Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Mail Packet - 4/24/2018 - Memorandum From Adam Jokerst And Eileen Dornfest Re: Halligan Water Supply Project - Updated Costs And TimelinesUtilities electric · stormwater · wastewater · water PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221-6700 970.221.6619 fax  V/TDD: 711 utilities@fcgov.com fcgov.com/utilities MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 2018 TO: Mayor Troxell and Councilmembers FROM: Adam Jokerst, Water Resources Project Engineer Eileen Dornfest, Special Projects Manager THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Kevin R. Gertig, Utilities Executive Director RE: Halligan Water Supply Project (“Halligan Project”) – Updated Costs and Timeline _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Staff recently completed a comprehensive cost update for the Halligan Project to address costs related uncertainties in the federal permitting process, changes to the project timeline, and refinements to project requirements. This memo provides updated costs and a timeline for the project, rationale for changes from previous estimates, comparisons with other water supply alternatives, and opportunities for improvement. BOTTOM LINE: The recent cost update is the most thorough evaluation of Halligan Project costs to date, and includes an independent (i.e., third-party) contractor estimate of construction costs. The total estimated cost for the project has increased to $74.1 million, indicating a need of $56.9 million in future expenditures and $36.7 million in future appropriations. The revised cost estimate is $27.3 million (58%) greater than the last reported project cost of $46.8 million. The majority of the cost increases ($21.4 million of the $27.3 million) are attributable to the following two items: 1) Escalation of costs attributable to increasing material and labor prices, which are compounded by delays in the federal permitting process; and 2) A revised estimate of costs required to address project uncertainties, developed using industry best practices for project risk management. The timeline for completing federal permitting for the Halligan Project has been delayed again. Staff now estimates the project’s draft environmental impact statement (“EIS”) will be released in late-2018 or early-2019 and that construction will commence in 2023. DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 4/6/2018 4/6/2018 4/9/2018 4/10/2018 4/12/2018 2 Despite the increased costs, the Halligan Project remains the most economical project for Utilities to secure additional water supplies. The project will provide firm yield at a price of $8,800 per acre- foot, far less than other regional water supply projects. It also provides many other advantages over other alternatives, such as delivering high quality water supplies and requiring no pumping. 1. REVISED PROJECT TIMELINE A revised schedule from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) indicates that release of the draft EIS is now projected for late-2018 or early-2019. This delay was caused, in part, by the City’s development of a “Showing Document.” The Showing Document provides critical information not currently addressed in the Corps draft EIS, such as flow improvements and wetland formation. Staff also reassessed future permitting requirements based on recent observations of obstacles and associated schedule delays encountered by other Front Range permitting projects. Staff believes it prudent to allot an additional year than previously specified to secure all required permits. These changes extend the overall project timeline by two years, with dam construction now estimated to commence in 2023. A revised timeline is shown below. This timeline differs from that provided in the Corps’ quarterly Front Range Water Supply Updates; however, Corps’ schedules have consistently underestimated permitting timelines and milestones. 2. REVISED COST ESTIMATE Over the past year, the Halligan Project has faced considerable uncertainty within the federal permitting process, which has in turn delayed the project. Unanticipated permitting and mitigation requirements have also been encountered within the past year. In response, staff initiated a revised cost study in June 2017. The revised cost estimate is the most comprehensive cost estimate to date and includes an independent (third-party) contractor’s construction cost estimate and an in-depth review of permitting, mitigation, and construction uncertainties and risks. Cost estimates of this detail have not been performed in the past because project requirements were largely unknown or were likely to change. For example, the size of the Halligan Reservoir enlargement has changed four times throughout the 12-year history of the permitting process, a result of withdrawal of project partners and reevaluation of the City’s water needs 1 . 