HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-07 Packet_City of Bozeman Wastewater Rate Study for FY2008-F_12
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director
Debbie Arkell, Public Services Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of the City of Bozeman Wastewater Rate Study for FY2008-
FY2012, prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc.
MEETING DATE: June 25, 2007
BACKGROUND: On March 26, 2007, HDR Engineering presented the Commission with
the results of their study of Wastewater Rates. During that public presentation, HDR addressed
the rate increases needed over the next five years and proposed a number of options for changes
in the city’s rate structures. To paraphrase the report, the proposed wastewater rates are cost-
based and were developed using “generally accepted” rate making methods and principles. The
proposed rates have been adjusted to reflect the results of the cost of service analysis.
After their first presentation, HDR advised the City to enter into discussions with the Country
Classic Dairy regarding their future wastewater treatment plans. Staff has met with Country
Classic Dairy several times regarding the potential increases in their rates and surcharges. The
Dairy is investigating options to decrease the amount of waste discharged to our system and will
submit their plans by August 6, 2007.
162
HDR has issued the final Draft Report “City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate
Study.” This draft’s rates differs from their initial presentation in that they have removed the
effects of rate surcharge increases for the Dairy, due to the uncertainty of the Dairy’s intent to
continue to discharge industrial strength waste. Excluding the Dairy surcharges results in
different rates for the other customer classes. Please refer to section 3.4.3 of the report, on page
3-17.
HDR Engineering recommends, and staff concurs, with implementing the cost-of-service rates
for all customers, including the industrial surcharges, once plans are finalized with Country Class
Dairy.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate
Study. Direct staff to prepare the necessary resolutions and to schedule Wastewater Rate Public
Hearings for a Commission meeting in August, after receipt of the Country Classic Dairy Report.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Taking the recommended action has no direct fiscal impact at this
point. Once the rate resolutions are adopted after public hearings, the recommended rates for
FY2008 would result in an overall increase in rate revenues of 5%:
IF the Dairy chooses to continue its current wastewater practices:
• Approximate 1.8% decrease for Residential Customers.
• Approximate 5% increase for Commercial Customers.
• Approximate 5% increase for Country Classic Dairy to the base rate and 152%
increase in surcharge.
IF the Dairy chooses to significantly adjust the strength of waste discharged into the City’s
system:
• Approximate 2.7% increase for Residential Customers.
• Approximate 5% increase for Commercial Customers.
• Approximate 5% increase for Country Classic Dairy to both the base rate and
surcharge.
163
The proposed rates are designed to enable our wastewater utility to operate in a financially sound
and prudent manner, with overall rate increases of 5% in FY2008, 9% in FY2009, 9% in
FY2010, 2% in FY2011, and 2% in 2012.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________________ _________________________________
Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director Debbie Arkell, Public Services Director
_________________________________
Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager
Report compiled on June 20, 2007
Attachments: Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study,
including technical appendix.
164
Draft Report
City of Bozeman
Comprehensive Wastewater Rate
Study
April 2007
Prepared by:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
165
May 8, 2007 DRAFT
Ms. Anna Rosenberry, CPA
Finance Director
City of Bozeman
411 E Main Street
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230
Dear Ms. Rosenberry:
HDR Engineering Inc. (HDR) is pleased to provide the draft final report on the comprehensive
wastewater rate study recently completed for the City of Bozeman (City). This report contains a
discussion of the process used to develop the wastewater rate study. In addition, contained in the
Technical Appendix of this report is a complete set of the exhibits used to develop the study.
This study has been developed based upon data and information supplied by the City to HDR. In
addition, this report was prepared using generally accepted wastewater rate setting techniques
and methodologies. The accounting, budgeting, billing records, and current revenue requirement
analysis for the City were the primary sources for the data contained within the report.
We appreciate your assistance, along with that of the City’s management team and staff in the
development of this report. We look forward to the opportunity to provide other technical
assistance in the future.
Sincerely yours,
H DR Engineering, Inc.
Tom Gould
Vice President
166
Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction..................................................................................................................ES-1
Key Wastewater Rate Study Results ...........................................................................ES-1
Overview of the Rate Study Process............................................................................ES-2
Prudent Financial Planning..........................................................................................ES-2
Wastewater Rate Study................................................................................................ES-3
Summary....................................................................................................................ES-10
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Overview of the Rate Study Process....................................................................1-1
1.3 Organization of the Study....................................................................................1-2
1.4 Summary..............................................................................................................1-2
2 Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles
2.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Global Principles in Which Rates Should Be Set................................................2-1
2.3 Methods of Accumulating Costs for Wastewater Revenue Requirements..........2-2
2.4 Economic Theory and Rate Design.....................................................................2-3
2.5 Prudent Financial Planning..................................................................................2-3
2.6 City Financial/Rate Setting Policies....................................................................2-5
2.7 Summary..............................................................................................................2-6
3 Development of the Wastewater Utility Rate Study
3.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Development of the Wastewater Revenue Requirements....................................3-1
3.3 Wastewater Cost of Service Analysis..................................................................3-9
3.4 Wastewater Rate Designs ..................................................................................3-15
3.5 Summary of the Wastewater Rate Study...........................................................3-20
Technical Appendix
Table of Contents i
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
167
Executive Summary
Introduction
HDR Engineering (HDR) was retained by the City of Bozeman (City) to conduct a
comprehensive wastewater rate study. A comprehensive rate study reviews both the adequacy of
the City’s current rates, as well as the fairness and equity of the rates. This study provides the
decision framework for any needed future adjustments.
In developing this study the City’s planned capital improvement projects were major cost drivers
for the study. The major capital improvement to occur during the time period is the Phase 1
expansion of the City’s wastewater treatment plant. Funding for this project will be provided
from a combination of rates, bond issuance and impact fees. The amount and timing of this
expansion project, along with other capital improvements projects, were key in establishing the
financial revenue requirements for the wastewater utility.
Key Wastewater Rate Study Results
Based upon the technical analysis undertaken as a part of this study, the following findings,
conclusions and recommendations were noted.
Minimum wastewater reserve levels are recommended to increase financial stability.
Wastewater capital funding from rates, equal to or greater than annual depreciation expense,
is recommended to ensure adequate funding for replacement of existing infrastructure.
Phase 1 of the expansion of the wastewater treatment is planned to occur and be operational
in 2010. Construction of the treatment plant needs to occur during this time period to meet
operational permitting requirements.
Revenue requirements were developed for the wastewater utility for the period of fiscal year
2007 through 2012. The findings of this study indicate that rate adjustments of 5%, 9%, 9%,
2% and 2% are needed for the respective five years of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Based upon the findings of the wastewater cost-of-service analyses conducted, there are
some interclass differences. A slow ramping in of interclass changes or adjustments is
recommended for the wastewater utility.
The Country Classic Dairy flows to the wastewater plant are at exceptionally high (strength)
loading levels. At the same time, the City’s treatment plant requires expansion and upgrades,
in part, to meet permitting requirements. As such, it is recommended that this customer, due
to their high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) loading levels, should be separated into a
separate class of service to provide an equitable and cost-based rate, or until such time that
the dairy constructs pretreatment facilities.
It is recommended that the City establish a new class of service for industrial customers
which would include commercial/industrial customers with consistently high loading levels,
and do not have pretreatment facilities.
Executive Summary ES-1
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
168
The City’s overall level of wastewater rates should be adjusted to reflect the above
recommendations, but no change in the wastewater rate structure is recommended.
Provided below is the executive summary of the analyses undertaken for the City and the
findings, conclusions and recommendations reached as a result of this study.
A comprehensive review of the City’s wastewater rates was undertaken. The wastewater utility
was financially evaluated on a “stand-alone” basis. That is, no subsidies between the any other
City utilities should occur. By viewing the utility on a stand-alone basis, the need to adequately
fund both O&M and capital infrastructure must be balanced against the rate impacts to
customers.
Prudent Financial Planning
In developing revenue requirements, the City’s budget documents were used as the initial
starting point. However, within the development of the revenue requirements, the analysis
should also consider prudent financial planning criteria. The prudent financial planning criteria
considered during the development of this study were as follows:
ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM FUNDING LEVEL FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDED FROM
RATES – Prudent financial planning dictates that a utility should fund a certain portion of
capital improvement projects from rates on an on-going basis. The general financial
guideline used is that at a minimum, a utility should fund an amount equal to or greater than
annual depreciation expense.
ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE RATIO – The debt service coverage
ratio is an important financial measure that is reviewed by bond rating agencies and banks to
evaluate a utility’s ability to make debt service payments. While the City will have a legal
obligation to meet a specified minimum DSC, for financial planning purposes it is prudent to
plan around meeting a debt service coverage ratio that is above the minimum (e.g. 1.50 –
1.75).
ESTABLISHING MINIMUM RESERVE LEVELS – The City should strive to maintain a cash
balance sufficient to meet the total operating expenses for the wastewater utility in order to
provide sufficient cash flow to meet daily operating expenses.
These prudent financial planning practices were used within the City’s study.
Wastewater Rate Study
In conducting the wastewater rate study, the three analyses of a comprehensive rate study were
conducted; a revenue requirement analysis, a cost of service analysis and the design of rates.
Provided below is a summary of each analysis.
Wastewater Revenue Requirement Analysis – The development of the wastewater revenue
requirements was the first analysis undertaken. A revenue requirement analysis is used to
determine the overall adequacy of the wastewater utility rates.
Executive Summary ES-2
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
169
For this particular analysis, the revenue requirements were developed for the six-year time
period of 2007 – 2012. The City’s analysis utilized the “cash-basis” approach to accumulate
costs. The cash basis approach sums the wastewater utility’s O&M expenses, debt service and
capital improvements from rates to determine the overall funding requirements needed from
rates. This approach is the most commonly used methodology to set revenue requirements for
municipal utilities.
“An important aspect of
the wastewater revenue
requirements was the
proper and adequate
funding of capital
improvements.”
An important aspect of the wastewater revenue requirements was
the proper and adequate funding of capital improvements. The
City’s capital improvement plan was used as a starting point.
The capital improvement projects were designated by the City as
either wastewater fund or impact fee (growth) related projects.
The City has planned on approximately $36.5 million in
wastewater fund capital improvements and $14 million in growth
related capital improvements, during the six-year time period.
The majority of funding for the planned wastewater fund capital improvements is from rates and
$17.7 million dollar State Revolving Fund loan. The funding for the wastewater growth related
capital improvements is from wastewater impact fees.
A general financial guideline that can be used to determine proper funding levels for capital
improvements from rates is that, at a minimum, a utility should fund an amount equal to or
greater than annual depreciation expense. The City has historically funded at least 100% or
more of annual depreciation expense within their rates for renewal and replacement capital
projects. The City should be commended for maintaining this level of funding from rates. This
level of funding attempts to close the gap between depreciation expense (original cost) and
replacement cost.
Executive Summary ES-3
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
170
A summary of the wastewater revenue requirement analysis is provided below in Table ES-1.
Table ES-1
Summary of the Wastewater Revenue Requirement Analysis (000’s)
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Revenues
Retail Sales $3,999 $4,454 $4,676 $4,909 $5,154 $5,412
Other Revenue 161 161 168 162 151 152
Total Revenues $4,161 $4,615 $4,844 $5,071 $5,305 $5,564
Expenses
O&M Expenses $2,658 $2,965 $3,237 $3,643 $3,738 $3,911
Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP 1,591 1,791 2,510 2,750 2,600 2,700
Current Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Debt (Net of Impact Fees) 0 0 42 254 314 274
Total Revenue Requirements $4,249 $4,756 $5,789 $6,647 $6,653 $6,885
Balance/(Deficiency) of Funds ($88) ($141) ($945) ($1,576) ($1,347) ($1,321)
Bal./(Def.) as a % of Rates (Cumulative) 2.2% 3.2% 20.2% 32.1% 26.1% 24.4%
Proposed Annual Rate Adjustments 0.0% 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Add’l Revenue From Rate Adj. $0 $223 $655 $1,129 $1,289 $1,461
B al./(Def.) of Funds After Rate Adj. ($88) $82 ($290) ($447) ($59) $140
It should be noted that the balance or deficiencies in any single year are cumulative. That is, any
adjustments in the initial years will reduce the deficiency in the following years. Over the six-
year period, rates need to be adjusted by approximately 24.4% in order to adequately and
properly fund the City’s wastewater utility O&M and capital infrastructure needs.
To implement the needed adjustments, a wastewater transition plan was developed. Provided in
Table ES-2 is the proposed wastewater utility rate transition plan for the six year period.
Table ES-2
Wastewater Utility – Six Year Rate Transition Plan
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Present Average Monthly
Residential Wastewater Bill [1]
$21.67
Proposed Wastewater Rate
Adjustments 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Projected Average Monthly
Residential Wastewater Bill $22.75 $24.80 $27.03 $27.57 $28.13
$ Change Per Month $1.08 $2.05 $2.23 $0.54 $0.55
Cumulative $ Change Per Month $1.08 $3.13 $5.36 $5.90 $6.45
[1] Average bill was assumed a ¾” meter with 6 CCF
Executive Summary ES-4
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
171
Wastewater Cost of Service Analysis – A wastewater cost of service analysis is concerned with
the equitable allocation of the total wastewater revenue requirements to the various customer
classes of service of the utility. The objectives of the wastewater cost of service analysis are
different from determining revenue requirements. A revenue requirement analysis determines
the utility's overall financial needs, while the cost of service study determines the "fair and
equitable” manner to collect those revenue requirements. A summary of the wastewater utility
cost of service analysis is shown within Table ES-3.
Table ES-3
Summary of the Wastewater Utility Cost of Service Analysis for 2008 ($000’s)
Classes of Service
Present Rate
Revenues
Allocated
Costs
$
Difference
%
Difference
Residential $1,690 $1,543 ($147) -8.7%
Low-Income 3 7 4 135.2%
Multi-Family 974 1,007 33 3.4%
Commercial 1,162 1,252 90 7.7%
Commercial – Special 13 13 (0) -0.8%
Classic Country Dairy [1] 26 103 77 296.1%
Government 55 60 5 8.7%
Government – Special 0 0 0 2.3%
Montana State University 521 601 80 15.3%
Unmetered 9 9 (1) -7.2%
Total $4,454 $4,595 $141 3.2%
[1] This table does not include surcharge revenues paid by the Dairy. Currently they pay approximately an
additional $27,000 annually in surcharges. That would increase substantially if this rate structure were
maintained and appropriate cost-based surcharges applied.
The cost of service results indicate that cost differences do exist between the major customer
classes of service. A simple rule is that a customer class is considered to be paying their fair
allocation of costs if the costs of service results are within +/- 5% of the overall adjustment.
Therefore, it was determined that a slow ramping in of interclass cost of service adjustments
should be made over time. As a result of this decision, each class of service will be adjusted in
the design of the proposed rates to reflect the cost of service results.
Classic County Dairy (the “dairy”) currently is in the commercial class of service. For purposes
of the cost of service study, the dairy was separated out as an individual customer based on the
dairy’s exceptionally high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) loadings. This study has
recommended to the City an approach to work with the Dairy in a positive manner which should
allow the dairy to make a business decision as to whether they will invest in pretreatment to
reduce their loadings to the City, or alternatively, continue to have the City treat their high BOD
wastewater and charge the dairy the appropriate and cost-based rates indicated by this study. A
more detailed discussion of this aspect of the study is included within the rate design discussion
of the study.
Wastewater Rate Design – The revenue requirement and cost of service results indicate the
priority of the City should be to generate an adequate level of funding for the wastewater utility.
Therefore, the revenue requirement results were the basis for establishing cost-based rates for the
utility. The City currently has seven wastewater classes of service. They are residential, low-
Executive Summary ES-5
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
172
income, multi-family, commercial, government, Montana State University, and unmetered. All
of the classes of service are under the same rate schedule. The present rate structure is composed
of a service charge and a volume charge. Presented below in Table ES-4 is a summary of the
present (2007) wastewater rate schedules.
Table ES-4
Summary of the 2007 Present Wastewater Rates
Rate Components Current Rate
Service Charge (Monthly) (Low-Income no charge) $10.67/Month
Volume Charge ($/ccf) [1]
Residential $1.80
Low-Income $1.80
Multi-Family $1.80
Commercial $1.80
Government $1.80
Montana State University $1.80
[1] – CCF of wastewater = One hundred cubic feet of wastewater. 1 CCF of wastewater = 748 gallons
Presented below in Table ES-5 is a summary of the proposed wastewater rates. The multi-family,
commercial, government and Montana State University were combined into Non-Residential
class of service. The rates collect the proposed overall increase of 5% in rate revenues.
Table ES-5
Summary of the Proposed 2007 Wastewater Rates
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Service Charge (Monthly)
Residential $10.87 $11.17 $12.17 $13.27 $13.54 $13.81
Low-Income $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Non-Residential $10.87 $11.41 $12.44 $13.56 $13.83 $14.11
Industrial (Country Classic) $10.87 $27.36 $29.82 $32.50 $33.15 $33.81
Volume Charge ($/ccf)
Residential $1.80 $1.85 $2.02 $2.20 $2.24 $2.28
Low-Income $1.80 $1.80 $1.96 $2.14 $2.18 $2.22
Non-Residential $1.80 $1.89 $2.06 $2.25 $2.30 $2.35
Industrial (Country Classic) $1.80 $4.53 $4.94 $5.38 $5.49 $5.60
As can be seen, the dairy was separated from the commercial class into an industrial class of
service for customers with high wastewater loadings, and that do not pre-treat their wastewater.
The proposed rate for the dairy assumes no change in the operation of the dairy and continued
high BOD loadings. This report has recommended an approach for the City to work with the
dairy in a positive manner to allow the dairy sufficient time to determine the best approach for
the dairy to address this problem. For that reason, this report is not recommending an immediate
increase in the dairy’s rates, to the levels shown in Table ES-5. Rather, the City should work
with the dairy to allow them sufficient time to make a reasoned business decision on the
Executive Summary ES-6
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
173
construction of pretreatment facilities. If the dairy determines that it will build a pretreatment
facility, the City should reward them for this decision and hold their rates at the proposed
commercial level. This assumes that the City will provide the dairy with a reasonable date for
the final completion and start-up of the facility. Failure to meet this completion date could, at
the City’s discretion, trigger the implementation of the rates as shown in Table ES-5. Finally, if
the dairy determines that they will forego building a pretreatment facility, then the City should
implement the rates as shown in Table ES-5, since these are cost-based and reflect the impacts to
the City’s wastewater facility from the high BOD loadings by the dairy.
A full and complete discussion of the development of the comprehensive wastewater rate study
and the proposed rate designs can be found in Section 3 of this report.
Summary
The previous discussion has provided an executive summary of the rate analyses undertaken for
the City’s wastewater utility. In summary, it was concluded that the City’s wastewater rates
appear to be fair and equitable and set at a level that generally meets the City’s current overall
costs. A detailed discussion of the analyses undertaken for the City’s wastewater utility is
contained in the following sections of this report. Included within this report are Technical
Appendices, which document all the analyses undertaken, along with our findings and
conclusions.
Executive Summary ES-7
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
174
Section 1
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
“The objective of the rate
study was to develop
financial plans and rates
necessary to meet the City’s
operation and maintenance
needs and the capital
improvement program for
the utility.”
HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) was retained by the City of Bozeman (City) to conduct a
comprehensive wastewater rate study. The objective of the rate study was to develop financial
plans and cost-based rates necessary to meet the City’s
operation and maintenance (O&M) needs and the capital
improvement program for the wastewater utility. This study
determined the adequacy of the existing wastewater rates and
provides the framework for any needed future adjustments.
This study is timely in that the City has planned for a
significant amount of future improvements to the City’s
wastewater system. In particular, the expansion of the City’s
wastewater treatment plant will have a major impact upon the
City’s wastewater rates. This expansion is required to meet operational permitting requirements
and growth-related needs. The City is currently at or exceeding permitting requirements and
therefore must complete Phase 1 of the expansion project within this study’s projected test (time)
period. Given the level of expenditures required, developing a financial plan to fund these
projects and to ensure financial and rate stability for the utility was of paramount importance. In
developing this study the City’s wastewater capital improvement plan was a major cost driver for
the study and our findings and recommendations. The amount and timing of these projects were
important to the establishment of the overall financial revenue requirements.
1.2 Overview of the Rate Study Process
User rates must be set at a level where a utility’s operating and capital expenses are met with the
revenues received from customers. This is an important point, as failure to achieve this objective
may lead to insufficient funds to maintain system integrity. To evaluate the adequacy of the
existing rates, a comprehensive wastewater rate study is often performed. A comprehensive
wastewater rate study consists of three interrelated analyses. Figure 1-1 provides an overview of
these analyses.
Introduction 1-1
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
175
Figure 1-1
Overview of the Comprehensive Rate Analyses
Compares the sources of funds (revenues)
to the expenses of the utility to determine
the overall rate adjustment required
Revenue Requirement Analysis
Allocates the revenue requirements to
the various customer classes of service
in a “fair and equitable" manner
Cost of Service Analysis
Considers both the level and structure of
the rate design to collect the target
level of revenues
Rate Design Analysis
1.3 Organization of the Study
This report is organized in a sequential manner that first provides an overview of utility rate
setting principles, followed by sections that detail the specific steps used to review the City’s
wastewater rates. The following sections comprise the City’s wastewater rate study report:
Section 2 – Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles
Section 3 – Development of the Wastewater Rate Analyses
A Technical Appendices is attached at the end of this report, which details the various
wastewater rate analyses that were used in the preparation of this report.
1.4 Summary
This report will review the comprehensive wastewater rate analyses prepared for the City of
Bozeman. This report has been prepared utilizing “generally accepted” wastewater rate setting
techniques. The next section of the report will provide a brief overview of the general rate
setting process that was used to analyze and establish the proposed wastewater rates for the City.
Introduction 1-2
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
176
Section 2
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles
2.1 Introduction
A major objective of conducting a comprehensive wastewater rate study is to determine the
adequacy of the existing wastewater rates and provide the basis for any needed adjustments to
meet operating and capital needs of the City. At the same time, the study reviewed the fairness
and equity of the current wastewater rates.
“In developing and
establishing utility rates,
there are “generally
accepted” principles or
guidelines around which
rates should be set.”
In developing and establishing utility rates, there are “generally accepted” principles or
guidelines around which rates should be set. This section of the
report provides a general overview of the methodology and
guidelines used for setting cost-based rates for the utility. This
should give the reader a better understanding of the general
process that is detailed later in this report. In addition, this
section of the report discusses the issues of “prudent” financial
planning and the use of established financial policies to aid in
establishing the City’s rates.
2.2 Global Principles in Which Rates Should Be Set
As a practical matter, there should be a general set of principles around which rates should be
set. These guiding principles may be items such as setting rates that are cost-based, equitable,
and easy to administer. These types of principles may be referred to as “global principles” since
they should be utilized by all utilities in the development of their rates.
Provided below is a brief listing of the global principles around which the City should consider
setting its utility rates:
Rates should be cost-based and equitable, and set at a level able to meet the full revenue
requirements of the utility.
Rates should be easy to understand and administer.
Rates and the process of allocating costs should conform to generally-accepted rate setting
techniques.
Rates should be stable, in their ability to provide adequate revenues to meet the utility’s
financial, operating, and regulatory requirements.
Rate levels should be stable from year to year from the customer’s perception.
These guiding principles were utilized within this study to help develop utility rates that are cost-
based and equitable.
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-1
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
177
2.3 Methods of Accumulating Costs for Wastewater
Revenue Requirements
The convention used by most public utilities to establish their revenue requirements is called the
“cash basis” approach of setting rates. As the name implies, a public utility aggregates its cash
expenditures for a period of time to determine its required revenues from user rates and other
forms of income. This methodology conforms nicely to most public utility budgetary
requirements, and is a very straightforward and easily understood calculation. Operation and
maintenance expenses are added to any applicable transfer payments to determine total operating
expenses. Capital costs are calculated by adding debt service payments (principal and interest)
to capital improvements financed with operating rate revenues. Depreciation expense is
sometimes included in lieu of this latter item to stabilize annual revenue requirements. Under
the “cash basis” of accounting, the sum of the capital and operating expense equals the utility’s
revenue requirement during any period of time. It should be noted that the two portions of the
capital expense component (debt service and capital improvements financed from rates) are
necessary under the “cash basis” approach because utilities generally cannot finance all of their
capital facilities with long-term debt. Table 2-1 may be helpful in summarizing the “cash basis”
methodology.
Table 2-1
Overview of the “Cash Basis” Methodology
+ O&M Expense
+ Taxes/Transfer Payments
+ Capital Additions Financed with Rate Revenues (≥ Depreciation Exp.)
+ Debt Service (P+I)
= Total Revenue Requirements
2.4 Overview of the Cost Allocation Procedures
After the total revenue requirement has been quantified and determined, it is allocated to the
users of the service in a manner that reflects the cost relationships incurred for the delivery of the
services. This analytical exercise usually takes the form of a “cost of service” study.
A cost of service study is a three-step approach. First, costs must be functionalized or grouped
into the various cost categories related to the providing of service (e.g. for a wastewater utility;
collection, pumping, treatment etc.). This step is largely accomplished by the utility’s
accounting system. The next step is the classification of the functionalized costs. Classification
refers to the arrangement of the functionalized data into cost components. For a wastewater
utility, these are typically, volume (flow)-related, strength-related, and customer-related
component costs. Each of the cost components are allocated to the various customer classes of
service based upon each customer class’ relative contribution to the specific cost component.
For example, customer related costs are allocated proportionally to each class of service based
upon the total number of customers in that class of service. Once the costs are allocated to each
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-2
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
178
class of service, a measure of the required level of rate revenues from each class of service to
achieve cost-based rates can be determined.
2.5 Economic Theory and Rate Design
The design of the proposed wastewater rates for adoption by the City concludes the rate study
process. The rate design process utilizes the results of both the revenue requirement and cost of
service analysis to develop rates that achieve the overall goals and objectives of the City. These
goals and objectives may include consideration of cost-based rates, but may also consider items
such as ability to pay, continuity of past rate philosophy, encouragement of economic
development, ease of administration, legal requirements, etc. It is important to understand that
cost of service is only one goal or objective in designing final wastewater rates, however, it is an
important one.
While the general description of the utility rate setting process discussed in this section of the
report is greatly simplified and abbreviated, it does however address the basic elements of
contemporary regulatory thinking. One of the major justifications for a comprehensive rate
study is founded in economic theory. Economic theory suggests that the price of a commodity
must roughly equal its cost, if equity among customers is to be maintained. The implications of
this statement on utility rate design are significant. For example, volume-related costs are
usually incurred by a wastewater utility to meet flow requirements. Thus, the customers causing
peak flows should properly pay for the demand-related facilities in proportion to their
contribution to maximum demands. Through refinement of costing and pricing techniques,
consumers of a product are given a more accurate price signal of what the costs are for collection
and treatment. The above basic thoughts have considerable foundation in economic literature.
They also serve as primary guidelines for rate design by most utility regulators and
administrative agencies. This “price-equals-cost” concept will provide the basis for much of the
subsequent analysis and comment.
2.6 Prudent Financial Planning
In developing revenue requirements, the City’s budget documents are used as the initial starting
point. However, within the development of the revenue requirements, the analysis should also
consider prudent financial planning criteria. There are three key financial indicators that should
be considered in the development of all utility financial plans or revenue requirement analyses.
These three financial planning criteria are: establishing minimum funding levels for capital
projects funded from rates, establishing a minimum target debt service coverage ratio, and
establishing minimum reserve levels. The following discussion provides a brief overview of
each of these financial planning indicators.
ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM FUNDING LEVEL FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDED FROM
RATES
Prudent financial planning dictates that a utility should fund a certain portion of capital
improvement projects from rates on an on-going basis. The general financial guideline used
is that at a minimum, a utility should fund an amount equal to or greater than annual
depreciation expense. However, there are three reasons for increasing the level of capital
funding through rates. The first is that funding levels over and above depreciation expense
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-3
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
179
better reflect actual replacement cost. Second, increasing the level of capital funding from
rates will help provide cash flow to fund the capital plan in future years, and minimize any
long-term borrowing needs. Finally, an increased level of capital funding will have the
added benefit of strengthening the utility’s debt service coverage ratio.
ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM TARGET DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE RATIO
The debt service coverage ratio is an important financial measure that is reviewed by bond
rating agencies and banks to evaluate a utility’s ability to make debt service payments. For
revenue bonds, there is typically a legal requirement (rate covenant) to meet a minimum debt
service coverage ratio. The debt service coverage ratio is calculated by subtracting total
O&M and taxes from total revenues. The resulting figure is the balance available for debt
service payment. The balance available for debt service is then divided by the annual debt
service obligations (payments) to determine the debt service coverage ratio. For a revenue
bond, most bond covenants require meeting a minimum coverage ratio of 1.25 – 1.30. While
the City would have a legal obligation to meet the minimum, for financial planning purposes
it is prudent to plan around meeting a debt service coverage ratio that is above the minimum
(e.g. 1.50 – 1.75). In that way, if the utility has any negative financial fluctuations (e.g. low
sales/revenues); they will be much more assured of meeting the required minimum. At the
same time, by planning around a higher debt service coverage ratio, the City will appear
financially stronger to the bond rating agencies, which may translate into an improved bond
rating and lower interest rates on borrowing. Bond rating agencies do not want utilities to
financially plan around simply meeting the minimum.
ESTABLISHING MINIMUM RESERVE LEVELS
Reserve levels are a crucial part of a utility’s financial picture. Typically utilities maintain
several different types of reserve funds. These may include: an operating reserve, a capital
(replacement) reserve, an emergency or contingency reserve, and a rate stabilization reserve.
Each of these reserves has its own financial, operating or legal requirements which may set
an established minimum reserve level (e.g. a bond reserve). A key aspect of reviewing
reserve levels was determining target minimum levels for the City’s current reserves. It is
important to remember that when reserves fall below the targeted minimum level,
management should review the cause of the declining reserves and determine what action, if
any, should be taken. Maintenance of minimum reserve levels should not, on its own, trigger
the need for a rate adjustment. However, after two consecutive years of diminishing reserves
as a result of under-recovery of costs, rates should be reviewed.
The above key financial planning criteria are main drivers in the City’s wastewater rate study.
Other prudent financial planning criteria beyond those cited above were used within the City’s
study. As the study is discussed in more detail, these other financial planning criteria will be
discussed at that time.
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-4
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
180
2.7 City Financial/Rate Setting Policies
“By establishing
financial/rate setting
policies, it provides City
management with clear
policy direction concerning
these key financial
measures and parameters.”
As a part of the comprehensive rate study process, it is important to understand the key
objectives the City was striving to achieve and the policy issues that needed to be addressed by
the study. By establishing financial/rate setting policies, it provides City management with clear
policy direction concerning these key financial measures and
parameters. At the same time, it should also lead to more
stable rates over time as a consistent set of financial policies
are used to establish the City’s rates.
Provided below is a brief discussion of each of the key
financial/rate setting policy issues addressed as a part of this
study. The key policy issues provided a decision framework
for key areas of the study.
OPERATING RESERVES – THE CITY SHOULD STRIVE TO MAINTAIN A CASH BALANCE THAT IS
SUFFICENT TO MEET DAILY OPERATING EXPENSES.
Cash working capital, or operating reserves, is needed to meet daily cash flow needs, and to
minimize reliance on short-term borrowing. For the wastewater utility it was determined that
minimum operating reserve levels of 45 days of annual operating expenses were needed for
that purpose. This financial measure is equivalent to approximately 12% (45 days / 365
days) of operating expenses.
CAPITAL RESERVE – THE CITY SHOULD STRIVE TO MAINTAIN A CAPITAL RESERVE.
The capital reserve should be set at a minimum level equal to an amount of the utility’s
annual depreciation expense.
“One of the major financial
challenges in the utility industry
is the need to properly maintain
utility infrastructure. Across the
U.S., the wastewater utility
industry is seeing more systems
that are deteriorating and are
inadequately funded.”
MINIMUM FUNDING OF CAPITAL OUTLAY FROM RATES – THE CITY SHOULD ANNUALLY
BUDGET AND FUND A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF THE COST FOR “DEPRECIATION” OF
CAPITAL ASSETS AS AN EXPENSE WITHIN THE UTILITY’S OPERATING BUDGET.
One of the major financial challenges in the utility
industry is the need to properly maintain utility
infrastructure. Across the U.S., the wastewater utility
industry is seeing more systems that are deteriorating
and are inadequately funded. Therefore, this policy is
designed to properly fund a capital program that will
help to assure system reliability and efficiency. A well
thought out and fully funded replacement program will
extend the life of the City’s utility system and in turn
reduce infrastructure costs over the long-term. A utility
should fund a certain portion of capital improvement projects from rates on an on-going
basis. A general financial guideline that can be used to determine minimum funding levels
for capital improvements funded from rates is an amount equal to or greater than annual
depreciation expense.
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-5
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
181
MINIMUM DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE RATIO – THE CITY SHOULD STRIVE FOR A MINIMUM
DEBT SERVICE “COVERAGE” RATIO NECESSARY TO SATISFY ITS OUTSTANDING REVENUE
BOND COVENANTS
The debt service coverage (DSC) ratio is a financial measure of the utility’s ability to repay
outstanding debt. Typically, a utility must maintain a minimum of a 1.25 DSC on
outstanding revenue bond debt. Failure to meet the minimum DSC for an outstanding debt
obligation is considered to be technical default, making the bonds callable or payable upon
demand. It is recommended that the City target a minimum DSC of 1.50 for financial
planning purposes.
COMPREHENSIVE UTILITY RATE STUDY – A COMPREHENSIVE UTILITY RATE STUDY
SHOULD BE CONDUCTED AT LEAST EVERY FIVE YEARS TO UPDATE ASSUMPTIONS AND
ENSURE LONG-TERM SOLVENCY AND VIABILITY OF THE CITY’S UTILITY.
The City’s system and costs change over time. It is prudent for the City to conduct a
comprehensive rate study at least every five (5) years. It should be noted that the use of five
years should tie to the comprehensive (master) planning period.
2.8 Summary
This section of the report has provided a brief introduction to the general principles, techniques,
and economic theory used to set utility rates. These principles, techniques, and economic theory
were the basis for the rate study and the foundation used to meet the City’s key objectives in
establishing their wastewater rates.
Overview of Utility Rate Setting Principles 2-6
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
182
Section 3
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study
3.1 Introduction
This section of the report will present the comprehensive wastewater rate study undertaken for
the City. The objective of a wastewater rate study is to determine the sufficiency of current
wastewater rate revenues to cover operating and capital needs along with evaluating the equity of
current rates. The City’s capital improvement plan was the basis for the major capital
improvement projects for the wastewater utility. Specifically, the expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant was a major cost driver both for capital improvement timing and funding along
with changes in operational costs during construction and implementation.
The comprehensive wastewater rate study is comprised of three interrelated analyses. These are
a wastewater revenue requirement analysis, a wastewater cost of service study and the design of
proposed wastewater rates. This section of the report will review each of these analytical steps
of the comprehensive wastewater rate study and discuss the key assumptions, findings and
conclusions of each. At the end of this section of the report, the proposed wastewater rates are
provided.
3.2 Development of the Wastewater Revenue Requirements
“The revenue requirement
analysis assumes that the
City’s wastewater utility
must financially “stand on
its own” and not be
subsidized by any other
utility or City fund.”
To be consistent with the basic philosophy used to analyze the City’s water revenue
requirements, the City’s wastewater revenue requirement
analysis assumes that the wastewater utility must financially
“stand on its own” and not be subsidized by any other City
utility. Therefore, the wastewater revenue requirements are
developed on a stand-alone basis. In developing the revenue
requirements for this utility, all the costs that are necessary to
run the wastewater utility in a prudent and financially stable
manner were included in the analysis.
3.2.1 Determination of Time Period and Method of Accumulating Costs
The wastewater revenue requirements reviewed a six-year projected period of 2007 – 2012. This
time period was reviewed in order to maintain consistency between the wastewater rate study
and the recent wastewater capital improvement plan for the City.
The wastewater system billing records, wastewater budget, and the City’s wastewater capital
improvement plan were the major inputs used to develop the wastewater utility revenue
requirements. A more detailed discussion of the key assumptions contained within the
wastewater revenue requirement is provided below.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-1
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
183
In developing the City’s revenue requirements, a “cash basis” approach was utilized. While
Section 2 provided a brief overview of the “cash basis” approach, this method of establishing the
City’s wastewater revenue requirements has been “tailored” to follow the City’s system of
accounts (budget documents). Table 3-1 provides a summary of the approach that was used to
develop the City’s wastewater revenue requirements.
Table 3-1
Overview of the Wastewater Utility Revenue Requirements
+ Operation and Maintenance Expenses
9 Operations
9 Utilities Locate
9 Services
9 Manholes
9 Televising
9 Main Repairs
9 Plant Operations
9 Plant Laboratory
9 Plant Sludge Injection
+ Net Capital Improvements Funded From Rates (calculated below) [1]
+ Debt Service (P+I) Existing and Future
= Total Wastewater Revenue Requirements
[1] Net Capital Improvements Funded From Rates
+ Total Wastewater Capital Improvement Projects
– Funding Sources Other Than Rates
9 Impact Fees
9 Grants
9 Low-Interest State Loans
9 Long Term Debt Issues
= Net Capital Improvements Funded From Rates [1]
Given a time period around which to develop the revenue requirements, and a method to
accumulate the costs, the focus can shift to the projection of revenues and expenses for the City’s
wastewater utility. The primary financial inputs in this process were the City’s historical billing
records, the City’s capital improvement plan and the City’s 2006 budgeted expenses.
3.2.2 Wastewater Rate and Other Miscellaneous Revenues
The revenue requirement calculation begins with a projection of rate revenues at present rate
levels. This process involved developing projected billing units for each customer class of
service (e.g. residential, commercial, etc.) based on historical usage records and an assumed
annual growth rate. The billing units are then applied (multiplied) against the current rates to
calculate the projected revenue. This method of independently calculating revenue ensures
consistency in the revenue and consumption figures that are used throughout the rate study
process.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-2
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
184
Projected 2007 Wastewater Rate Revenues
By Class of Service ($ 000's)
$2,400
$1,056
$50
$467
$26
Residential
Commercial
Government
MSU
Industrial
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-3
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
Projected 2007 Wastewater Rate Revenues
By Class of Service ($ 000's)
$2,400
$1,056
$50
$467
$26
Residential
Commercial
Government
MSU
Industrial
Projected 2007 Wastewater Rate Revenues
By Class of Service ($ 000's)
$2,400
$1,056
$50
$467
$26
Residential
Commercial
Government
MSU
Industrial
The revenue at present rates was
calculated using historical data. The
present rates were then calculated for
each year based on the specific rate
schedule for that year. The revenues at
present rates were calculated separately
for historical FY 2006. FY 2007 was
estimated based on historical 2006
customer class loads and an assumed
5.0% customer growth rate. Projected
revenues for 2007 thru 2012 were based u
pon an assumed 5.0% customer growth rate.
he wastewater utility also receives a variety of miscellaneous revenues. These revenues are
.2.3 Projection of Wastewater Operation and Maintenance Expenses
perationally, the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant will have an impact upon the
and 2010 in water operations to reflect
s of 2007, 2008, 2009 to reflect the increase
sion of the
wastewater treatment plant.
