonds
Quantity
15%
5%
5%
3%
Units
Equipment/materials (2015)
Labor
Total Unit Cost
TOTAL =
Total Cost
$307,500
$102,500
$102,500
$61,500
$2,620,000
References/Comments
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility - Site 6, Lake Fairfax Maintenance Facility
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
DIVISION 1
Start-up and Testing
DIVISION 2
Demolition -Building
Demolition -Site work
Clear and Grub (moderate)
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Silt Fence
Inlet Protection
E&S Maintenance
Earthwork
Excavation
Backfill
Aggregates
Subgrade Preparation
Stone Subbase
Pavement
Bituminous Top Course (2")
Top Course (over 2") (Add 1")
Curb and Gutter
Trench Drain
Final Grading
Landscaping
Fencing w/ Two Gates
DIVISION 3
Cast-in-place concrete
Concrete Truck Pad
Concrete Curb
Concrete Slab on Grade
Concrete Wet Wells
DIVISION 4
Masonry- Exterior Walls (Brick and Block)
Masonry- Exterior Walls (Wood)
DIVISION 5
Grating
Aluminum Hatch
Miscellaneous Metals
DIVISION 7
Roofing
Downspouts
Joint Fillers, Sealants, Caulking
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
Quantity
Units
Equipment/materials (2015)
1
LS
1
Total Unit Cost
Total Cost
$5,243.27
$5,243
Division #1 Subtotal =
$5,243
$5,243
LS
$30,000.00
$30,000
$30,000
1
LS
$1,048.65
$1,049
$1,049
1200
1
1
LF
EA
LS
$4.64
$185.40
$524.33
$5
$185
$524
$5,562
$185
$524
2900
2900
CY
CY
$15.73
$10.49
$16
$10
$45,616
$30,411
32800
815
SF
CY
$3.15
$31.46
$3
$31
$103,188
$25,640
2700
2700
1200
1200
1
1
600
SY
SY
LF
LF
LS
LS
LF
$15.45
$7.72
$52.43
$52.43
$524.33
$5,243.27
$48.98
$15
$8
$52
$52
$524
$5,243
$49
Division #2 Subtotal =
$41,715
$20,853
$62,919
$62,919
$524
$5,243
$29,390
$465,739
111
60
200
2
CY
LF
CY
EA
$524.33
$796
$573
$796
$2,028
Division #3 Subtotal =
$88,356
$34,380
$159,200
$4,055.24
$285,991
2200
SF
$41.95
$42
Division #4 Subtotal =
$92,282
$40,000
$132,282
$42
$1,152
$2,097
Division #5 Subtotal =
$1,049
$28,811
$2,097
$31,957
$26
$10
$6,292
$78,649
$273
$6,292
25
25
1
SF
SF
LS
$41.95
$52.43
$2,097.31
3000
26
1
SF
LF
LS
$26.22
$10.49
$6,291.93
Labor
$1,100
References/Comments
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility - Site 6, Lake Fairfax Maintenance Facility
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
Quantity
Units
Equipment/materials (2015)
DIVISION 8
Single Door and Frames
1
EA
DIVISION 9
Painting
1
DIVISION 10
Signage
Fire Extinguisher
Total Unit Cost
Division #7 Subtotal =
Total Cost
$85,214
$6,291.93
$6,292
Division #8 Subtotal =
$6,292
$6,292
LS
$10,000
$10,000
Division #9 Subtotal =
$10,000
$10,000
1
1
LS
LS
$262.16
$209.73
$75
$60
$337
$270
Division #10 Subtotal =
$337
$270
$607
DIVISION 11
Muffin Monster - Sewage Grinder (JWCE Model 30005-008)
Lakeside Raptor Unit
1
1
EA
EA
$38,800.23
$390,600
$5,820
$58,590
$44,620
$449,190
Division #11 Subtotal =
$44,620
$449,190
$493,810
DIVISION 13
Deep Bed Carbon System
1
EA
$95,951.92
$16,500
$112,452
Division #13 Subtotal =
350
1
LF
LS
$100,000.00
DIVISION 16
Electrical
1
LS
DIVISION 17
Instrumentation
1
LS
DIVISION 15
24" Pipe Connection
HVAC
Labor
$455
$100,000
Division #15 Subtotal =
$159,250
$100,000
$259,250
$95,363.97
$95,364
Division #16 Subtotal =
$95,364
$95,364
$63,575.98
$63,576
Division #17 Subtotal =
$63,576
$63,576
Subtotal =
Contingency
30%
Contractor Overhead & Profit
General Requirements
Mobilization/Demobilization
Insurance/Bonds
15%
5%
5%
3%
$112,452
$112,452
Subtotal =
TOTAL =
$2,050,000
$615,000
$2,670,000
$400,500
$133,500
$133,500
$80,100
$3,420,000
References/Comments
HAZEN AND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4035 Ridge Top Rd, Suite 400
Fairfax, Virginia, 22030
Tel: (703) 218-2034 • Fax: (703) 218-2040
PROJECT: Fairfax County Septage Receiving Facility Improvements - Noman Cole Site
PROJECT NO. 32267-008
DESCRIPTION: Draft Planning Cost Estimate
PREPARED BY: JA Date: 6/3/2015
REVIEWED BY: EH Date: 6/4/2015
Description
DIVISION 1
Start-up and Testing
Quantity
Units
Equipment/materials (2015)Labor