1 It took until August 2016 for the Corps to finalize the size of the Halligan Reservoir enlargement carried forward in the permitting process. 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 404 Permitting - Draft EIS 404 Permitting - Final EIS 404 Permitting - Permit Decision Other federal & state permitting Preliminary Design Final Design Construction 3 Staff presented revised cost updates to the Water Board at a February 1, 2018 work session, and incorporated Water Board’s feedback into the present cost estimate. 2.1 Past Cost Estimates Staff hires engineering contractors to provide project cost estimates when there are major dam design alterations or when project requirements significantly change. Since 2002, five engineer’s cost estimates have been prepared. The last engineer’s cost update was completed in July 2015 following the withdrawal of the North Poudre Irrigation Company from the project, which reduced the size of the dam enlargement. Engineer’s cost estimates form the basis for quarterly cost updates to City Council. Staff last apprised Council of project costs and schedule in November 2017, at which time costs were based on the engineer’s estimate prepared in 2015. 2.2 Cost Refinements In addition to incorporating an independent construction cost estimate, the revised cost update reflects several changes to the scope of the Halligan Project, changes in market conditions, and other cost refinements, including:  An extension to the project timeline resulting in higher escalation costs and more ongoing consultant costs;  Escalation of construction material and labor using local market rates;  Incorporation of numerous mitigation and enhancement measures identified within the last year by the Corps and the City;  Addition of public recreation facilities at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir;  Reflection of more rigorous permitting requirements;  Refinements to construction sequencing, scheduling, and staffing based on input from the third-party contractor; and,  Use of an industry best practice to identify project risks and to quantify the costs of contingency required to address project risks and uncertainty. The table below provides updated costs by category, comparisons with previously reported values, and rationale for cost changes. All costs are provided in 4 th quarter 2017 dollars and assume construction commencement in the spring of 2023. Staff estimates that each year of construction delay past the spring of 2023 will increase project costs by $3.4 million due to escalation and assumed permitting costs. DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 4 Item Last Reported Cost ($M)1 Revised Cost ($M) Difference ($M) Reason for Difference Acquisition $3.8 $3.5 -$0.3 City owns more property around Halligan Reservoir than initially claimed. Construction Construction $15.6 $17.5 $1.9 Independent cost estimate refinement. Engineering, Admin & Mgmt $5.1 $7.0 $1.9 Independent cost estimate revised admin. and management needs, including City personnel. Identified Mitigation $2.4 $3.0 $0.6 Includes costs for recently developed mitigation, enhancement, and recreation projects Permitting $14.9 $16.8 $1.9 Recent delays increased permitting costs. Additional costs added for non-Corps permits based on other Front Range projects. Debt Service $1.9 $1.9 $0.0 Escalation $0.0 $8.2 $8.2 Schedule delays. Independent cost estimate revised escalation rates. Risk Mitigation/ Contingency $3.1 $16.3 $13.2 Additional funds required to address design, construction, mitigation, and permitting risks and uncertainties. Total 2 $46.8 $74.1 $27.3 1) Project costs last reported November 1, 2017. 2) Line items may not sum to total due to rounding. Most cost increases are attributable to two items, which warrant further discussion: 1) $13.2 million in risk mitigation/contingency to address project uncertainties; and 2) $8.2 million for escalation of material and labor costs. 2.3 Risk Mitigation and Contingency At this stage in the project there remains considerable uncertainty in the dam’s design and permitting and mitigation requirements. A project contingency of 40 percent of the total project cost is currently allocated to address risks related to current project uncertainties, as described below. Using best practices in project risk management, Staff compiled a register of identified risks in the project’s permitting, mitigation, design, and construction phases. For each item in the risk register, we estimated a cost of consequence and assigned a probability of occurrence. The cost of each risk was then reduced to account for the unique probability of occurrence. The risk register identified over 20 risks and $14.6 million in potential consequences. Based on the current level of design of DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 5 the project, as well as input from independent construction contractors and Water Board, staff increased this amount approximately 10% to $16.3 million. This equates to 40% of the total anticipated project cost being held to address project risks associated with uncertainty. Retaining 40% of project costs to address risks and uncertainties is standard industry practice for project budgeting purposes at this phase of conceptual design. The risk register indicates that past engineer’s cost estimates generally underestimated project risks and contingency requirements. Past engineer’s cost estimates could not contemplate certain risks that are much better understood today, e.g., that permitting would take 15+ years to complete. Further design of the dam enlargement will refine many of the costs included in the $16.3 million contingency. However, given the high cost of such design work, combined with the project history of changes in dam size and concept, staff has elected not to undertake these next project design steps until the City is relatively assured the project will be permitted and until design requirements are better developed through the permitting process. Waiting to complete preliminary and final design until the permitting process is further resolved is not only prudent, but is common practice among other Corps-permitted water supply projects. Staff intends to commence preliminary design following public comment on the draft EIS. The $16.3 million contingency also accounts for uncertainties of federal permitting and mitigation requirements. Permitting processes and mitigation requirements are dictated by federal and state agencies and are thus largely outside the City’s control. Although future permitting and mitigation requirements have become much clearer in recent months, staff believes it prudent to include contingency to address further permitting delays or more costly mitigation measures. The City “owns” the entire contingency budget. The cost of risks that fail to materialize will not be incurred. 2.4 Cost Escalation Staff updates construction costs for the Halligan Project quarterly using national construction cost indices 2 . While this rate has escalated 1.2% annually since 2015, local rates in the heavy construction maket have seen escalation of 5% annually per input from local contractors. Staff applied the 5% local escalation rate to all future project costs. Compounded annually and extended by delays in the permitting process, even small adjustments to escalation rates lead to large increases in project costs. 2.5 Cost Assumptions The updated cost estimate is based on several assumptions that, if proven otherwise, could increase the cost of the project. Such assumptions include:  Construction will commence in the spring of 2023;  Construction will be completed within two years (weather delays will increase costs);  Local material and labor costs escalate at or less than 5% annually;  Preliminary and final designs will not deviate substantially from the feasibility design;  The existing dam is structurally competent for enlargement and outlet works tunneling; 2 Indices taken from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s quarterly construction cost trend for concrete dams. DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 6  All mitigation will be accomplished by onsite measures; and,  The draft EIS will provide a significant majority of all resource studies needed for other federal and state permits.  Costs do account for potential legal challenges to permit issuance. 3. FUTURE COSTS and APPROPRIATIONS A summary of past and future expenses for the Halligan Project is provided in the table below. The table indicates $56.9 million in future expenditures and a need for an additional $36.7 million in new appropriations for the project. The project has received reimbursements for shared project expenses of $4.6 million to date. These reimbursements have not been re-appropriated to the project budget but are shown in the table below for completeness. Future appropriations for the Halligan Project, if approved, will be sourced from Water Enterprise Fund reserves. Revenue for the Water Enterprise Fund is provided from water rates and development fees. In particular, revenue collected from cash-in-lieu payments for water supply requirements and commercial water surcharges are accrued to the Water Rights Reserve Fund. The Water Rights Reserve Fund is a component of the Water Enterprise Fund, and funds water supply development projects such as the Halligan Project. The current balance of Water Rights Reserve Fund is approximately $25 million. The updated project cost estimate would increase the Utilities’ cash-in-lieu rate for Water Supply Requirements from $17,300 per acre-foot to approximately $21,200 per acre-foot, an increase of 23%. The Utilities’ cash- in-lieu rate is updated every two years, with the next update planned in 2020. Revised costs for the Halligan Project, along with other water supply factors, will be evaluated prior to updating the cash- in-lieu rate. DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 7 Expenses ($M)1 To Date2 Future Total Acquisition $3.3 $0.3 $3.6 Permitting & Mitigation $12.0 $9.1 $21.1 Construction - $31.3 $31.3 Debt Service3 $1.9 - $1.9 Risk Mitigation/Contingency - $16.3 $16.3 Total $17.2 $56.9 $74.1 Final Utility Cost ($M) To Date2 Future Total Project Costs $17.2 $56.9 $74.1 Less Reimbursements4 ($4.6) ($0.1) ($4.7) Total5 $12.6 $56.8 $69.4 Appropriations ($M) To Date2 Future Total Past Appropriations $37.4 - $37.4 Required Future Appropriation - $36.7 $36.7 Total $37.4 $36.7 $74.1 1) Expenses include escalation in each line item. Line items may not sum to total due to rounding. 