T
received from sources such as service charges, and interest income. Miscellaneous revenues
vary by year, but are fairly level during the planning period. In 2007, assuming the present
(current) rates, the City is projected to receive approximately $4.1 million in total revenues.
3
In general, operation and maintenance expenses are grouped into functional areas or services
(e.g. operations, maintenance, etc.). Escalation factors were developed for the various types of
expenses that the City incurs: power, labor, materials and supplies, equipment, miscellaneous,
etc. The escalation factors applied range from 2% to 10% per year. The higher escalation factor
reflected the significantly higher recent escalation of costs associated with medical benefits. The
City’s 2006 budgeted expenses were used as a starting point to project future O&M expenses.
Future year projections were calculated by applying an applicable escalation factor (e.g. labor-
related costs escalated using the labor escalation factor).
O
City’s O&M expenses, and simply escalating historical O&M levels would not properly reflect
these fundamental changes. Given that, several O&M expense items were adjusted to reflect the
impact on O&M of the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. These adjustments to O&M
included both increases and decreases in O&M costs. The adjustments to the O&M levels for
specific costs related to the wastewater treatment plant were developed based upon extensive
discussions between HDR and the City. The adjustments in O&M, which are related to the
wastewater treatment plant expansion, were as follows:
One full time employee was added in 2008, 2009,
additional operating costs for meeting permit requirements on the wastewater treatment plant.
One full time employee was added 2011 in plant operations to account for the completion of
the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant.
Chemical costs were increased for the three year
in costs due to the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant not being completed yet, but
the City’s need to meet the new requirements of the NPDES permit. These costs were
reduced in ’11 when the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant is completed.
Electrical costs in 2011 was increased by 35% to reflect the blowers for the expan
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-3
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
185
“A general financial guideline
that can be used to determine
ra
proper funding levels for
capital improvements from
tes is that, at a minimum,
equal to or greater than
annual depreciation expense.”
a
utility should fund an amount
“One very good financial
indicator for the City is
from rates (replacement projects in particular) is that, at a
minimum
that historically, the City
has funded 100% or
more of depreciation
expense for renewal and
replacement funding.”
7.
ith the expansion of the treatment plant and the additional expenses associated with that
s and
Funding
improvem ty anticipates approximately $50.6 million in capital expenditures for the
jects, an important element
f this study was the development of a financial (funding) plan. Provided below is a discussion
rojects;
rowth-related projects, regulatory-related projects and renewal/replacement projects. There are
ideline that can be used to
etermine proper funding levels for capital improvements
Insurance costs were increased in 2010 to reflect the new expansion of the treatment plant.
In total, the City is projected to have O&M expenses of approximately $2.7 million in 200
W
expansion, the City’s O&M expenses are projected to increase to $3.9 million by 2012.
3.2.4 Projection of Wastewater Capital Improvement Project
An important aspect of the wastewater revenue requirements was the funding of capital
ents. The Ci
wastewater utility over the planning period. A major component of the City’s capital
improvement needs is the Phase 1 expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in the amount of
$32.8 million. The expansion of the wastewater treatment plant is needed to comply with
permitting requirements and to meet the demands of customer growth. The City is currently
close to exceeding their newly established permitting requirements.
Given the magnitude of the City’s planned capital improvement pro
o
of the funding methods used to finance the City’s wastewater capital improvement plan.
Capital improvements projects are generally comprised of three different types of p
g
a number of different funding methods that may be used for the City’s growth, regulatory and
replacement-related capital projects. Among the methods that may be used to finance these
capital improvement projects are long-term debt, impact fees, grants, capital reserves and rates.
It is through the use of a combination of these financing resources that the City can minimize
their rates through time.
A general financial gu
d
, a utility should fund an amount equal to or
greater than annual depreciation expenses. Annual
depreciation expense reflects the current investment in
plant that is being depreciated or “losing” its useful life.
Therefore, this portion of plant investment needs to be
replaced (funded) to maintain the existing level of
infrastructure. It must be kept in mind that, in theory,
annual depreciation expense reflects an investment in infra
years ago, assuming a 30-year useful (depreciable) life.
annual depreciation expense will not be sufficient to replace the existing or depreciated facility.
Therefore, consideration should be given to funding within rates some amount greater than
annual depreciation expense for renewals and replacements.
One very good financial indicator for the City is that
historically, the City has fun
s 5)
Simply funding an amount equal to
ded 100% or more of depreciation
tructure an average of fifteen (1
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-4
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
186
ex plac
re bor
fu e de
Fo e C
As noted previously, a major
ex r t
trea ate
million will be paid for this exp h
revenue bonds. Provided belo
pense for renewal and re
quire the use of long-term
nding, or unfortunately, th
r purposes of this study, th
pansion of the wastewate
tment plant is approxim
ement funding. Failure to fund at level this level will either
rowing to fund the difference between replacement cost and rate
ferral of maintenance projects due to a lack of adequate funding.
ity’s current level of funding has been maintained.
component of the City’s capital improvement program is the
reatment plant. Phase 1 of the expansion of the wastewater
ly $32.8 million over the test period. Of this amount, $11.2
nsion from impact fees. The remaining will be funded througa
w in Table 3-2 is a summary of the wastewater utility capital
improvement projects.
Table 3-2
Overview of the Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan (000’s)
Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
CIP- Wastewater Fund
Wastewater Op 5 $1,013
Wastewater Tre
WWTP B tion 0 0 5 5 0 0
0 200 0 0 0 0
ions
2,46 1,68
d $ $2 $ $$2,60 $2,70
erations $0 $2,348 $90 $788 $13
atment -
NR Construc 3,04 11,48 11,48
Semi Trucks Replacement
P Phase II
WW Comp Plan - WWT 0
0
60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0WW Comp Plan - Collect
Unidentified CIP Projects [1] 0
3,04
0 2,274
13,84
2,500
14,77
5 7
Total CIP for Wastewater Fun 0 ,608 9 3 0 0
CIP - Impact Fee
Shop Complex - Phase 1 $ $99 $ $ $ $
Interceptor 0 0 0 0 844 0
abcock
$ $ $ $$84 $
0 0 0 0 0 0
WWTP BNR Construction 0 0 5,600 5,600 0 0
E8 Hospital Trunk: Haggerty 0 1,062 0 0 0 0
S15 Install 21" WW
A* South Rose Trunk E B 0 0 0 0 0 0
R4 Replace Front Street 0 0 0
5,60
0
5,60
0 0
Total CIP for Impact Fee 0 2,052 0 0 4 0
Total Capital Outlays $3,04 $4,66 $19,44 $20,37 $3 $2,700 0 9 3 ,444 0
Less: Funding Sources
From Operating Reserve Fund
From Capital Reserve Fund 1,449 818 104 5,523 0 0
0 2,052 5,600 5,600 844 0
1,4 2,8 16,9 17,6
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
SRF Loan for WTP 0 0 11,235 6,500 0 0
Impact Fees
Total Funding Other than Rates 49 70 39 23 0 0
Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP $1,591 $1,790 $2,600 $2,700 $2,510 $2,750
[1] – Detail of the wastewater capital improve nt pro be fo he Wa Techni pendices
antici ppro ly $ illio ital itur
e five- eriod
s,
me jects can und in t stewater cal Ap
As noted previously, the City
e wastewater utility over th
pates a
year
ximate
of 2008 – 2012. This equates to approxim
50.6 m n in cap expend es for
atelythp
$10 million per year in capital improvement projects. Of the $50.6 million in project
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-5
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
187
“. . . annual debt service payments wastewater revenue bonds outstanding. W
expansion of the wwill increase to approximately
$1.35 million in 2010. However, will need to incur new long-term debt. The impact of
this additional long-term debt will be significant. It
is anticipated that annual debt service payments will
increase to approximately $1.35 million in 2010.
However, impact fees will be used to off-set a
majority of these annual debt payment obligations. In
doing so, the City is relying upon annual growth and
resulting impact fee revenue to meet this on-going
annual debt obligation. Should growth slow down,
now or in the future, then the City may need to
in impact fee revenue coming through the door on an
vice.
ater Revenue Requirements
The above components came together to develop the overall wastewater revenue requirements
or the City. In developing the final revenue
impact fees will be used to off-set a
payment obligations. In doing so,
pproximately $36.5 million is related to wastewater fund improvements and $14 million in
n will be funded from $17.7 million dollars in State Revolving Fund loans, $11.2
illion in impact fees and the balance from capital reserves and rates. Approximately $12.3
e. The City currently has no outstanding
ith the
astewater treatment plant, the City
inc ction
annu bt ser
3.2.7 Summary of the Wastew
requirements, consideration was given to the
l p pting to
e tivities, along
a
impact fee (growth-related) improvements, during the five-year time period. It is important to
note that 100% of the impact fee related projects are funded from impact fees (note for example
the $5.6 million of improvements in 2009 are off-set by $5.6 million of funding from impact
fees). This is an important concept in that no funding from rates has been included for those
specific projects, and the City’s existing customers have been sheltered from the rate impacts of
growth.
The funding for the planned wastewater fund capital improvements is primarily from a
combination of long-term debt, impact fees and rates. The $32.8 million wastewater treatment
expansio
m
million of the total wastewater fund projects is funded from rates. The balance of the wastewater
fund projects will be funded from existing reserves.
3.2.6 Projection of Debt Service Payments
Debt service relates to the principal and interest obligations of the wastewater utility when
inancing capital projects with a long-term debt issuf
majority of these annual debt
the City is relying upon annual
growth and resulting impact fee
revenue to meet this on-going
annual debt obligation.
rease their rates to off-set the redu
al basis to pay this portion of de
f
financia lanning criteria of the City. In particular, emphasis was placed on attem
minimiz rates, yet still providing adequate funds to support the City’s O&M ac
with the planned capital projects throughout the projected time period. A summary of the
wastewater revenue requirements is shown below in Table 3-3.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-6
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
188
Table 3-3
Summary of the Wastewater Revenue Requirement Analysis (000’s)
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Revenues
Retail Sales $3,999 $4,454 $4,676 $4,909 $5,154 $5,412
Other Revenue 161 161 168 162 151 152
Total Revenues $4,161 $4,615 $4,844 $5,071 $5,305 $5,564
Expenses
O&M Expenses $2,658 $2,965 $3,237 $3,643 $3,738 $3,911
Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP 1,591 1,791 2,510 2,750 2,600 2,700
Current Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Debt (Net of Impact Fees) 0 0 42 254 314 274
Total Revenue Requirements $4,249 $4,756 $5,789 $6,647 $6,653 $6,885
Balance/(Deficiency) of Funds ($88) ($141) ($945) ($1,576) ($1,347) ($1,321)
Bal./(Def.) as a % of Rates (Cumulative) 2.2% 3.2% 20.2% 32.1% 26.1% 24.4%
Proposed Annual Rate Adjustments 0.0% 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Add’l Revenue From Rate Adj. $0 $223 $655 $1,129 $1,289 $1,461
B al./(Def.) of Funds After Rate Adj. ($88) $82 ($290) ($447) ($59) $140
In reviewing Table 3-3, it should be noted that the annual deficiencies are cumulative. That is,
any adjustments in the initial years will reduce the deficiency in the latter years. The results of
the wastewater revenue requirements indicate a deficiency of funds by the end of the projected
six-year time period. Over the six year period, increasing costs will erode the existing balance of
funds and by 2012 the deficiency of funding is approximately $1.3 million or 24.4% of rates.
This level of deficiency is a function of both increasing O&M and capital improvements funded
from rates. The expansion of the City’s wastewater treatment plant has added significantly to the
O&M levels, while the need to fund a significant portion of capital improvements, while
attempting to limit long-term borrowing has added to the need to fund a greater amount of
capital projects from rates.
Detailed exhibits of the wastewater revenue requirement analysis prepared for the City are
provided in Technical Appendices at the end of this report.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-7
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
189
3.2.8 Debt Service Coverage
The debt service coverage (DSC) ratio is a financial measure of the utility’s ability to repay
outstanding debt. A debt service coverage ratio of 1.25 is generally considered the legally
acceptable minimum for a revenue bond.1 Failure to meet this DSC requirement would be
considered a “technical default” on the part of the City, making the revenue bonds callable or
payable upon demand. Therefore, it is critical that the City meet this legal requirement. The
City does not currently have any outstanding wastewater bond issues. New debt issues start in
2009.
Table 3-4
Summary of Revenue Bond Debt Service Coverage Ratios
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wastewater Revenue Bond DSC
Ratios –
Before Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 1.87 1.05 1.16 1.22
After Proposed Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 2.64 1.89 2.11 2.30
As can be seen from the above table, the City does not meet the debt service coverage test in
2010 – 2012 without the proposed rate increases. Once the proposed rate adjustments are
implemented, then the City would be meeting the debt service coverage test.
3.2.9 Rate Transition Plan
The purpose in developing a rate transition plan was to set the size and timing of the wastewater
rate adjustments to meet the City’s needs, but also to help minimize impacts to customers.
Given the overall magnitude of the projected deficiency, it was desireable to make the needed
adjustments over a number of years. The proposed rate transition plan for the wastewater utility
is shown in Table 3-5.
Table 3-5
Wastewater Utility – Rate Transition Plan
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Present Average Monthly
Residential Wastewater Bill [1]
$21.67
Proposed Wastewater Rate
Adjustments 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Projected Average Monthly
Residential Wastewater Bill $22.75 $24.80 $27.03 $27.57 $28.13
$ Change Per Month $1.08 $2.05 $2.23 $0.54 $0.55
Cumulative $ Change Per Month $1.08 $3.13 $5.36 $5.90 $6.45
1 "Legally" as used herein, refers to the contractual agreement between revenue bondholders and the City to assure
repayment of the bonds, and to financially operate the utility in such a manner as to maintain the City’s debt service
coverage ratio above a specified minimum. This minimum debt service coverage ratio is a specified covenant of the
bond resolution for the revenue bond.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-8
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
190
[1] Average bill was assumed a ¾” meter with 6 CCF
As Table 3-5 indicates, the current average residential bill for a City customer is $21.67/month.
The rate adjustments will change the average residential bill to $28.13 per month by 2012, or a
$6.45/month overall change.
It should be noted that this rate transition plan assumes that the City will need to use reserves in
the initial years to meet their revenue requirements. As was noted in Table 3-3, even with the
proposed adjustments, there is still a fairly significant deficiency in funding in 2009 and 2010.
By the end of the planning period, the City will have a slightly positive cash flow and recover
some of the reserves utilized in 2009 and 2010.
3.2.10 Summary and Recommendations of the Revenue Requirements
“In reviewing the results
of the wastewater revenue
requirement analysis with
City management, it was
determined that a rate
transition plan be
implemented.
Based upon the wastewater revenue requirement analysis
developed herein, it is projected that the City’s wastewater
utility will operate at a deficit during the six-year period of
2007 – 2012. The total level of deficiency is projected to be
approximately $1.3 million or 24.4% by 2012. In reviewing
the results of the wastewater revenue requirement analysis
with City management, it was determined that a rate transition
plan should be developed and implemented. The first rate
proposed adjustment would be in 2008 and equal to 5.0%
(Table 3-5). Failure to implement the proposed rate
adjustments in the subsequent years will jeopardize the City’s ability to fund/finance their
wastewater treatment plant expansion.
This concludes the discussion and review of the wastewater revenue requirement analysis.
Given the findings and recommendations from this analysis, the focus now shifts to the
wastewater cost of service analysis.
3.3 Wastewater Cost of Service Analysis
A wastewater cost of service analysis is concerned with the equitable allocation of total
wastewater revenue requirements to the various customer classes of service of the utility. A cost
of service analysis is a “generally accepted” method used to equitably allocate costs between the
various types of customers served.
The cost of service functionalizes, classifies, and allocates the wastewater revenue requirements
to each of the classes of service in an equitable manner. Provided below is a detailed discussion
of the wastewater cost of service study.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-9
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
191
3.3.1 Customer Classes of Service
One of the first tasks that must be accomplished in the cost of service analysis is to determine the
customer classes of service to be reviewed. The objective of this task is to group customers
together into similar or homogeneous groups based upon facility requirements, flow and/or
loading characteristics. For this study, the following customer classes of service were utilized:
Residential
Low-Income
Multi-Family
Commercial
Country Classic Dairy (Currently billed as Commercial)
Governmental
Montana State University
Unmetered
Country Classic Dairy (the “dairy”) is currently a commercial customer which was separated
into a separate class for cost of service purposes. The dairy has exceptionally high wastewater
(strength) loadings and as such, is very unique to the City’s system. In addition, the dairy does
not have pretreatment facilities and as a result causes exceptionally heavy loadings to the City’s
treatment plant, particularly in the fall. The City currently charges the dairy as a commercial
customer, with an additional surcharge for these heavy loadings. Given these unique
characteristics, it has been proposed within this report that the dairy be placed in a proposed
industrial class of service. The industrial class of service would be for those customers that do
not have pretreatment facilities and have loadings that far exceed typical commercial loading
profiles.
The wastewater cost of service conducted for the City utilized a three-step approach to review
costs. These three steps are: functionalization, classification, and allocation. Provided below is
a more detailed discussion of each of these analytical steps of the wastewater cost of service
study performed for the City.
3.3.2 Functionalization of Costs
The first analytical step in the wastewater cost of service is called functionalization.
Functionalization is the arrangement of expenses and asset (plant) data by major operating
functions within the utility (e.g. collection, treatment, etc). Within this study, the
functionalization of the wastewater cost data was largely accomplished through the City’s
system of accounts.
3.3.3 Classification of Costs
The second analytical task performed is the classification of the functionalized expenses to cost
components. This task reviews each cost and attempts to determine why the wastewater cost
was incurred and what type of need was being met (e.g. volume, strength, customer etc.). The
cost classifiers used for the wastewater utility cost of service study are as follows:
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-10
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
192
Volume Related Costs. Volume-related costs are those that
tend to vary according to the quantity of wastewater
collected and treated. A majority of collection system costs
and a portion of the treatment costs are included in this
component. An example of a volume-related cost is
chemicals for treatment of wastewater.
Wastewater Cost
Classifiers
VOLUME COSTS – Costs that
are classified as volume related
vary with the total flow of
wastewater on the system (e.g.
chemical use at the treatment
plant).
STRENGTH (LOADING) COSTS
– Costs classified as strength
(loading) related refer to the
wastewater treatment function.
Typically, strength-related costs
are further defined as
biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) and suspended solids
(SS), but may include other
loading characteristics, such as
nitrogen or phosphorous.
Different types of customers
may have high wastewater
strength characteristics, and
high strength wastewater costs
more to treat.