Total Unit Cost
Total Cost
1
LS
$5,243.27
$5,000
Division #1 Subtotal =
$5,000
$5,000
1
LS
$18,246.60
$17,400
$17,400
1
LS
$1,048.65
$1,000
$1,000
1200
1
1
LF
EA
LS
$4.64
$185.40
$524.33
$4
$177
$500
$5,304
$177
$500
20000
370
SF
CY
$3.15
$31.46
$3
$30
$60,000
$11,100
2222
2222
750
750
1
1
600
SY
SY
LF
LF
LS
LS
LF
$15.45
$7.72
$52.43
$52.43
$524.33
$5,243.27
$5,243.27
$48.98
$15
$7
$50
$50
$500
$5,000
$5,000
$47
Division #2 Subtotal =
$32,737
$16,365
$37,500
$37,500
$500
$5,000
$5,000
$28,026
$253,109
DIVISION 13
Deep Bed Carbon System
1
EA
$95,951.92
$17,300
$113,252
Division #14 Subtotal =
DIVISION 16
Lighting
Miscellaneous Elec
1
1
EA
EA
$10,000.00
$5,000.00
$2,500
$3,750
$7,500
$11,250
Division #16 Subtotal =
$7,500
$11,250
$18,750
DIVISION 17
Instrumentation
1
LS
$50,000.00
$50,000
Division #17 Subtotal =
$50,000
$50,000
DIVISION 2
Demolition Equipment
Demolition -Site work
Clear and Grub (moderate)
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Silt Fence
Inlet Protection
E&S Maintenance
Aggregates
Subgrade Preparation
Stone Subbase
Pavement
Bituminous Top Course (2")
Top Course (over 2") (Add 1")
Curb and Gutter
Trench Drain
Final Grading
Landscaping
Landscaping
Fencing w/ Two Gates
Subtotal =
Contingency
30%
Contractor Overhead & Profit
General Requirements
Mobilization/Demobilization
Insurance/Bonds
15%
5%
5%
3%
Subtotal =
TOTAL =
$113,252
$113,252
$440,000
$132,000
$570,000
$85,500
$28,500
$28,500
$17,100
$730,000
References/Comments
Task Order No. 14-05
Appendix E
Septage Receiving Site Feasibility Study
DRAFT
APPENDIX E – RATE DEVELOPMENT
June 2015
Fairfax County Wastewater Management Proposed Septage Receiving Rates, FY17-FY21
Annual real discount rate
3%
Base Year-FY16
FY17
FY18
FY19
FY20
FY21
Revenues
Sales of Service
258,839.60
262,847.17
267,841.76
272,052.89
280,214.48
288,620.91
258,839.60
262,847.17
267,841.76
272,052.89
280,214.48
288,620.91
41,685.90
27,350.00
42,936.48
28,170.50
44,224.57
29,015.62
45,551.31
29,886.08
46,917.85
30,782.67
48,325.38
31,706.15
2,000.00
2,272.40
5,000.00
1,000.00
400.00
608.51
100.00
30,000.00
1,000.00
2,060.00
2,340.57
5,150.00
1,030.00
412.00
626.77
103.00
30,900.00
1,030.00
2,121.80
2,410.79
5,304.50
1,060.90
424.36
645.57
106.09
31,827.00
1,060.90
2,185.45
2,483.11
5,463.64
1,092.73
437.09
664.94
109.27
32,781.81
1,092.73
2,251.02
2,557.61
5,627.54
1,125.51
450.20
684.88
112.55
33,765.26
1,125.51
2,318.55
2,634.33
5,796.37
1,159.27
463.71
705.43
115.93
34,778.22
1,159.27
28.20
7,824.39
63,441.00
76,129.20
28.32
7,859.69
63,727.20
76,472.64
28.62
7,942.05
64,395.00
77,274.00
28.75
7,977.35
64,681.20
77,617.44
29.61
8,216.67
66,621.64
79,945.96
30.50
8,463.17
68,620.29
82,344.34
Total Fixed Expenses
111,416.81
114,759.31
118,202.09
121,748.16
125,400.60
129,162.62
Total Fixed and Variable Expenses
258,839.60
262,847.17
267,841.76
272,052.89
280,214.48
288,620.91
Total Revenues
Expenses
Fixed Expenses
Labor
Elec, Mech, Instrum, Bld & Grounds
Administrative
Materials, Equipment, and Other
Electricity
Mileage
Minor Capital
Minor Equipment
Minor Contractual
Misc. Materials
Postal Services
Solids Removal and Disposal
Testing & Lab
Variable Expenses
Sewer Use Charge
Truck Size
1 to 49 gal
50 to 899
900 to 2999
3000 or more
Number
of Trucks
in Bin
8
37
90
54
Total No. Active Trucks
Median
Size for Bin
(gallons)
10
600
2000
4000
189
Net of Revenues and Expenses
-
-
-
-
-
-
593
801
1,294
1,999
611
820
1,315
2,023
629
840
1,341
2,056
648
860
1,363
2,082
667
886
1,404
2,144
687
912
1,446
2,208
-
-
-
-
-
Annual Fee per Truck
Truck Size
1 to 49 gal
50 to 899
900 to 2999
3000 or more
Example Annual Bill
Truck Size
1 to 49 gal
50 to 899
900 to 2999
3000 or more
No. Trucks
0
1
1
1
4,094.69
4,158.24
-
Comparison with Other Local Utilities
Cost for one 2,000 gallon truck making 53 trips per year
Fairfax County
2,004.41
DC Water
Loudoun Water
PWCSA
UOSA
WSSC
14,640.00
4,602.00
2,245.00
2,120.00
8,735.00
4,237.37
-
4,304.15
-
4,433.28
-
4,566.28
-