2) Past costs through December 2017. 3) Debt service payments from 2004 to 2014 were allocated as Halligan project expenses. All future debt service payments will not be accounted as a project cost. 4) Reimbursements were received from former project partners (North Poudre Irrigation Co. and the Tri-Districts) between 2005 and 2014; miscellaneous reimbursements have been and will be collected from the City of Greeley and from rents in the future. 5) Total Utility cost includes debt service and deducts reimbursements. 4. ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON Despite the increased costs, the Halligan Project remains, by a wide margin, the most economical project for Utilities to secure additional water supplies. The Halligan Project will provide firm yield (i.e., the amount of water supply that can be reliably provided in a drought) at a cost of $8,800 per acre-foot 3 , which is far below the cost of other water supply options. For comparison, the market rate for firm yield from the Colorado-Big Thompson project is $60,000 per acre-foot. Firm yield from the Northern Integrated Supply Project (“NISP”) will cost approximately $25,000 per acre-foot and from the Windy Gap Firming Project, firm yield will cost more than $14,000 per acre-foot. All other alternatives analyzed in the federal permitting process have larger capital costs than the Halligan Project. 3 Based on net cost of the project to Utilities of $69.4 million. DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 8 Costs for other Front Range water supply projects have seen similar cost increases over time as the project scope and requirements were refined. For example, the cost of NISP was reported in 2008 to be $426 million 4 . Recently, the cost of was reported to exceed $1 billion. Staff has evaluated numerous other water supply options, both within and outside the federal permitting process, in recent years. In addition to cost savings, the Halligan Project provides many advantages over these other alternatives, including:  Operates by gravity, thereby requiring no pumping or generating associated greenhouse gas emissions;  Low operating costs;  Addresses deteriorating conditions and safety concerns of the nearly 110-year old Halligan Dam;  Delivers high quality water supplies that require no pre-treatment;  Provides significant flow and habitat improvements to the North Fork of the Poudre River; and,  Provides new reservoir recreation opportunities. 5. PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS Staff has reflected on the events and past assumptions that led to the large increase in project costs to identify opportunities for future improvement. Procedures used in the revised Halligan Project cost study fit within the ongoing Utilities-wide effort to better quantify project risks and include funds for project uncertainty and risk mitigation in preliminary project budgets. As noted above, nearly half of the cost increase documented in this memo is attributable to additional budget to address project risks. The Halligan Project is unique among Utilities capital projects in that major costs (e.g., permitting, mitigation, and certain dam requirements) will be mandated by federal and state agencies and are thus outside the City’s control. Further complicating cost estimating is that permitting and mitigation requirements frequently change. Nevertheless, staff has identified the following actions to lessen future cost uncertainties:  Establish a project design team prior to release of the draft EIS.  Initiate site characterization and preliminary design following the public comment period on the draft EIS.  Increase dialogue with other applicants for federally permitted water supply projects to gather lessons learned (to this point, staff recently met with Denver Water and Colorado Spring Utilities).  Increase the frequency of cost estimate updates.  Assess local labor and material market conditions more regularly. CC: Water Board Lance Smith, Utilities Strategic Finance Director Owen Randall, Chief Engineer Donnie Dustin, Water Resources Manager 4 Value from NISP Draft EIS DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31 Enlarged Halligan Operations DocuSign Envelope ID: B93F8561-02BF-4CC2-83F5-D26717983D31