CUSTOMER COSTS – Costs
classified as customer related
vary with the number of
customers on the system, e.g.
billing costs. Customer costs
may be actual or weighted.
Actual customer costs do not
vary based upon the size or
wastewater contributions of the
customer. A weighted customer
cost is disproportionate, and
varies due to the size or usage
characteristics of the customer.
DIRECT ASSIGNMENT – Costs
that can be clearly identified as
belonging to a specific customer
or group of customers.
Strength (Loading) Related Costs. Strength related costs
are those costs associated with the additional handling and
treatment of high “strength” wastewater. Strength of
wastewater is typically measured in biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (SS). However,
strength-related costs may also include loadings related to
nitrogen or phosphorous. Increased loading levels generally
equate to increased treatment costs. Pre-treatment is
generally required if the discharge is known to regularly
exceed the typical waste strength.
Customer Related Costs. Customer-related costs vary with
the addition or deletion of a customer. Customer related
costs typically include the costs of billing, collecting, and
accounting. Customer-related costs may also be further
categorized as actual or weighted.
Revenue Related. Some costs associated with the
wastewater utility may vary with the amount of revenue
received by the utility.
Direct Assignment. Certain costs associated with operating
the utility may be directly traced to a specific customer or
class of service. These costs are then “directly assigned” to
that specific class of service.
A more detailed discussion of the specific cost of service
methodology used for the wastewater utility is provided below.
3.3.4 Functionalization and Classification of
Wastewater Plant in Service
The City’s historical plant records were used in performing the
functionalization of wastewater plant in service. The
classification process included reviewing each group of assets
and determining which cost classifiers the assets were related to,
or what function the asset (facility) provided. For example, the
wastewater utility accounts were classified as related to volume,
loading related (BOD, SS, Peak BOD Capacity), customer,
revenue or direct assignment. Provided below is a brief
discussion of the classification process used for the City’s
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-11
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
193
wastewater utility.
The City’s historical plant records were used in performing the functionalization of wastewater
plant in service. The classification process included reviewing each group of assets and
determining which cost classifiers the assets were related to, or what function the asset (facility)
provided.
The existing treatment plant was based on the overall design of the plant to meet volume (flow),
BOD and SS. Based on City and engineering information the plant was classified 50% volume,
25% BOD and 25% SS. This classification reflects a plant operated under “normal” operating
conditions. A unique aspect of the City’s system is the impact of the exceptionally high
loadings, particularly BOD, from the dairy. Given these high loadings, this study explored
different methodologies to equitably allocate the costs, particularly as they related to the
exceptionally high and wide variations of BOD loading from the dairy. It was concluded that
attempting to allocate BOD entirely on average annual loading failed to recognize the impacts of
exceptionally high peak loadings from the dairy in relation to their average loadings. To better
recognize that operating characteristic of the dairy and its impact on the wastewater treatment
plant, this study developed a cost classifier for BOD peak capacity.
The BOD loadings for the dairy were analyzed to determine a classification split that fairly
reflected the issues noted above. It appears that the dairy, on an annual average basis,
contributes 996 pounds of the 8,580 pounds per day of BOD capacity. This represents 12
percent of the total BOD treatment capacity of Bozeman’s existing facility (996/8,580=12%). A
lower rate of 10 percent was used in this study to allow some of the peak capacity to flow in to
the surcharge revenues. This approach was used to provide an incentive for the Dairy to improve
their operations. The BOD per day amount under a 10% scenario would be 830 lbs of BOD per
day or approximately 10% of the daily treatment capacity (830/8,580=10%). Therefore, the peak
BOD capacity was based on 10% of the BOD from the Dairy which equates to 10% of the
classified 25% BOD or 2.5% related to peak BOD capacity.
Table 3-6 shows a summary of the basic functionalization and classification of the City’s major
wastewater plant items.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-12
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
194
Table 3-6
Summary of the Classification of Wastewater Utility Plant in Service
Plant Component Volume BOD SS
Peak BOD
Capacity
Actual
Customer
Weighted
Customer
Treatment 50.0% 22.5% 25.0% 2.5% – –
Collection 100.0% – – – – –
The above table represents a summary of the classification of major accounts. A more detailed
review of the classification of the wastewater plant in service can be found in the Technical
Appendices.
3.3.5 Functionalization and Classification of Wastewater Operating
Expenses
The City’s wastewater revenue requirements for 2008 were used in the wastewater cost of
service analysis. Generally, expenses are functionalized based on the City’s system of accounts
and classified in a manner similar to the corresponding plant account. For example, collection
related expenses are classified in the same manner (percentages) as collection plant, etc. This
approach to the classification of operating expenses has been used for this analysis. A more
detailed review of the classification of revenue requirements can be found in the Technical
Appendices.
3.3.6 Allocation of the Revenue Requirements
Once the classes of service have been defined, and the classification process is complete, the
various costs are then allocated to each of the classes of service based on equitable allocation
factors. The City’s classified wastewater costs were allocated to the various classes of service
using the following allocation factors.
Volume Allocation Factors. Volume-related costs are generally allocated on the basis of
contribution to wastewater flows. In order to develop this allocation factor, some knowledge
of the contribution to flows must be determined. Given that wastewater flows are not
metered for residential customers, water consumption is generally utilized as the surrogate
for wastewater contributions. Residential flows were based upon use of winter water and
then annualized to reflect their estimated annual contribution. The use of winter water use is
intended to eliminate outdoor irrigation from the allocation factor. For commercial
customers, the actual volumetric billings (water usage) was used within this study for the
allocation factor. Infiltration and inflow (I&I) is a fairly significant issue on the City’s
system. I&I was considered to be a function of volumetric flows and the number of
customers served (i.e. the network of collection lines is a function of the number of
customers served). Within this study, I&I volumes were assigned based upon 50%/50% split
between volume contributed and the number of customers serviced.
Loading-Related Costs. Loading-related costs are classified between biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS) and peak BOD capacity (CAP). These types of costs
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-13
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
195
are allocated to the various classes of service based upon the relative estimated loadings that
each class of service contributed to the overall flow at the plant. The BOD loadings are
based upon average loading characteristics for BOD and SS. Under this methodology, the
dairy is not allocated any costs associated with BOD and SS. Rather, Peak BOD capacity is
entirely related to Country Classic Dairy. As discussed previously, Peak BOD capacity is a
measure of peak day loading, and allocates 10% of the plant’s BOD treatment capacity to the
dairy. Embedded within the peak BOD capacity allocation to the dairy is the assumption of
an average daily loading of 830 lbs/day of BOD. However, the dairy has extreme swings in
their BOD loading, which on an average day basis appears manageable. Operationally, when
their loadings are viewed from peak loading perspective, the Dairy utilizes significant
treatment capacity within the City’s plant and as a result may cause operational (loading)
issues from time to time. This approach follows basic cost of service principles in that the
cost-causer should be the cost-payer.
Some costs were allocated to nitrogen as some of the increased cost in electricity associated
with the treatment plant expansion is related to nitrogen removal. In addition, the temporary
increase in chemical costs described above under revenue requirements was allocated to
phosphorus which is necessary to enable the City to meet the more stringent regulatory
standards while the treatment plant upgrade is under construction.
Customer-Related Costs. Customer-related costs within the cost of service study are
allocated to the various customer classes of service based upon their respective customer
counts. The number of customers, by customer class of service, was developed within the
revenue requirement study. Two types of customer allocation factors were developed, actual
and weighted. Actual customer costs do not vary by the volume or strength/loading
characteristics of the class of service and are based on the actual number of customers for
each class of service. A weighting factor was used to develop the weighted customer
allocation factor. The weighted customer allocation factor attempts to reflect the
disproportionate costs associated with serving larger customers. These customers are
assigned a higher per customer cost because they require additional administrative costs and
possible monitoring.
Revenue-Related Costs. Revenue-related costs were allocated based upon the revenues at
present rates for each class of service. Revenue-related costs are those costs that vary with
the amount of revenue received. Revenues at present rates for 2008 were developed within
the revenue requirement study previously discussed.
The wastewater utility allocation factors noted above can be found in the Technical Appendices.
3.3.7 Summary of the Wastewater Cost of Service Results
The summary of the allocated costs determine each class’s overall cost responsibility. The
allocated costs are then compared to the present revenue received from each customer class to
determine the cost difference between current rates and the cost of service for each class. This
difference in costs is compared to present rate levels to determine the adjustment needed
(increase or decrease) to have cost-based rates. A summary of the wastewater cost of service
analysis developed for each class of service is shown within Table 3-7.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-14
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
196
Table 3-7
Summary of the Wastewater Utility Cost of Service Analysis for 2008 ($000’s)
Classes of Service
Present Rate
Revenues
Allocated
Costs
$
Difference
%
Difference
Residential $1,690 $1,543 ($147) -8.7%
Low-Income 3 7 4 135.2%
Multi-Family 974 1,007 33 3.4%
Commercial 1,162 1,252 90 7.7%
Commercial – Special 13 13 (0) -0.8%
Classic Country Dairy [1] 26 103 77 296.1%
Government 55 60 5 8.7%
Government - Special 0 0 0 2.3%
Montana State University 521 601 80 15.3%
Unmetered 9 9 (1) -7.2%
Total $4,454 $4,595 $141 3.2%
[1] This table does not include surcharge revenues paid by the Dairy. Currently they pay approximately an
additional $27,000 annually in surcharges. That would increase substantially if this rate structure were
maintained and appropriate cost-based surcharges applied.
The allocation of costs attempted to assure that the facilities and costs allocated to each customer
class reflected their respective benefit. The cost of service results indicate that some cost
differences do exist between the major customer classes of service. Generally, plus or minus 5%
of the overall average is considered to be within the range of reasonableness and indicate that a
class of service is paying their “cost of service.”
As can be seen, within this cost of service, Country Classic Dairy has been allocated costs which
greatly exceed their current rate revenues. This cost of service has equitably allocated treatment
costs to the dairy, particularly as it relates to their utilization of the BOD loading capacity of the
treatment plant and how that affects (impacts) the City’s ability to meet the loading requirements
of the NPDES permit requirements. While the cost of service has shown the need for a large
increase to the Dairy, the Dairy has the potential to better manage their operations to help limit
their wastewater loadings on the City’s system. Alternatively, the Dairy could invest in
pretreatment facilities and pretreat their wastewater. The result of an investment by the dairy in
pretreatment facilities would be a significantly lower rate from the City because the Dairy would
be discharging wastewater at domestic loading levels.
3.3.8 Summary Conclusions and Recommendations of the Cost of
Service
The cost of service did note some cost differences associated with
serving the City’s different customer groups. Therefore, it was
determined that interclass cost of service adjustments should slowly
be ramped in over time. As a result of this decision, each class of
service will be adjusted in the design of the proposed rates not more
than +/-5.0%. Residential will be adjusted +2.7%, Commercial,
Government, Multi-Family, MSU and Unmetered by +5.0%. By
“The cost of service
did note some cost
differences associated
with serving the City’s
different customer
groups.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-15
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
197
definition, low-income should be below cost, and show the need for a large adjustment. For that
reason, no cost of service adjustment is made to the low-income customer class of service.
It must be kept in mind that a cost of service analysis reflects costs and usage characteristics of a
specific point in time, and as time goes on, customer’s consumption patterns and usage
requirements change. Only over time, and through continual analysis, can one fully understand
the true cost of providing service. Given the results of the wastewater cost of service analysis,
the focus will now shift to the development of the proposed wastewater rate designs.
3.4 Wastewater Rate Designs
The final step of the comprehensive wastewater rate study process is the design of wastewater
rates to collect the desired level of revenue, based upon the findings and recommendations of the
wastewater revenue requirement and cost of service analysis. In reviewing wastewater rate
designs, consideration is given to the level of the rates and the structure of the rates. This
subsection of the report will review the proposed wastewater rate designs for the City.
3.4.1 Overview of Wastewater Rate Structures
There are several different rate structures used in the wastewater industry. However, the two
most common structures are a fixed monthly fee or fixed fee plus a volumetric charge for
estimated (assumed) wastewater contributions. Typically residential type customers are charged
a flat monthly rate while commercial customers are charged a fixed rate plus a volumetric rate.
However, the recent trend in the wastewater industry is to move towards a more volumetric
based rate. This typically has to do with both equity issues and conservation efforts2.
The rate structure concepts noted above may be combined and used to form various rate design
options that meet the City’s needs. However, at the same time, the City must understand its
overall goals and objectives in designing rates.
3.4.2 Rate Design Criteria and Considerations
Prudent rate administration dictates that several criteria must be considered when setting utility
rates. Some of these rate design criteria are listed below:
Rates which are easy to understand, from the customer’s perspective
Rates which are easy for the utility to administer
Consideration of the customer’s ability to pay
Continuity, over time, of the rate making philosophy
Policy considerations (encourage conservation, economic development, etc.)
Provide revenue stability from month to month and year to year
Equitable and non-discriminating (cost based)
Many contemporary rate economists and regulatory agencies feel that the last consideration,
cost-based rates, should be of paramount importance and provide the primary guidance to
utilities on rate structure and policy.
2 Some believe that volumetric sewer rates help to achieve water conservation
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-16
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
198
It is important that the City provide its customers with a proper price signal as to what their
usage is costing. This goal may be approached through rate level and structure. When
developing the proposed rate designs, all of the above listed criteria were taken into
consideration. However, it should be noted that it is difficult, if not impossible, to design a rate
that meets all of the goals and objectives listed above. For example, it may be difficult to design
a rate that takes into consideration the customer’s ability to pay, and one which is cost-based. In
designing final rates for adoption, there are always trade-offs between the various goals and
objectives.
3.4.3 Review of Overall Rate Adjustments
As indicated in the revenue requirement analysis and the cost of service analysis, the priority for
the wastewater utility was to adjust and transition the overall level of the wastewater rates to
meet the City’s financial needs and current rate-setting philosophy and policies. Therefore, the
results of revenue requirement analysis were the primary basis for establishing the proposed rate
adjustments for the wastewater utility. Table 3-9 provides a summary of the proposed
wastewater utility adjustments shown within the revenue requirement analysis. In addition, cost
of service adjustments were recommended at this time, the proposed 2008 rate adjustment
includes the ramping in of the cost of service results for each of the customer classes of service
(rate schedules). The overall rate adjustment will collect an additional 5.0% in rate revenues.
Excluding the dairy, Residential will be adjusted +2.7%, Commercial, Government, Multi-
Family, MSU and Unlettered will be adjusted by +5.0%. As will be noted later, the dairy’s rates
will be developed based upon the results of the cost of service analysis. However, the City will
need to discuss with the dairy their options to address their high BOD loadings. This aspect of
the study is discussed later in this section of the report.
Table 3-9
Summary of the Proposed Wastewater Rate Adjustments
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Proposed Annual Rate Adjustments 0.0% 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%
3.4.4 Present Wastewater Rates
The City currently has a seven wastewater rate schedules. All customers have the same fixed
service charge. The consumption charge is a flat charge based on the amount of usage and does
not vary in rate amongst the classes of service. The City’s present wastewater rates are shown
below in Table 3-10.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-17
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
199
Table 3-10
Summary of the 2007 Present Wastewater Rates
Rate Components Current Rate
$10.67/Month Service Charge (Monthly) (Low-Income no charge)
Volume Charge ($/CCF) [1]
Residential $1.80
Low-Income $1.80
Multi-Family $1.80
Commercial $1.80
Government $1.80
Montana State University $1.80
[1] – CCF of wastewater = One hundred cubic feet of wastewater. 1 CCF of wastewater = 748 gallons
The above summary shows the present wastewater rates, the focus now shifts to the development
of the proposed wastewater rates.
3.4.5 Proposed Wastewater Rates
In developing the proposed wastewater rates, consideration was given to reviewing various rate
structures and approaches to adjusting the rates. The proposed wastewater rates are shown
below in Table 3-11 have assumed equal adjustments for all components of the rate structure,
and has incorporated the cost of service adjustments within it.
Table 3-11
Summary of the Proposed 2007 Wastewater Rates
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Service Charge (Monthly)
Residential $10.87 $11.17 $12.17 $13.27 $13.54 $13.81
Low-Income $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Non-Residential $10.87 $11.41 $12.44 $13.56 $13.83 $14.11
Industrial (Country Classic) $10.87 $27.36 $29.82 $32.50 $33.15 $33.81
Volume Charge ($/ccf)
Residential $1.80 $1.85 $2.02 $2.20 $2.24 $2.28
Low-Income $1.80 $1.80 $1.96 $2.14 $2.18 $2.22
Non-Residential $1.80 $1.89 $2.06 $2.25 $2.30 $2.35
Industrial (Country Classic) $1.80 $4.53 $4.94 $5.38 $5.49 $5.60
Given the proposed rate structure, a bill comparison was developed which compared the
residential bill under the present and proposed rates for varying levels of consumption. Based
upon the proposed rate structure, the rates would collect an overall increase of 5% in rate
revenues.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-18
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
200
Comparison of Present and Proposed Residential
Bills at Varying Consumption Levels ($/Month)
$0.00
$50.00
$100.00
1,000 Gal. UsageMonthly Bill - $Present Rates $10.87 $19.87 $28.87 $37.87 $46.87 $55.87 $64.87
Proposed Rates $11.13 $20.33 $29.53 $38.73 $47.93 $57.13 $66.33
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Comparison of Present and Proposed Residential
Bills at Varying Consumption Levels ($/Month)
$0.00
$50.00
$100.00
1,000 Gal. UsageMonthly Bill - $Present Rates $10.87 $19.87 $28.87 $37.87 $46.87 $55.87 $64.87
Proposed Rates $11.13 $20.33 $29.53 $38.73 $47.93 $57.13 $66.33
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
3.4.6 Country Classic Dairy (Industrial) Surcharges
The revenue requirement analysis supports the need for overall rate adjustments to the
wastewater rates. At the same time, the cost of service indicated that Country Classic Dairy’s
rates needed to be adjusted significantly to reflect their wastewater loadings and impacts upon
the operation of the City’s wastewater treatment facility. Given the unique characteristics of the
dairy, it is recommended that the City establish an industrial customer class of service for the
wastewater utility. The purpose of this rate schedule would be to address individual high
strength (loading) customers, such as the dairy, who do not have pretreatment facilities.
It appears that the dairy’s current rate is inadequate to fairly reflect the Dairy’s impact upon the
system. While the overall level of the rates appear to be insufficient, the rates are structured in a
manner that seems appropriate, with certain revisions, to fairly and equitably charge the dairy
going forward. The current rates use an approach of a “base rate” and “surcharges” for BOD and
SS loadings in excess of the assumed loadings contained within the “base rates.” Going forward,
HDR would recommend a similar approach be used for the dairy.
From a treatment perspective, the City needs to assure that they are capable of meeting the load
limits for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS), phosphorous (P) and
nitrogen (N). The City has a limited treatment capacity for each of these types of wastewater
loadings. This particular study has focused on BOD and SS, but phosphorous and nitrogen is a
concern and will be even more critical in the years to come. Given that understanding of the
issues facing the City and the limitations in their treatment capability, the focus can shift to the
method that may be used to create a rate structure for the dairy that is cost-based and fair, yet
still provides an incentive for the dairy to manage their operations and loadings. This is
accomplished by two separate but interrelated rate (charges) – base rates and surcharges.
Based on recent sampling data (from July 2006 to December 2006) the dairy’s average daily
loadings are as follows: 996 lbs of BOD, 208 lbs of SS, and 8.3 lbs of total phosphorus, and a
total daily flow of 32,000 gallons/day. These loadings are based on actual sewer flows and
monitored data. On average, the dairy contributes 996 pounds of the City’s total treatment
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-19
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
201
capacity of 8,580 pounds/day. This average daily loading represents 12 percent of the total BOD
treatment capacity of Bozeman’s existing facility (996/8,580=12%). As discussed in the
previous section a lower 10 percent average daily loading was used in this study to allow the
remaining capacity to flow into the surcharge revenues. This amount was used to provide an
incentive for the Dairy to improve their operations, while maintaining equity with other system
customers.
The concept of surcharges is that the customer is charged a “base rate” which includes within
that base rate a specified amount of treatment capacity. Any loadings over and above these
specified amounts contained within the “base rate: should be charged a surcharge for that amount
of loading over and above the amount included within the “base rate.” This concept is very
similar to the approach currently used by the City. This study has utilized a similar approach for
surcharges for suspended solids, phosphorous and nitrogen. However, a slightly different
approach has been proposed for BOD loadings.
As has been previously discussed, the City is impacted by BOD loadings in two different ways;
on an average daily basis and a peak daily basis. Average daily loadings exceeding the dairy’s
assumed daily limit of 830 lbs/day has one type of impact upon the system.3 In developing the
cost of service analysis for the dairy, they were directly assigned via the peak BOD capacity
approach 10% of the BOD treatment capacity or 830 lbs/day, and the base rate for the dairy
assumes an average daily loading of 830 lbs.
In contrast to the impact of average daily BOD loading, peak daily BOD loadings is a more
important measure for the City’s treatment plant in that a very high daily loading can cause
significant operational problems for the City. Simply using average daily loading for surcharges,
as the City’s current approach does, masks the issue. As an example, assuming three daily
loadings of 415, 830 and 1,245 produces an average daily loading of 830 and would not be
subject to surcharges under the City’s current surcharge approach, even though the day with a
peak loading of 1,245 lbs may have caused significant operational problems or caused the City to
exceed their permit limitations for that day.
To address the above issue, this study has proposed a two part approach for BOD loadings in
excess of the loading contained in the base rate. The first part of the surcharge would be similar
to the current approach and consider average daily loadings in excess of a specified limit. All
average daily use over and above the limitation would be charged a surcharge for average daily
loading. In contrast to this, the second part of the surcharge would consider the peak daily
loading of the dairy in relation to the assumed limit. Essentially, the dairy would be charged for
their peak loading on the system. This concept is somewhat analogous to a demand charge by an
electric utility. Using the simple example of the three day loading noted above, the dairy’s peak
loading for purposes of the peak daily BOD surcharge would be based on a peak loading of
1,245. The base rate for the dairy includes an average loading of 830 lbs/day, and therefore, the
dairy would be charged for 415 lbs at the peak BOD surcharge rate.
3 Average daily loading is the simple average of the loadings, or the sum of the daily loadings divided by the
number of days.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-20
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
202
A detailed example of the calculation of the surcharges, along with loadings contained within the
dairy’s “base rate” is shown on Exhibit 16 of the Technical Appendices. It should be noted that
the dairy has the ability to manage their operations to help minimize these surcharges.
3.4.7 Implementation of the Dairy’s Proposed Rates
It is important to understand that this study has developed a cost-based rate design for the dairy,
along with associated loading surcharges, based upon their current loading characteristics. At
the same time, HDR and the City recognize the financial and rate impacts to the dairy of moving
to cost-based rates. Given that, HDR has considered the City’s options with regard to the
implementation of the proposed rates for the dairy.
HDR and the City understand that immediate implementation of the proposed rate to the dairy
would be difficult for both the City and dairy. However, at the same time, the City also
recognizes that the current situation of high loadings and significantly below cost rates to the
dairy is not acceptable. Ideally, the City and the dairy should work towards a mutually
acceptable solution in a positive and business like manner. To do that, the City will need to
provide the dairy with a certain amount of time to assess their options. It would appear that the
dairy has essentially three options. These options are as follows:
1. Invest in pretreatment facilities and significantly reduce the rates being proposed for the
dairy
2. Don’t build pretreatment, but review their operations to determine any changes that may
help to minimize the impacts of the proposed rates.
3. Don’t build pretreatment and don’t change operations and continue with high loadings
Under the first option, the dairy would need to make an investment in pretreatment facilities.
The impact of this investment would be to significantly lower their BOD loadings and receive
from the City a rate commensurate with a commercial customer with domestic level loadings.
The second option doesn’t change the proposed rates from the City, but may avoid certain
surcharges, particularly as they relate to the peak BOD loading surcharge. Finally, the dairy may
determine that it is unwilling to invest in pretreatment facilities and they are unable to change
their operations to any significant level to modify their loadings. In that case, the dairy will be
charged the rates as shown in this study and likely incur the estimated bills as shown within this
study.
To assess the above options, the dairy will need time to determine the costs and benefits of each
of the options. Simply stated, the dairy will need to develop a business case for each alternative
option. For that reason, this report is not recommending an immediate increase in the dairy’s
rates, to the levels shown in Table 3-11. Rather, the City should work with the dairy to allow
them sufficient time to make a reasoned business decision on the construction of pretreatment
facilities. If the dairy determines that it will build a pretreatment facility, the City should reward
them for this decision and hold their rates at the proposed commercial level, with current level
surcharges. This assumes that the City will provide the dairy with a reasonable date for the final
completion and start-up of the facility. Failure to meet this completion date could, at the City’s
discretion, trigger the implementation of the rates as shown in Table 3-11. Finally, if the dairy
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-21
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
203
determines that they will forego building a pretreatment facility, then the City should implement
the rates as shown in Table 3-11, since these are cost-based and reflect the impacts to the City’s
wastewater facility from the high BOD loadings by the dairy.
The City needs a firm commitment from the Dairy within a specified time regarding which
course of action they will take (e.g. six months). The dairy’s intent or plan of action should be
established in a letter agreement between the City and the dairy specifying the reasonable time
table for completion of the plant and the consequences if the time period is exceeded. If the time
period is exceeded, the City should have the right to implement the full rate adjustment, and
possibly retroactively.4 If the Dairy chooses not to build pretreatment the full cost of service
rate adjustment should be implemented immediately after the dairy’s decision.
3.5 Summary of the Wastewater Rate Study
This section of the report has discussed the development and results of the comprehensive
wastewater rate study conducted for the City. The results of the wastewater rate study indicated
that wastewater rates are deficient for the projected time period reviewed. A key issue for this
study is establishing cost-based rates for the dairy. It is important for the City to enter in an
agreement with the Dairy as soon as possible to establish a plan of action to address this issue.
The timeline is critical to the overall operational permitting process for the wastewater treatment
plant and the required capital improvements. The implementation of rate adjustments, as shown
in the rate transition plan, should generate the additional revenue needed to meet the City’s
increased wastewater operating and capital needs, along with the City’s financial and rate setting
philosophy.
The wastewater rates, as proposed herein, are cost-based and were developed using “generally
accepted” rate making methods and principles. The proposed rates should enable the City’s
wastewater utility to operate in a financially sound and prudent manner.
4 Retroactive rates should only apply if the dairy starts down a path of building pretreatment and for whatever
reason clearly abandons the pretreatment project.
Development of the Wastewater Rate Study 3-22
City of Bozeman – Comprehensive Wastewater Rate Study
204
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
205
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 1DATA ASSUMPTIONSFY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12Escalation Factors1 Revenues2 Rates 4.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Per Facility Plan3 Other Revenues 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00%4 56 Expenses7 Utilities 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00%8 Labor 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% Per City9 Benefits - Medical 4.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% Per City10 Benefits - Other 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%11 Materials & Supplies 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 12 Chemicals 7.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% Materials & Supplies + Growth13 Electricity 9.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 8.00% 8.00% Materials & Supplies + Growth14 Natural Gas 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15 Gas & Oil 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%16 Equipment 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00%17 Miscellaneous 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Interest Income 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00%New Debt Service (Actual debt issues shown in following exhibit) Revenue Bond Issue Term in Years 20 20 20 20 20 20 Rate 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% New SRF Loans Term in Years 20 20 20 20 20 20 Rate 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% Per City WW Fund Projection206
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 2SUMMARY OF WASTEWATER REVENUE REQUIREMENTSFY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12RevenuesRetail Sales $3,999,205 $4,453,764 $4,675,992 $4,909,332 $5,154,339 $5,411,595Other Revenue [1] 160,956 161,522 167,338 161,228 150,499 151,500 Total Revenues $4,160,161 $4,615,287 $4,843,330 $5,070,560 $5,304,838 $5,563,096ExpensesO&M Expenses Operations $872,763 $963,321 $1,058,019 $1,199,096 $1,247,125 $1,297,522 Utilities Locate 4,503 4,665 4,832 5,005 5,184 5,370 Services 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 Manholes 25,750 26,523 27,318 28,138 28,982 29,851 Televising 5,871 6,047 6,229 6,415 6,608 6,806 Main Repairs 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 Plant Operations 1,526,374 1,733,038 1,899,595 2,003,399 2,033,350 2,136,908 Plant Laboratory 161,750 168,591 175,793 183,384 191,388 199,836 Plant Sludge Injection 44,262 45,943 47,695 199,520 207,198 215,179Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP 1,591,000 1,790,800 2,510,000 2,750,000 2,600,000 2,700,000Net Debt Service 0 0 41,846 254,152 314,152 274,152 Total Expenses $4,248,753 $4,755,902 $5,788,810 $6,647,117 $6,652,536 $6,884,729Balance/(Deficiency) of Funds($88,592) ($140,615) ($945,480) ($1,576,558) ($1,347,698) ($1,321,633)REQUIRED RATE ADJUSTMENT (Cummulative) 2.2% 3.2% 20.2% 32.1% 26.1% 24.4%PROPOSED RATE ADJUSTMENT 0.0% 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0% ADDITIONAL REVENUE WITH RATE ADJUSTMENT$0 $222,688 $654,639 $1,129,146 $1,288,585 $1,461,131BALANCE/(DEFICIENCY) OF FUNDS($88,592) $82,073 ($290,842) ($447,411) ($59,114) $139,498ADDITIONAL RATE ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED 2.2% -1.8% 5.2% 6.5% 0.7% -1.4%Average Residential Rate (3/4" meter, 6 cf winter) [1] $21.67 $21.67 $22.75 $24.80 $27.03 $27.57Rate Impact with Increase $0.00 $1.08 $2.05 $2.23 $0.54 $0.55Total Monthly Rate with Increase $21.67 $22.75 $24.80 $27.03 $27.57 $28.13Debt Service Coverage Ratio Before Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 1.87 1.05 1.16 1.22 After Proposed Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 2.64 1.89 2.11 2.30[1] Rate increase as of September 1, 2006207
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 1 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12Notes SOURCES OF FUNDS Rate Revenues Residential $1,515,085 $1,689,573 $1,774,051 $1,862,754 $1,955,892 $2,053,686 Rates Low-Income 2,630 2,936 3,083 3,237 3,399 3,569 Rates Multi-Family 873,205 974,146 1,022,853 1,073,996 1,127,696 1,184,081 Rates Commercial 1,044,525 1,161,839 1,219,931 1,280,927 1,344,973 1,412,222 Rates Commercial - Special 11,910 13,330 13,997 14,697 15,432 16,203 Rates Country Classic Dairies 26,028 26,028 27,329 28,696 30,131 31,637 Rates Government 49,676 55,236 57,998 60,898 63,943 67,140 Rates Government - Special 268 277 291 305 321 337 Rates Montana State University 466,677 521,198 547,258 574,621 603,352 633,520 RatesUnmetered Sewer Sales 9,200 9,200 9,200 9,200 9,200 9,200 Other RevenuesTotal Rate Revenues $3,999,205 $4,453,764 $4,675,992 $4,909,332 $5,154,339 $5,411,595 Other RevenuesSales of Sewer Materials $7,800 $8,112 $8,436 $8,690 $8,950 $9,219 Other RevenuesExtra Strength Fees 22,246 22,246 22,246 22,246 22,246 22,246 Flat EscalationSewer Hook-up Charges 36,400 37,856 39,370 40,551 41,768 43,021 Other RevenuesInterest Income 58,110 55,452 57,914 49,189 35,767 33,993 CalculatedRefunds & Reimbursements 31,200 32,448 33,746 34,758 35,801 36,875 Other RevenuesRents & Royalties 5,200 5,408 5,624 5,793 5,967 6,146 Other RevenuesTotal Other Revenues $160,956 $161,522 $167,338 $161,228 $150,499 $151,500TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $4,160,161 $4,615,287 $4,843,330 $5,070,560 $5,304,838 $5,563,096APPLICATIONS OF FUNDSOperation & Maintenance ExpenseWastewater Operations Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $358,161 $412,700 $469,339 $528,159 $548,493 $569,610 Labor; 1 FTE '08, '09, '10Overtime 16,672 17,314 17,981 18,673 19,392 20,138 LaborPERS 21,239 29,278 37,478 45,841 46,758 47,693 Benefits - Other; 1 FTE '08, '09, '10Health/Dental Ins 47,970 60,567 74,424 89,666 98,633 108,496 Benefits - Medical; 1 FTE '08, '09, '10Life Insurance 218 223 227 232 236 241 Benefits - OtherUnemploy Tax 499 509 519 529 540 551 Benefits - OtherFICA 21,377 21,805 22,241 22,686 23,139 23,602 Benefits - OtherWorkers Comp 13,267 13,532 13,803 14,079 14,361 14,648 Benefits - Other Total Personnel Services $479,404 $555,928 $636,011 $719,865 $751,552 $784,979 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $2,575 $2,652 $2,732 $2,814 $2,898 $2,985 Materials & SuppliesComputer Supplies 773 796 820 844 869 896 Materials & SuppliesPersonal Computers 5,150 5,305 5,464 5,628 5,796 5,970 Materials & SuppliesClothing & Uniforms 2,060 2,122 2,185 2,251 2,319 2,388 Materials & SuppliesChemicals 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 Materials & SuppliesRoad Supplies 5,150 5,305 5,464 5,628 5,796 5,970 Materials & SuppliesVehicle Supplies 3,863 3,978 4,098 4,221 4,347 4,478 Materials & SuppliesGas & Oil 5,768 5,941 6,119 6,303 6,492 6,687 Materials & SuppliesSmall Equip & Tools 8,755 9,018 9,288 9,567 9,854 10,149 EquipmentBooks & Ref Materials 103 106 109 113 116 119 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 36,050 37,132 38,245 39,393 40,575 41,792 Materials & Supplies Total Supplies & Materials $78,486 $80,841 $83,266 $85,764 $88,337 $90,987P R O J E C T E D208
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 2 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E D MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $9,785 $10,079 $10,381 $10,692 $11,013 $11,343 EquipmentRep & Maint - Other 6,180 6,365 6,556 6,753 6,956 7,164 Equipment Total Maintenance $15,965 $16,444 $16,937 $17,445 $17,969 $18,508 UtilitiesElectricity $13,625 $14,988 $16,486 $18,135 $19,586 $21,153 ElectricityWater Service 927 955 983 1,013 1,043 1,075 UtilitiesNatural Gas 9,188 9,647 10,129 10,636 11,167 11,726 Natural GasTelephone 2,060 2,122 2,185 2,251 2,319 2,388 Utilities Total Utilities $25,800 $27,711 $29,784 $32,035 $34,115 $36,341 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv $7,100 $7,373 $7,657 $7,952 $8,258 $8,576 Labor; Reduce to monitoringMaint Contract 6,231 6,471 6,720 6,979 7,247 7,526 LaborGeneral 54,262 56,351 58,520 60,773 63,113 65,543 Labor Total Contracted Services $67,593 $70,195 $72,897 $75,704 $78,619 $81,645 Travel/TrainingIn-State $2,678 $2,731 $2,786 $2,841 $2,898 $2,956 Miscellaneous Total Travel/Training $2,678 $2,731 $2,786 $2,841 $2,898 $2,956 OtherAdvertising $306 $312 $318 $325 $331 $338 MiscellaneousSubscriptions 510 520 531 541 552 563 MiscellaneousPostage 15,300 15,606 15,918 16,236 16,561 16,892 MiscellaneousInsurance 42,713 43,567 44,438 87,327 89,073 90,855 Miscellaneous; Incr. for WWTPRents & Leases 3,605 3,713 3,825 3,939 4,057 4,179 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 3,060 3,121 3,184 3,247 3,312 3,378 Miscellaneous Total Other $65,494 $66,839 $68,213 $111,616 $113,888 $116,206 Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead $130,079 $135,087 $140,288 $145,689 $151,298 $157,123 LaborVeh Maint Fund 7,265 7,545 7,836 8,137 8,450 8,776 Labor Total Internal Charges $137,345 $142,633 $148,124 $153,827 $159,749 $165,899 Total Wastewater Operations $872,763 $963,321 $1,058,019 $1,199,096 $1,247,125 $1,297,522Utilities Locate Personnel ServicesOvertime $465 $483 $502 $521 $541 $562 Labor Total Personnel Services $465 $483 $502 $521 $541 $562 Supplies & MaterialsComputer Supplies $927 $955 $983 $1,013 $1,043 $1,075 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 515 530 546 563 580 597 Materials & Supplies Total Supplies & Materials $1,442 $1,485 $1,530 $1,576 $1,623 $1,672 Contracted ServicesGeneral $2,596 $2,696 $2,800 $2,908 $3,020 $3,136 Labor Total Contracted Services $2,596 $2,696 $2,800 $2,908 $3,020 $3,136Total Utilities Locate $4,503 $4,665 $4,832 $5,005 $5,184 $5,370209
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 3 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E DWastewater Services Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $8,240 $8,487 $8,742 $9,004 $9,274 $9,552 Materials & SuppliesTotal Wastewater Services $8,240 $8,487 $8,742 $9,004 $9,274 $9,552Wastewater Operations Manholes Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $25,750 $26,523 $27,318 $28,138 $28,982 $29,851 Materials & SuppliesTotal Manholes $25,750 $26,523 $27,318 $28,138 $28,982 $29,851Wastewater Operations Televising Supplies & MaterialsClothing & Allowance $618 $637 $656 $675 $696 $716 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 618 637 656 675 696 716 Materials & Supplies Total Televising - Supplies & Materials $1,236 $1,273 $1,311 $1,351 $1,391 $1,433 Repair & Maintenance EquipmentEquipment $4,635 $4,774 $4,917 $5,065 $5,217 $5,373 Equipment Total Televising - Repair & Maintenance Equipment $4,635 $4,774 $4,917 $5,065 $5,217 $5,373Total Televising $5,871 $6,047 $6,229 $6,415 $6,608 $6,806Wastewater Operations Main Repairs Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $8,240 $8,487 $8,742 $9,004 $9,274 $9,552 Materials & SuppliesTotal Main Repairs $8,240 $8,487 $8,742 $9,004 $9,274 $9,552Total Operations & Maintenance $925,367 $1,017,530 $1,113,881 $1,256,662 $1,306,447 $1,358,654Wastewater Plant Operations Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $530,010 $550,415 $571,606 $593,613 $657,217 $682,520 Labor; New FTE bene. '11Overtime 25,266 26,238 27,249 28,298 29,387 30,519 LaborPERS 41,891 42,729 43,584 44,455 52,959 54,018 Benefits - Other; New FTE bene. '11Health/Dental Ins 92,430 101,673 111,840 123,024 143,127 157,439 Benefits - Medical; FTE Med. bene. '11Life Insurance 456 465 474 484 494 503 Benefits - OtherUnemploy Tax 955 974 993 1,013 1,033 1,054 Benefits - OtherFICA 39,836 40,633 41,445 42,274 43,120 43,982 Benefits - OtherWorkers Comp 26,778 27,314 27,860 28,417 28,985 29,565 Benefits - Other Total Personnel Services $757,622 $790,441 $825,052 $861,579 $956,322 $999,601 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $4,635 $4,774 $4,917 $5,065 $5,217 $5,373 Materials & SuppliesComputer Supplies 3,090 3,183 3,278 3,377 3,478 3,582 Materials & SuppliesClothing & Uniforms 2,163 2,228 2,295 2,364 2,434 2,508 Materials & SuppliesChemicals 37,450 190,446 280,682 303,136 78,987 85,306 Chemicals;'07 & '08 increaseRoad Supplies 2,060 2,122 2,185 2,251 2,319 2,388 Materials & SuppliesVehicle Supplies 1,545 1,591 1,639 1,688 1,739 1,791 Materials & SuppliesGas & Oil 2,625 2,756 2,894 3,039 3,191 3,350 Gas & OilSmall Equip & Tools 7,725 7,957 8,195 8,441 8,695 8,955 EquipmentBooks & Ref Materials 515 530 546 563 580 597 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 25,750 26,523 27,318 28,138 28,982 29,851 Materials & Supplies Total Supplies & Materials $87,558 $242,110 $333,950 $358,061 $135,620 $143,702210
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 4 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E D MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $30,900 $31,827 $32,782 $33,765 $34,778 $35,822 EquipmentRep & Maint - Buildings 96,820 99,725 102,716 105,798 108,972 112,241 EquipmentRep & Maint - Other 25,750 26,523 27,318 28,138 28,982 29,851 Equipment Total Maintenance $153,470 $158,074 $162,816 $167,701 $172,732 $177,914 UtilitiesElectricity $233,260 $256,586 $282,245 $310,469 $452,664 $488,877 Electricity Incr. 35% '10 for BlowersWater Service 1,648 1,697 1,748 1,801 1,855 1,910 UtilitiesNatural Gas 16,800 17,640 18,522 19,448 20,421 21,442 Natural GasTelephone 5,562 5,729 5,901 6,078 6,260 6,448 UtilitiesRefuse Disposal 1,957 2,016 2,076 2,138 2,203 2,269 UtilitiesGeneral 103 106 109 113 116 119 Utilities Total Utilities $259,330 $283,774 $310,601 $340,047 $483,518 $521,065 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv $6,231 $6,471 $6,720 $6,979 $7,247 $7,526 LaborMaint Contract 4,876 5,063 5,258 5,461 5,671 5,889 LaborJanitorial Contracts 831 863 896 930 966 1,004 LaborEngineers 18,003 0 0 0 0 0 Labor Adjusted for one-time exps.Medical Services 831 863 896 930 966 1,004 LaborGeneral 17,135 17,795 18,480 19,192 19,930 20,698 Labor Total Contracted Services $47,907 $31,055 $32,251 $33,492 $34,782 $36,121 Travel/TrainingIn-State $10,710 $10,924 $11,143 $11,366 $11,593 $11,825 Miscellaneous Total Travel/Training $10,710 $10,924 $11,143 $11,366 $11,593 $11,825 OtherAdvertising $510 $520 $531 $541 $552 $563 MiscellaneousSubscriptions 408 416 424 433 442 450 MiscellaneousPostage 306 312 318 325 331 338 MiscellaneousShipping & Handling 1,428 1,457 1,486 1,515 1,546 1,577 MiscellaneousDues & Subscriptions 102 104 106 108 110 113 MiscellaneousInsurance 42,713 43,567 44,438 45,327 46,233 47,158 MiscellaneousRents & Leases 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 Materials & SuppliesGeneral 15,300 15,606 15,918 16,236 16,561 16,892 Miscellaneous Total Other $69,007 $70,469 $71,963 $73,490 $75,050 $76,644 Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead $130,079 $135,087 $140,288 $145,689 $151,298 $157,123 LaborVeh Maint Fund 10,691 11,103 11,530 11,974 12,435 12,914 Labor Total Internal Charges $140,771 $146,190 $151,819 $157,664 $163,734 $170,038 Total Wastewater Plant Operations $1,526,374 $1,733,038 $1,899,595 $2,003,399 $2,033,350 $2,136,908Wastewater Plant Laboratory Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $95,233 $98,899 $102,707 $106,661 $110,767 $115,032 LaborOvertime 4,563 4,739 4,921 5,111 5,308 5,512 LaborPERS 7,557 7,708 7,862 8,020 8,180 8,344 Benefits - OtherHealth/Dental Ins 17,940 19,734 21,707 23,878 26,266 28,893 Benefits - Medical211
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 5 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E DLife Insurance 82 83 85 87 88 90 Benefits - OtherUnemploy Tax 166 170 173 176 180 184 Benefits - OtherFICA 6,625 6,757 6,893 7,030 7,171 7,314 Benefits - OtherWorkers Comp 5,353 5,460 5,569 5,681 5,794 5,910 Benefits - Other Total Personnel Services $137,519 $143,550 $149,917 $156,643 $163,754 $171,278 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $773 $796 $820 $844 $869 $896 Materials & SuppliesSmall Equip & Tools 1,030 1,061 1,093 1,126 1,159 1,194 EquipmentGeneral 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 Materials & Supplies Total Supplies & Materials $10,043 $10,344 $10,654 $10,974 $11,303 $11,642 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $3,502 $3,607 $3,715 $3,827 $3,942 $4,060 Equipment Total Maintenance $3,502 $3,607 $3,715 $3,827 $3,942 $4,060 Contracted ServicesMaint Contract $1,869 $1,941 $2,016 $2,094 $2,174 $2,258 LaborGeneral 8,308 8,628 8,960 9,305 9,663 10,035 Labor Total Contracted Services $10,177 $10,569 $10,976 $11,399 $11,837 $12,293 OtherShipping & Handling $510 $520 $531 $541 $552 $563 Miscellaneous Total Other $510 $520 $531 $541 $552 $563 Total Wastewater Plant Laboratory $161,750 $168,591 $175,793 $183,384 $191,388 $199,836Wastewater Plant Sludge Injection Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $4,094 $4,251 $4,415 $4,585 $4,762 $4,945 LaborOvertime 782 812 843 876 910 945 LaborPERS 325 332 339 345 352 359 Benefits - OtherHealth/Dental Ins 780 858 944 1,038 1,142 1,256 Benefits - MedicalLife Insurance 3 3 3 3 3 3 Benefits - OtherUnemploy Tax 7 7 7 8 8 8 Benefits - OtherFICA 294 300 306 312 318 324 Benefits - OtherWorkers Comp 231 235 240 245 250 255 Benefits - Other Total Personnel Services $6,516 $6,799 $7,097 $7,412 $7,744 $8,095 Supplies & MaterialsRoad Supplies $1,545 $1,591 $1,639 $1,688 $1,739 $1,791 Materials & SuppliesVehicle Supplies 515 530 546 563 580 597 Materials & SuppliesGasoline and Oil 11,550 12,128 12,734 13,371 14,039 14,741 Gas & OilSmall Equip & Tools 412 424 437 450 464 478 EquipmentGeneral 4,120 4,244 4,371 4,502 4,637 4,776 Materials & Supplies Total Supplies & Materials $18,142 $18,917 $19,727 $20,574 $21,458 $22,383 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $12,875 $13,261 $13,659 $14,069 $14,491 $14,926 Equipment Total Maintenance $12,875 $13,261 $13,659 $14,069 $14,491 $14,926 Contracted ServicesGeneral $4,154 $4,314 $4,480 $154,652 $160,607 $166,790 Labor; New Inject Svcs. '10 Total Contracted Services $4,154 $4,314 $4,480 $154,652 $160,607 $166,790 212
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 6 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E D OtherRents & Leases $2,575 $2,652 $2,732 $2,814 $2,898 $2,985 Equipment Total Other $2,575 $2,652 $2,732 $2,814 $2,898 $2,985 Total Wastewater Plant Sludge Injection $44,262 $45,943 $47,695 $199,520 $207,198 $215,179Total Operations and Maintenance $2,657,753 $2,965,102 $3,236,964 $3,642,965 $3,738,384 $3,910,577 Capital OutlaysSewer OperationsWW01 Dump Truck $0 $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW02 1 Ton Truck W/Hoist 0 0 0 0 44,995 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW03 3/4 Ton 4X4 Pickup 0 0 0 37,856 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07PW01 Shop Complex - Phase 1 0 1,507,500 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW07 Bi-Annual Engineering Design 0 0 90,000 0 90,000 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW08 Wastewater Bi-Annual Upgrades 0 750,000 0 750,000 0 750,000 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW17 Television Van Replacement 0 0 0 0 0 263,218 From CIP Plan 1/10/07Sewer Treatment WW04 WWTP BNR Construction 3,039,825 0 11,485,000 11,485,000 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07; + $3.5 mill. DewtriWW18 Semi Trucks Replacement 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07Sewer Comp Plan - WWTP Phase II0 60,000 0 0 0 0 Upgrading Floating DredgeSewer Comp Plan - Collections0 0 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07Unidentified CIP Projects [1] 0 0 2,273,500 2,500,000 2,465,005 1,686,782 InputTotal Capital Outlays $3,039,825 $2,607,500 $13,848,500 $14,772,856 $2,600,000 $2,700,000 $37,209,825 Less: Funding Sources Other Than Rates Funds From Operating Reserve Fund [2] $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 InputFunds From Capital Reserve Fund 1,448,825 816,700 103,500 5,522,856 0 0 InputRevenue Bond 0 0 0 0 0 0 InputNew SRF Loan - WWTP Phase I 0 0 11,235,000 6,500,000 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07Total Funding Sources Other Than Rates $1,448,825 $816,700 $11,338,500 $12,022,856 $0 $0 $24,178,056 Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP [2] $1,591,000 $1,790,800 $2,510,000 $2,750,000 $2,600,000 $2,700,000 Per City 1/10/07; Deprec.$1,638,184 in '05 Capital Outlays - Impact Fee Sewer PlantPW01 Shop Complex - Phase 1 $0 $990,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW04 WWTP BNR Construction 0 0 5,600,000 5,600,000 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07 + $1.5 mill. DewtrinWWIF05 E8 Hospital Trunk: Haggerty 0 1,062,000 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WWIF07 S15 Install 21" Sewer Interceptor 0 0 0 0 843,648 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WWIF10 A* South Rose Trunk E Babcock 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unsched. $970,000WWIF11 R4 Replace Front Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unsched. $1.8 million Total Impact Fee Plant $0 $2,052,000 $5,600,000 $5,600,000 $843,648 $0 Less: Impact Fees $0 ($2,052,000) ($5,600,000) ($5,600,000) ($843,648) $0 Total Unfunded Impact Fee Plant $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Debt ServiceNew Revenue Bond $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 20 yrs @ 5.5%New SRF Loan - WWTP Phase I 0 0 857,846 1,354,152 1,354,152 1,354,152 20 yrs @ 4.4%Total Debt Service $0 $0 $857,846 $1,354,152 $1,354,152 $1,354,152 213
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 7 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E DLess: Impact Fees 0 0816,000 1,100,000 1,040,000 1,080,000 May use up to 40% of impact feesNet Debt Service $0 $0 $41,846 $254,152 $314,152 $274,152TOTAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT $4,248,753 $4,755,902 $5,788,810 $6,647,117 $6,652,536 $6,884,729TOTAL BALANCE/(DEFICIENCY) ($88,592) ($140,615) ($945,480) ($1,576,558) ($1,347,698) ($1,321,633) REQUIRED RATE ADJUSTMENT (Cummulative) 2.2% 3.2% 20.2% 32.1% 26.1% 24.4%PROPOSED RATE ADJUSTMENT 0.0% 5.0% 9.0% 9.0% 2.0% 2.0%ADDITIONAL REVENUE WITH RATE ADJUSTMENT$0 $222,688 $654,639 $1,129,146 $1,288,585 $1,461,131BALANCE/(DEFICIENCY) OF FUNDS($88,592) $82,073 ($290,842) ($447,411) ($59,114) $139,498ADDITIONAL RATE ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED 2.2% -1.8% 5.2% 6.5% 0.7% -1.4%Debt Service Coverage Ratio Before Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 1.87 1.05 1.16 1.22 After Proposed Rate Increase 0.00 0.00 2.64 1.89 2.11 2.30 [1] Unidentified CIP relates to the unscheduled projects to be funded[2] The WWTP funding sources are City provided from the 1/10/07 WW funding spreadsheet.214
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 8 of 8COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 3SOURCES AND APPLICATIONS OF FUNDS FOR PROJECTED 2006 TO 2012FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12NotesP R O J E C T E D Operating Reserve FundBeginning Reserve Balance $1,937,000 $1,848,408 $1,930,482 $1,639,640 $1,192,229 $1,133,115Less: To CIP Reserves for WWTP Phase I 0 0 0 0 0 0 Uses of Funds (88,592) 82,073 (290,842) (447,411) (59,114) 139,498 Balance of RR summaryEnding Reserve Balance$1,848,408 $1,930,482 $1,639,640 $1,192,229 $1,133,115 $1,272,613Minimum 45 days O&M $327,668 $365,560 $399,078 $449,133 $460,897 $482,126Capital Reserve FundBeginning Reserve Balance$3,000,000 $1,641,175 $873,710 $3,069,922 $139,163 $2,608,343Plus: From Impact Fee Reserve Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rate Revenues Dedicated to CIP 1,591,000 1,790,800 2,510,000 2,750,000 2,600,000 2,700,000 From CIP funding sources From Operating Reserves for WWTP Phase I 0 0 0 0 0 0 From CIP funding sources Unexpended funds/Unidentified Future CIP 0 0 0 0 0 0 From CIP funding sources SRF Loan Proceeds 0 0 11,235,000 6,500,000 0 0 From CIP funding sources Interest Income 90,000 49,235 26,211 92,098 4,175 78,250 CalculatedLess: Uses of Funds - Total Capital Outlay 3,039,825 2,607,500 11,575,000 12,272,856 134,995 1,013,218 From CIP per above RREnding Reserve Balance$1,641,175 $873,710 $3,069,922 $139,163 $2,608,343 $4,373,375 Estimated Annual Depreciation$1,687,330 $1,737,949 $1,790,088 $1,843,791 $1,899,104 $1,956,077 Increased 3% per year Percentage of Rates Dedicated to CIP39.8% 38.3% 47.1% 45.5% 40.4% 39.3% (Includes Proposed Rate Revenue)Total Operating and Capital Reserve Balance$3,489,583 $2,804,192 $4,709,562 $1,331,392 $3,741,458 $5,645,988Total Operating and Capital Reserve Minimum Target$2,014,998 $2,103,510 $2,189,166 $2,292,923 $2,360,001 $2,438,203Impact Fee Reserve FundBeginning Reserve Balance $8,600,000 $11,133,000 $12,099,590 $7,691,218 $2,681,020 $2,752,325Plus: Impact Fees 2,275,000 2,366,000 2,460,640 2,559,066 2,661,428 2,767,885 From City Estimates 1/10/07 Developer Revenue 318,600 0 0 253,094 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07 Interest Income 258,000 333,990 362,988 230,737 80,431 82,570 CalculatedLess: Transfer to Capital Reserve Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 From CIP funding sourcesDebt Service Payments 0 0 816,000 1,100,000 1,040,000 1,080,000PW01 Shop Complex - Phase 1 0 990,000 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WW04 WWTP BNR Construction 0 0 5,600,000 5,600,000 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WWIF05 E8 Hospital Trunk: Haggerty 0 1,062,000 0 0 0 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WWIF07 S15 Install 21" Sewer Interceptor 0 0 0 0 843,648 0 From CIP Plan 1/10/07WWIF10 A* South Rose Trunk E Babcock 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unsched. $970,000 Impacts Fees for Growth related Debt 0 0 816,000 1,100,000 1,040,000 1,080,000 Impacts Fees for Growth related DebtWWIF11 R4 Replace Front Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unsched. $1.8 millionEnding Reserve Balance$11,133,000 $12,099,590 $7,691,218 $2,681,020 $2,752,325 $3,442,780 215
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 4CALCULATION OF I&I2006 FlowsPlant (CCF) Residential410,108 Low-Income1,554 Multi-Family375,995 Commercial530,941 Commercial - Special4,491 Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User13,699 Government24,779 Government - Special83 Montana State University274,485 Unmetered2,5801,638,715 Estimated Flow 2,390,883Calculated I&I 752,16846%I&I ALLOCATION% Allocation TotalTotal I&I 752,168Customer50%376,084Volume50%376,084ALLOCATION OF I&I BY CUSTOMER CLASSCustomer Class Customer [1] Volume [2] Total Residential 257,565 94,120 351,684 Low-Income 1,339 357 1,696 Multi-Family 74,220 86,291 160,511 Commercial 37,311 121,851 159,161 Commercial - Special 1,364 1,031 2,395 Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User 39 3,144 3,182 Government 2,367 5,687 8,054 Government - Special 40 19 59 Montana State University 682 62,994 63,676 Unmetered 1,157 592 1,749 Total 376,084 376,084 752,168Notes: [1] Base 50% on Customer and 50% on Volume[2] Based on Total Flow216
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 5DEVELOPMENT OF THE VOLUME ALLOCATION FACTORWater AVG Winter 2006 Flows Plus: I&I Adjusted Total % ofClass of Service (CCF) (CCF) 46% Flow (CCF) (in MGD) Total Residential 432,139 410,108 351,684 761,793 1.56 31.9% Low-Income 1,560 1,554 1,696 3,249 0.01 0.1% Multi-Family 397,369 375,995 160,511 536,506 1.10 22.4% Commercial 437,880 530,941 159,161 690,102 1.41 28.9% Commercial - Special 11,017 4,491 2,395 6,885 0.01 0.3% Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User 12,993 13,699 3,182 16,881 0.03 0.7% Government 24,030 24,779 8,054 32,833 0.07 1.4% Government - Special 66 83 59 142 0.00 0.0% Montana State University 281,465 274,485 63,676 338,161 0.69 14.1% Unmetered 0 2,580 1,749 4,329 0.01 0.2%Total 1,598,518 1,638,715 752,168 2,390,883 4.90 100.0% Allocation Factor Current Annual Flow [2] 4.90(VOL)[1] Page 4-12 of 2005 Bozeman WW Facilities Plan shows system wide peak I/I of 3.9 mgd compared to total 10 mgd peak.[2] Page 1-1 of 2005 Bozeman WW Facilities Plan.217
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 6DEVELOPMENT OF LOADING ALLOCATION FACTORSBio-chemical Oxygen Demand Suspended SolidsLoading W/O Dairy Loading Loading LoadingAnnual Flow Avg. Factor Calculated % of Avg. Factor Calculated % of Avg. Calculated % of Avg. lculated % of Class of Service (CCF) (mg/l) [1] Pounds Total (mg/l) [1] Pounds Total (mg/l) [3] Pounds Total (mg/l) [3] Pounds Total Residential 761,793 213 1,012,241 32.1% 223 1,059,764 31.9% 16 76,037 31.9% 3.4 16,158 31.9% Low-Income 3,249 213 4,318 0.1% 223 4,521 0.1% 16 324 0.1% 3.4 69 0.1% Multi-Family 536,506 213 712,889 22.6% 223 746,358 22.4% 16 53,550 22.4% 3.4 11,379 22.4% Commercial 690,102 213 916,981 29.1% 223 960,032 28.9% 16 68,881 28.9% 3.4 14,637 28.9% Commercial - Special 6,885 213 9,149 0.3% 223 9,579 0.3% 16 687 0.3% 3.4 146 0.3% Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User [2] 16,881 0 0 0.0% 223 23,485 0.7% 16 1,685 0.7% 3.4 358 0.7% Government 32,833 213 43,627 1.4% 223 45,675 1.4% 16 3,277 1.4% 3.4 696 1.4% Government - Special 142 213 189 0.0% 223 198 0.0% 16 14 0.0% 3.4 3 0.0% Montana State University 338,161 213 449,336 14.2% 223 470,432 14.1% 16 33,753 14.1% 3.4 7,172 14.1% Unmetered 4,329 213 5,752 0.2% 223 6,022 0.2% 16 432 0.2% 3.4 92 0.2% Total2,390,883 3,154,483 100.0% 3,326,066 100.0% 160 238,641 100.0% 34 50,711 100.0%Allocation Factor(BOD) (SS) (N) (P) [1] Page 5-2 of 2005 Bozeman WW Facilities Plan [2] Page 2-15 of 2005 Bozeman WW Facilities Plan [3] Page 7-4 of 2005 Bozeman WW Facilities PlanNitrogen Phosphorus218
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 7DEVELOPMENT OF THE CUSTOMER ALLOCATION FACTORNumber of % of Number of Weighting Weighted % ofClass of Service Billing Units [1] Total Billing Units [1] Factor Customer Total Residential 6,677 68.5% 6,677 1.0 6,677 68.5% Low-Income 35 0.4% 35 1.0 35 0.4% Multi-Family 1,924 19.7% 1,924 1.0 1,924 19.7% Commercial 967 9.9% 967 1.0 967 9.9% Commercial - Special 35 0.4% 35 1.0 35 0.4% Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User 1 0.0% 1 2.0 2 0.0% Government 61 0.6% 61 1.0 61 0.6% Government - Special 1 0.0% 1 1.0 1 0.0% Montana State University 18 0.2% 18 1.0 18 0.2% Unmetered 30 0.3% 30 1.0 30 0.3% Total9,749 100.0% 9,749 9,750 100.0%Allocation Factor (AC) (WCA)Note:[1] Escalated based on average number of 2005 customers plus 2006 escalation rate, see exhibit 1Customer Service and Accounting219
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 8DEVELOPMENT OF THE REVENUE RELATED ALLOCATION FACTORProjected 07/08 % ofClass of Service Revenue Total Residential $1,689,573 37.9% Low-Income 2,936 0.1% Multi-Family 974,146 21.9% Commercial 1,161,839 26.1% Commercial - Special 13,330 0.3% Country Classic Dairy - Industrial User [1] 26,028 0.6% Government 55,236 1.2% Government - Special 277 0.0% Montana State University 521,198 11.7% Unmetered 9,200 0.2%Total Rate Revenues $4,453,764 100.0% Allocation Factor (RR)[1] Darigold total billing including loading charges see Exhibit 16.13,699 Total CCFMeter & Volume Charge $26,028 Rate RevenueExtra Strength 22,246 Other RevenueTotal Rate Revenues $48,274220
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 1 of 2COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 9 FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF PLANT Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer Direct05/06 Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load [E] Actual Weighted Revenue Assign. Account Desc. Plant (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationSewer PlantSID 615 SEWER BUREY ANNES $281,632 $281,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLSID 645 SEWER KAGY-GRAFS 36,229 36,229 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 649 SANITARY SEWER 324,333 324,333 0 0 0 000000100% VOLWHEAT DRIVE LIFT STATION 132,994 132,994 0 0 0 000000100% VOLWASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT 853,275 426,637 191,987 213,319 0 0 21,332 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPWATER RESERVATION 20,992 20,992 0 0 0 000000100% VOL19TH INTERCHANGE 392,172 392,172 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSEWER RENOVATIONS 316,784 316,784 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 627 COOK-KLABUNDE 26,345 26,345 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 626 STRATFORD SEWER 14,229 14,229 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 629 SEWER UNIVERSITY 27,925 27,925 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 634 WEST MAIN SEWER 26,114 26,114 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 635 TRI-ANNEX SEWER 10,880 10,880 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 638 SANITARY SEWER 7,761 7,761 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 22 -Identified as collections 386,262 386,262 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 23 - Identified as collections 210,634 210,634 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 24 - Identified as collections 5,168,755 5,168,755 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 567 SAN SEWER LATERAL MN 95,631 95,631 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 580 SANITARY SEWER WEST KOCH 85,866 85,866 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 587 BEAUMONT SUBDIVISION 77,594 77,594 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 596 SEWER MCCHESNEY 105,000 105,000 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 597 SANITARY SEWER WHEAT SUBDIVISION 64,479 64,479 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 601 SEWER FIGGINS 4TH 87,205 87,205 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 604 SEWER GRAF'S FIRST 81,661 81,661 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT #1 147,341 73,670 33,152 36,835 0 0 3,684 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPEPA PROJECT #13 377,958 188,979 85,040 94,489 0 0 9,449 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW SITE WWTP 540,620 270,310 121,640 135,155 0 0 13,516 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW COMPLEX 30,300 15,150 6,818 7,575 0 0 758 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSHOP COMPLEX 65,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65,000 0 0 100% WCAEPA PROJECT #23-II 75,481 37,740 16,983 18,870 0 0 1,887 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPEPA PROJECT #23-III 72,708 36,354 16,359 18,177 0 0 1,818 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPDISPOSAL SYSTEM 60,696 30,348 13,657 15,174 0 0 1,517 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPDISPOSAL PLANT 274,352 137,176 61,729 68,588 0 0 6,859 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPOLD PLANT 50,000 25,000 11,250 12,500 0 0 1,250 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW PLANT 756,830 378,415 170,287 189,207 0 0 18,921 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPWEST SANITARY TANKS 113,638 56,819 25,568 28,409 0 0 2,841 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSANITARY SEWERS OLD 498,068 498,068 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSANITARY SEWERS NEW 699,081 699,081 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 414 SANITARY SEWER 144,223 144,223 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 425 SANITARY SEWER HILLCREST 83,703 83,703 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT #26 - Identified as collections 2,587,634 2,587,634 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 426 WESTRIDGE SANITARY SEWER 62,836 62,836 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 432 WEST END SANITARY SEWER 226,619 226,619 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 511 SANITARY SEWER THOMPSON 144,604 144,604 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 527 GRAFS & FIGGINS 69,258 69,258 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 621 SEWER VALLEY UNIT 585,797 585,797 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 623 SEWER VALLEY UNIT 515,644 515,644 0 0 0 000000100% VOLFIGGINS/WESTRIDGE OUTFALL 143,893 71,947 32,376 35,973 0 0 3,597 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSOLVENT SITE WATER IMPROVEMENTS 1,802,729 901,365 405,614 450,682 0 0 45,068 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSLUDGE MIXING PROJECT 17,660 8,830 3,973 4,415 0 0 441 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPBURRUP LIFT STATION 142,052 142,052 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA GRANT WASTEWATER FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION 10,451,349 5,225,674 2,351,553 2,612,837 0 0 261,284 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPIMPACT FEE CREDITS PROJECTS- SEWER 349,512 349,512 0 0 0 000000100% VOLNew WWTP Plant - Phase 1 Liquid [A] $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 48% VOL 22% BOD 14% SS 8% N Solids [B] 0 0 0 0 0 00000025%VOL25%BOD0%SS25%N Administration [C] 0 0 0 0 0 000000 As Liquid and Solids above Total New WWTP Plant [D] $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Sewer Plant $29,924,334 $21,974,920 $3,547,986 $3,942,207 $0 $0 $394,221 $0 $65,000 $0 $0Loading Related221
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 2 of 2COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 9 FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF PLANT Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer Direct05/06 Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load [E] Actual Weighted Revenue Assign. Account Desc. Plant (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationLoading RelatedLess: Accumulated DepreciationSID 615 SEWER BUREY ANNES ($211,224) ($211,224) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLSID 645 SEWER KAGY-GRAFS (27,172) (27,172) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 649 SANITARY SEWER (243,250) (243,250) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLWHEAT DRIVE LIFT STATION (73,143) (73,143) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLWASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (253,310) (126,655) (56,995) (63,327) 0 0 (6,333) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPWATER RESERVATION (16,777) (16,777) 0 0 0 000000100% VOL19TH INTERCHANGE (287,592) (287,592) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSEWER RENOVATIONS (170,063) (170,063) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 627 COOK-KLABUNDE (23,534) (23,534) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 626 STRATFORD SEWER (12,711) (12,711) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 629 SEWER UNIVERSITY (27,925) (27,925) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 634 WEST MAIN SEWER (23,960) (23,960) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 635 TRI-ANNEX SEWER (9,698) (9,698) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 638 SANITARY SEWER (7,160) (7,160) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 22 (347,415) (347,415) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 23 (189,284) (189,284) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT 24 (4,838,092) (4,838,092) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 567 SAN SEWER LATERAL MN (95,631) (95,631) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 580 SANITARY SEWER WEST KOCH (85,866) (85,866) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 587 BEAUMONT SUBDIVISION (76,127) (76,127) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 596 SEWER MCCHESNEY (103,821) (103,821) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 597 SANITARY SEWER WHEAT SUBDIVISION (63,755) (63,755) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 601 SEWER FIGGINS 4TH (83,822) (83,822) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 604 SEWER GRAF'S FIRST (81,661) (81,661) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT #1 (147,341) (73,670) (33,152) (36,835) 0 0 (3,684) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPEPA PROJECT #13 (377,958) (188,979) (85,040) (94,489) 0 0 (9,449) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW SITE WWTP (44,716) (22,358) (10,061) (11,179) 0 0 (1,118) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW COMPLEX (25,401) (12,701) (5,715) (6,350) 0 0 (635) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSHOP COMPLEX (65,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (65,000) 0 0 100% WCAEPA PROJECT #23-II (75,481) (37,740) (16,983) (18,870) 0 0 (1,887) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPEPA PROJECT #23-III (72,708) (36,354) (16,359) (18,177) 0 0 (1,818) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPDISPOSAL SYSTEM (60,696) (30,348) (13,657) (15,174) 0 0 (1,517) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPDISPOSAL PLANT (274,352) (137,176) (61,729) (68,588) 0 0 (6,859) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPOLD PLANT (45,625) (22,812) (10,266) (11,406) 0 0 (1,141) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPNEW PLANT (756,830) (378,415) (170,287) (189,207) 0 0 (18,921) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPWEST SANITARY TANKS (113,638) (56,819) (25,568) (28,409) 0 0 (2,841) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSANITARY SEWERS OLD (498,068) (498,068) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSANITARY SEWERS NEW (699,081) (699,081) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 414 SANITARY SEWER (144,223) (144,223) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 425 SANITARY SEWER HILLCREST (83,703) (83,703) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA PROJECT #26 (2,135,357) (2,135,357) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 426 WESTRIDGE SANITARY SEWER (62,836) (62,836) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 432 WEST END SANITARY SEWER (226,619) (226,619) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 511 SANITARY SEWER THOMPSON (144,604) (144,604) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 527 GRAFS & FIGGINS (69,209) (69,209) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 621 SEWER VALLEY UNIT (585,797) (585,797) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLSID 623 SEWER VALLEY UNIT (511,178) (511,178) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLFIGGINS/WESTRIDGE OUTFALL (33,920) (16,960) (7,632) (8,480) 0 0 (848) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSOLVENT SITE WATER IMPROVEMENTS (237,078) (118,539) (53,343) (59,270) 0 0 (5,927) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPSLUDGE MIXING PROJECT (4,378) (2,189) (985) (1,095) 0 0 (109) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPBURRUP LIFT STATION (19,292) (19,292) 0 0 0 000000100% VOLEPA GRANT WASTEWATER FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION (1,212,184) (606,092) (272,741) (303,046) 0 0 (30,305) 0 0 0 0 50% VOL 22.5% BOD 25% SS 2.5% CAPIMPACT FEE CREDITS PROJECTS- SEWER (43,689) (43,689) 0 0 0 000000100% VOL Total Accumulated Depreciation ($16,123,957) ($14,191,150) ($840,513) ($933,904) $0 $0 ($93,390) $0 ($65,000) $0 $0Total Net Sewer Plant $13,800,377 $7,783,770 $2,707,473 $3,008,303 $0 $0 $300,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 % OF NET PLANT 100.0% 56.4% 19.6% 21.8% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%[A] From WW Facilities Plan; Page 1-8, Table 1-4; Phase 1; Liquid Treatment Improvements - $15.33 million[B] From WW Facilities Plan; Page 1-8, Table 1-4; Phase 1; Solids Handling and Treatment Improvements - $17.47 million[C] From WW Facilities Plan; Page 1-8, Table 1-4; Phase 1; Engineering, Legal, Administration and Other - $5.6 million[D] Total project of $38.4 million. Classification was based on teleconference call with Amanda McInnis[E] Classification based on 10% of plant capacity due to Dairy. 10% of the 25% BOD is 2.5% to BOD capacity.222
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 1 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 10FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer DirectBudget Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load Actual Weighted Revenue Assign.Account Desc. FY 07/08 (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationOperation & Maintenance ExpenseWastewater Operations Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $412,700 $412,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLOvertime 17,314 17,314 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLPERS 29,278 29,278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLHealth/Dental Ins 60,567 60,567 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLLife Insurance 223 223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLUnemploy Tax 509 509 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLFICA 21,805 21,805 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLWorkers Comp 13,532 13,532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Personnel Services $555,928 $555,928 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $2,652 $2,652 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLComputer Supplies 796 796 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLPersonal Computers 5,305 5,305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLClothing & Uniforms 2,122 2,122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLChemicals 8,487 8,487 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLRoad Supplies 5,305 5,305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLVehicle Supplies 3,978 3,978 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLGas & Oil 5,941 5,941 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLSmall Equip & Tools 9,018 9,018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLBooks & Ref Materials 106 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLGeneral 37,132 37,132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Supplies & Materials $80,841 $80,841 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $10,079 $10,079 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLRep & Maint - Other 6,365 6,365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Maintenance $16,444 $16,444 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UtilitiesElectricity $14,988 $14,988 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLWater Service 955 955 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLNatural Gas 9,647 9,647 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLTelephone 2,122 2,122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Utilities $27,711 $27,711 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv $7,373 $7,373 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLMaint Contract 6,471 6,471 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLGeneral 56,351 56,351 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Contracted Services $70,195 $70,195 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Travel/TrainingIn-State $2,731 $2,731 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOL Total Travel/Training $2,731 $2,731 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherAdvertising $312 $312 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLSubscriptions 520 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLPostage 15,606 15,606 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLInsurance 43,567 43,567 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLRents & Leases 3,713 3,713 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLGeneral 3,121 3,121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Other $66,839 $66,839 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Loading Related223
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 2 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 10FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer DirectBudget Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load Actual Weighted Revenue Assign.Account Desc. FY 07/08 (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationLoading Related Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead $135,087 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,087 $0 $0 100% WCAVeh Maint Fund 7,545 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,545 0 0 100% WCA Total Internal Charges $142,633 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $142,633 $0 $0Total Wastewater Operations $963,321 $820,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $142,633 $0 $0 Utilities Locate Personnel ServicesOvertime $483 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $483 $0 $0 100% WCA Total Personnel Services $483 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $483 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsComputer Supplies $955 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $955 $0 $0 100% WCAGeneral 530 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 530 0 0 100% WCA Total Supplies & Materials $1,485 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,485 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesGeneral $2,696 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,696 $0 $0 100% WCA Total Contracted Services $2,696 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,696 $0 $0Total Utilities Locate $4,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,665 $0 $0Wastewater Services Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $8,487 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,487 $0 $0 100% WCATotal Wastewater Services $8,487 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,487 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Manholes Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $26,523 $26,523 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLTotal Manholes $26,523 $26,523 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Televising Supplies & MaterialsClothing & Allowance $637 $637 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLGeneral 637 637 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL Total Televising - Supplies & Materials $1,273 $1,273 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Repair & Maintenance EquipmentEquipment $4,774 $4,774 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOL Total Water Valves - Supplies & Materials $4,774 $4,774 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Televising $6,047 $6,047 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Main Repairs Supplies & MaterialsGeneral $8,487 $8,487 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100% VOLTotal Main Repairs $8,487 $8,487 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Operations & Maintenance $1,017,530 $861,746 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $155,784 $0 $0Wastewater Plant Operations Personnel Services Salaries & Wages $550,415 $400,924 $67,271 $74,746 $0 $0 $7,475 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantOvertime 26,238 19,112 3,207 3,563 0 0 356 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantPERS 42,729 31,124 5,222 5,803 0 0 580 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantHealth/Dental Ins 101,673 74,059 12,426 13,807 0 0 1,381 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantLife Insurance 465 339 57 63 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantUnemploy Tax 974 709 119 132 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantFICA 40,633 29,597 4,966 5,518 0 0 552 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantWorkers Comp 27,314 19,895 3,338 3,709 0 0 371 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Personnel Services $790,441 $575,760 $96,607 $107,341 $0 $0 $10,734 $0 $0 $0 $0224
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 3 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 10FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer DirectBudget Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load Actual Weighted Revenue Assign.Account Desc. FY 07/08 (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationLoading Related Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $4,774 $3,477 $583 $648 $0 $0 $65 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantComputer Supplies 3,183 2,318 389 432 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantClothing & Uniforms 2,228 1,623 272 303 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantChemicals ($150,000 DA Phosphorus) [2] 190,446 40,446 0 0 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOL $150,000 Phos.Road Supplies 2,122 1,546 259 288 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantVehicle Supplies 1,591 1,159 194 216 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGas & Oil 2,756 2,008 337 374 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantSmall Equip & Tools 7,957 5,796 972 1,081 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantBooks & Ref Materials 530 386 65 72 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 26,523 19,319 3,242 3,602 0 0 360 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Supplies & Materials $242,110 $78,078 $6,314 $7,016 $0 $150,000 $702 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $31,827 $23,183 $3,890 $4,322 $0 $0 $432 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantRep & Maint - Buildings 99,725 72,640 12,188 13,542 0 0 1,354 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantRep & Maint - Other 26,523 19,319 3,242 3,602 0 0 360 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Maintenance $158,074 $115,142 $19,320 $21,466 $0 $0 $2,147 $0 $0 $0 $0 UtilitiesElectricity [2] $256,586 $0 $173,196 $0 $64,147 $0 $19,244 $0 $0 $0 $0 68% BOD 25% N 8% CAPWater Service 1,697 1,697 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLNatural Gas 17,640 17,640 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100% VOLTelephone 5,729 4,173 700 778 0 0 78 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantRefuse Disposal 2,016 1,468 246 274 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 106 77 13 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Utilities $283,774 $25,056 $174,155 $1,066 $64,147 $0 $19,351 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv $6,471 $4,713 $791 $879 $0 $0 $88 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantMaint Contract 5,063 3,688 619 688 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantJanitorial Contracts 863 628 105 117 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantEngineers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantMedical Services 863 628 105 117 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 17,795 12,962 2,175 2,417 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Contracted Services $31,055 $22,620 $3,795 $4,217 $0 $0 $422 $0 $0 $0 $0 Travel/TrainingIn-State $10,924 $7,957 $1,335 $1,483 $0 $0 $148 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment Plant Total Travel/Training $10,924 $7,957 $1,335 $1,483 $0 $0 $148 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherAdvertising $520 $379 $64 $71 $0 $0 $7 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantSubscriptions 416 303 51 57 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantPostage 312 227 38 42 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantShipping & Handling 1,457 1,061 178 198 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantDues & Subscriptions 104 76 13 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantInsurance 43,567 31,734 5,325 5,916 0 0 592 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantRents & Leases 8,487 6,182 1,037 1,153 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 15,606 11,367 1,907 2,119 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Other $70,469 $51,330 $8,613 $9,570 $0 $0 $957 $0 $0 $0 $0 Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead $135,087 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,087 $0 $0 100% WCAVeh Maint Fund 11,103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,103 0 0 100% WCA Total Internal Charges $146,190 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $146,190 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Operations $1,733,038 $875,943 $310,139 $152,159 $64,147 $150,000 $34,460 $0 $146,190 $0 $0225
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 10FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer DirectBudget Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load Actual Weighted Revenue Assign.Account Desc. FY 07/08 (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationLoading Related Wastewater Plant Laboratory Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $98,899 $72,038 $12,087 $13,430 $0 $0 $1,343 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantOvertime 4,739 3,452 579 644 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantPERS 7,708 5,615 942 1,047 0 0 105 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantHealth/Dental Ins 19,734 14,374 2,412 2,680 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantLife Insurance 83 61 10 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantUnemploy Tax 170 124 21 23 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantFICA 6,757 4,922 826 918 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantWorkers Comp 5,460 3,977 667 741 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Personnel Services $143,550 $104,563 $17,545 $19,494 $0 $0 $1,949 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies $796 $580 $97 $108 $0 $0 $11 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantSmall Equip & Tools 1,061 773 130 144 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 8,487 6,182 1,037 1,153 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Supplies & Materials $10,344 $7,534 $1,264 $1,405 $0 $0 $140 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $3,607 $2,627 $441 $490 $0 $0 $49 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment Plant Total Maintenance $3,607 $2,627 $441 $490 $0 $0 $49 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesMaint Contract $1,941 $1,414 $237 $264 $0 $0 $26 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantGeneral 8,628 6,285 1,054 1,172 0 0 117 0 0 0 0 As Treatment Plant Total Contracted Services $10,569 $7,699 $1,292 $1,435 $0 $0 $144 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherShipping & Handling $520 $379 $64 $71 $0 $0 $7 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment Plant Total Other $520 $379 $64 $71 $0 $0 $7 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Laboratory $168,591 $122,802 $20,605 $22,894 $0 $0 $2,289 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Plant Sludge Injection [3] Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages $4,251 $0 $1,913 $2,126 $0 $0 $213 $0 $0 $0 $0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPOvertime 812 0 365 406 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPPERS 332 0 149 166 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPHealth/Dental Ins 858 0 386 429 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPLife Insurance 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPUnemploy Tax 7 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPFICA 300 0 135 150 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPWorkers Comp 235 0 106 118 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAP Total Personnel Services $6,799 $0 $3,059 $3,399 $0 $0 $340 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsRoad Supplies $1,591 $0 $716 $796 $0 $0 $80 $0 $0 $0 $0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPVehicle Supplies 530 0 239 265 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPGasoline and Oil 12,128 0 5,457 6,064 0 0 606 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPSmall Equip & Tools 424 0 191 212 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAPGeneral 4,244 0 1,910 2,122 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAP Total Supplies & Materials $18,917 $0 $8,513 $9,459 $0 $0 $946 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip $13,261 $0 $5,968 $6,631 $0 $0 $663 $0 $0 $0 $0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAP Total Maintenance $13,261 $0 $5,968 $6,631 $0 $0 $663 $0 $0 $0 $0226
CITY OF BOZEMANPage 5 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 10FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES Bio-Oxygen Suspended Peak Cap Customer DirectBudget Volume Demand Solids Nitrogen Phosphorous BOD Load Actual Weighted Revenue Assign.Account Desc. FY 07/08 (VOL) (BOD) (SS) (N) (P) (CAP) (AC) (WCA) (REV) (DA)Basis of ClassificationLoading Related Contracted ServicesGeneral $4,314 $0 $1,941 $2,157 $0 $0 $216 $0 $0 $0 $0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAP Total Contracted Services $4,314 $0 $1,941 $2,157 $0 $0 $216 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherRents & Leases $2,652 $0 $1,194 $1,326 $0 $0 $133 $0 $0 $0 $0 45% BOD 50% SS 5% CAP Total Other $2,652 $0 $1,194 $1,326 $0 $0 $133 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Sludge Injection $45,943 $0 $20,674 $22,972 $0 $0 $2,297 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Operations and Maintenance $2,965,102 $1,860,491 $351,418 $198,025 $64,147 $150,000 $39,046 $0 $301,975 $0 $0 Rates Dedicated to CIP $1,790,800 $1,010,058 $351,334 $390,371 $0 $0 $39,037 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Net Sewer PlantDebt ServiceNew Revenue Bond $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 As Treatment PlantNew SRF Loan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 As Treatment PlantTotal Debt Service$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT $4,755,902 $2,870,548 $702,752 $588,396 $64,147 $150,000 $78,084 $0 $301,975 $0 $0 Less: Miscellaneous Revenues Sales of Sewer Materials $8,112 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,112 $0 100% RRExtra Strength Fees [1] 22,246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,246 100% DASewer Hook up Charges 37,856 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37,856 0 100% RRInterest Income 55,452 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55,452 0 100% RRRefunds & Reimbursements 32,448 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32,448 0 100% RRRents & Royalties 5,408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,408 0 100% RRTotal Miscellaneous Revenues$161,522 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $139,276 $22,246NET REVENUE REQUIREMENTS $4,594,379 $2,870,548 $702,752 $588,396 $64,147 $150,000 $78,084 $0 $301,975 ($139,276) ($22,246) % OF NET REVENUE REQUIREMENTS 100.0% 62.5% 15.3% 12.8% 1.4% 3.3% 1.7% 0.0% 6.6% -3.0% -0.5% [1] The extra strength fees were directly assigned to each customer class based on volumes contributed.[2] WW Plant Operations electricity costs assigned to the Dairy are 10% of 75% or 8% BOD Peak; chemicals are $150,000 as Phosphorus and remaining based on volume Amanda McInnis.[3] The WW Plant Sludge Injection expenses assigned to the Dairy are 10% of 50% BOD or 5%. To BOD Peak. 227
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 11DIRECT ASSIGNMENT - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSESIndustrialUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - MontanaTotal Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U UnmeteredOperation & Maintenance ExpenseWastewater Operations Personnel Services Salaries & Wages $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Overtime00000000 000PERS00000000 000Health/Dental Ins00000000 000Life Insurance00000000 000Unemploy Tax00000000 000FICA00000000 000Workers Comp00000000 000 Total Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Computer Supplies00000000 000Personal Computers00000000 000Clothing & Uniforms00000000 000Chemicals00000000 000Road Supplies00000000 000Vehicle Supplies00000000 000Gas & Oil00000000 000Small Equip & Tools00000000 000Books & Ref Materials00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Rep & Maint - Other00000000 000 Total Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UtilitiesElectricity 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Water Service00000000 000Natural Gas00000000 000Telephone00000000 000 Total Utilities$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Maint Contract00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Contracted Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Travel/TrainingIn-State 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Travel/Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherAdvertising 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Subscriptions00000000 000Postage00000000 000Insurance00000000 000Rents & Leases00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0228
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 11DIRECT ASSIGNMENT - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSESIndustrialUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Total Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U Unmetered Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Veh Maint Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Operations $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities Locate Personnel ServicesOvertime 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsComputer Supplies 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0General 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesGeneral 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Contracted Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Utilities Locate $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Services Supplies & MaterialsGeneral 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Manholes Supplies & MaterialsGeneral 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Manholes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Televising Supplies & MaterialsClothing & Allowance 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0General 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Televising - Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Repair & Maintenance EquipmentEquipment 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Water Valves - Supplies & Materials$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Televising $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wastewater Operations Main Repairs Supplies & MaterialsGeneral 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Main Repairs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Operations & Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0229
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 11DIRECT ASSIGNMENT - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSESIndustrialUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Total Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U UnmeteredWastewater Plant Operations Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Overtime 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Health/Dental Ins 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Life Insurance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Unemploy Tax 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0FICA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Workers Comp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Computer Supplies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clothing & Uniforms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Chemicals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Road Supplies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Vehicle Supplies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Gas & Oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Small Equip & Tools 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Books & Ref Materials 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0General 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Rep & Maint - Buildings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Rep & Maint - Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UtilitiesElectricity 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Water Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Natural Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Telephone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Refuse Disposal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0General 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesConsult & Prof Serv 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Maint Contract 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Janitorial Contracts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Engineers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Medical Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0General 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Contracted Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Travel/TrainingIn-State 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Travel/Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0230
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 11DIRECT ASSIGNMENT - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSESIndustrialUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Total Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U Unmetered OtherAdvertising 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Subscriptions00000000 000Postage00000000 000Shipping & Handling00000000 000Dues & Subscriptions00000000 000Insurance00000000 000Rents & Leases00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Internal ChargesAdmin Overhead 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Veh Maint Fund00000000 000 Total Internal Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Operations $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Wastewater Plant Laboratory Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Overtime00000000 000PERS00000000 000Health/Dental Ins00000000 000Life Insurance00000000 000Unemploy Tax00000000 000FICA00000000 000Workers Comp00000000 000 Total Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsOffice Supplies 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Small Equip & Tools00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesMaint Contract 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0General00000000 000 Total Contracted Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherShipping & Handling 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Laboratory $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0231
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 11DIRECT ASSIGNMENT - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSESIndustrialUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Total Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U UnmeteredWastewater Plant Sludge Injection Personnel ServicesSalaries & Wages 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Overtime00000000 000PERS00000000 000Health/Dental Ins00000000 000Life Insurance00000000 000Unemploy Tax00000000 000FICA00000000 000Workers Comp00000000 000 Total Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies & MaterialsRoad Supplies 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Vehicle Supplies00000000 000Gasoline and Oil00000000 000Small Equip & Tools00000000 000General00000000 000 Total Supplies & Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MaintenanceRep & Maint - Equip 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contracted ServicesGeneral 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Contracted Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OtherRents & Leases 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Wastewater Plant Sludge Injection$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Operations and Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Net Capital Outlay from Rates $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Debt ServiceNew Revenue Bond 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0New SRF Loan00000000 000Total Debt Service$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Less: Miscellaneous Revenues Sales of Sewer Materials00000000 000Extra Strength Fees 22,246 7,088 30 4,992 6,421 64 157 305 1 3,146 40 Sewer Hook up Charges00000000 000Interest Income00000000 000Refunds & Reimbursements00000000 000Rents & Royalties00000000 000Total Miscellaneous Revenues$22,246 $7,088 $30 $4,992 $6,421 $64 $157 $305 $1 $3,146 $40NET REVENUE REQUIREMENTS ($22,246) ($7,088) ($30) ($4,992) ($6,421) ($64) ($157) ($305) ($1) ($3,146) ($40) 232
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 12ALLOCATION OF REVENUE REQUIREMENTSIndustrialUserCountryNet Revenue Low Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana AllocatioClassification Components Requirement Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy Government Special State U Unmetered FactorVolume Related$2,870,548 $914,625 $3,901 $644,142 $828,552 $8,267 $20,268 $39,420 $171 $406,004 $5,198 (VOL) Plant Loading Related - Bio-Oxygen Demand $702,752 $225,506 $962 $158,817 $204,284 $2,038 $0 $9,719 $42 $100,103 $1,281 (BOD) - Suspended Solids 588,396 187,477 800 132,034 169,834 1,694 4,155 8,080 35 83,221 1,065 (SS) - Nitrogen 64,147 20,439 87 14,394 18,515 185 453 881 4 9,073 116 (N) - Phosphorous 150,000 47,794 204 33,660 43,296 432 1,059 2,060 9 21,216 272 (P) - Peak Capacity Bio-Oxygen Demand Load 78,084 0 0 0 0 0 78,084 0 0 0 0 (CAP) Total Plant Loading Related$1,583,379 $481,215 $2,053 $338,905 $435,929 $4,349 $83,750 $20,740 $90 $213,612 $2,735 Customer Related - Actual Customer$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (AC) - Weighted for Customer Srvc/Accounting301,975 206,789 1,075 59,589 29,955 1,095 62 1,900 32 548 929 (WCA) Total Customer Related$301,975 $206,789 $1,075 $59,589 $29,955 $1,095 $62 $1,900 $32 $548 $929 Revenue Related($139,276) ($52,836) ($92) ($30,463) ($36,333) ($417) ($814) ($1,727) ($9) ($16,299) ($288) (RR) Direct Assignment($22,246) ($7,088) ($30) ($4,992) ($6,421) ($64) ($157) ($305) ($1) ($3,146) ($40) (DA) NET REVENUE REQUIREMENT $4,594,379 $1,542,706 $6,907 $1,007,180 $1,251,683 $13,230 $103,109 $60,028 $283 $600,719 $8,533 Percentage of Plant Loading Related 100.0% 30.4% 0.1% 21.4% 27.5% 0.3% 5.3% 1.3% 0.0% 13.5% 0.2%Percentage of Net Revenue Requirement 100.0% 33.6% 0.2% 21.9% 27.2% 0.3% 2.2% 1.3% 0.0% 13.1% 0.2%233
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 13SUMMARY OF THE COST OF SERVICE ANALYSISIndustrialUserFY 07/08Country O&M Low Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Expenses Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy [1] Government Special State U UnmeteredRevenues at Present Rates $4,453,764 $1,689,573 $2,936 $974,146 $1,161,839 $13,330 $26,028 $55,236 $277 $521,198 $9,200 Less: Allocated Revenue Requirement $4,594,379 $1,542,706 $6,907 $1,007,180 $1,251,683 $13,230 $103,109 $60,028 $283 $600,719 $8,533Total Balance/(Deficiency) in Rates ($140,615) $146,867 ($3,971) ($33,034) ($89,844) $100 ($77,081) ($4,791) ($6) ($79,521) $667Required % Rate Adjustment 3.2% -8.7% 135.2% 3.4% 7.7% -0.8% 296.1% 8.7% 2.3% 15.3% -7.2%COSA With Proposed Adjustment $4,676,452 $1,570,264 $7,031 $1,025,172 $1,274,043 $13,467 $104,951 $61,100 $288 $611,450 $8,686 % COSA With Proposed Adjustment 5.0% -7.1% 139.4% 5.2% 9.7% 1.0% 303.2% 10.6% 4.1% 17.3% -5.6% [1] This does not include surcharge revenues. See Exhibit 16 for Country Classic Dairy Surcharge amount.234
CITY OF BOZEMAN COMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDY EXHIBIT 14 IndustrialAVERAGE UNIT COSTSUserCountryLow Multi- Commercial - Classic Government - Montana Total Residential Income Family Commercial Special Dairy [1] Government Special State U UnmeteredVolume $/ccf $1.75 $2.23 $2.51 $1.71 $1.56 $1.84 $1.48 $1.59 $2.06 $1.48 $0.00Loading $/ccf $0.97 $1.17 $1.32 $0.90 $0.82 $0.97 $6.11 $0.84 $1.08 $0.78 $0.00Revenue/Direct $/ccf $0.09 $0.36 $0.61 $0.06 ($0.02) $0.14 ($0.07) ($0.01) $0.27 ($0.07) $0.00 Total $/ccf $2.81 $3.76 $4.45 $2.68 $2.36 $2.95 $7.53 $2.42 $3.40 $2.19 $0.00Customer Costs - $/account/month $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $23.70Average Total Cost $/ccf $2.81 $3.76 $4.45 $2.68 $2.36 $2.95 $7.53 $2.42 $3.40 $2.19 $0.00Basic Data: Annual Volume (ccf) 1,636,135 410,108 1,554 375,995 530,941 4,491 13,699 24,779 83 274,485 2,580Number of Accounts 9,719 6,677 35 1,924 967 35 1 61 1 18 30CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 15AVERAGE UNIT COSTS FOR LOADINGBODBOD Capacity SS Nitrogen Phosphorus Total Total System Cost $702,752 $78,084 $588,396 $64,147 $150,000 $1,583,379 Total System Pounds [1] [2] 3,154,483 302,950 3,326,066 238,641 50,711 Average Unit Cost $/lb $0.223 $0.258 $0.177 $0.269 $2.958 [1] Total BOD system pounds is 3,326,066 (BOD w/o Dairy 3,154,483 + Dairy 22,431 = 3,326,066) [2] Total BOD Capacity system pounds is 830 lbs/day capacity annualized equals 302,950 lbs per year 235
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 16BILLING SUMMARY FOR COUNTRY CLASSICS DAIRY - INDUSTRIAL USERAnnual Billed Volume (ccf) [1] 13,699Converted to gallons 10,247,537Total Billed Volume (gal/day) 28,075 Total Billed Flow at plant (gal/day) [3] 28,075Average MGD = 0.0281 Allocated Revenue Requirement with Proposed Adjustment [2] $104,951 Excess OverQuarterly Quarterly Maximum Minimum MaximumQuarterly Avg. Average Load Avg in Threshold Limit Threshold Daily Charge Loading Surcharge (Other than BOD) Flow in MGD (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [3] (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] $/Day SS 0.028177918225059 123.95 $0.18 21.93 Phosphorus 0.02813175.01 6.11 $2.96 18.08 Nitrogen 0.028100205 0.00 $0.27 0.00 Total$40.00 Days in a Year365 Subtotal Other Loading Surcharge Annual Surcharge $14,601 Quarterly Quarterly Average Day Excess OverQuarterly Avg. Average Load Avg in Capacity Cap Average Cap Daily Charge BOD Loading Surcharge Flow in MGD (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] $/Day BOD 0.02813,73287483043.84 $0.22 $9.77365Annual Surcharge $3,565Excess OverPeak Day Maximum MaximumLoading Limit Threshold $/Billing Peak BOD Capacity Demand Charge (lb/Day) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] Period Highest Monthly Peak (December)2,149 830 1,319.00 $0.26 $339.96 Months in year 12 Total Peak Capacity Surcharge Net Capacity Demand Charge $4,080 Total Loading & Peak Capacity Charges $22,246 Total Annual Country Classic's Dairy Billing$127,198[1] From PDF of "Account Billing History" report for 2006 provided by City. [2] Allocated revenue requirement from Exhibit 12.[3] The averages were provided by City's project engineer and are based on actual sewer flows not billed flow.[4] Excess Load (lb/day, as calculated from mg/l) for SS were established by the City's Pre-Treatment Committee.[5] Rates/Pound are from Exhibit 15.236
CITY OF BOZEMANCOMPREHENSIVE WASTEWATER RATE STUDYEXHIBIT 16BILLING SUMMARY FOR COUNTRY CLASSICS DAIRY - INDUSTRIAL USERAnnual Billed Volume (ccf) [1] 13,699Converted to gallons 10,247,537Total Billed Volume (gal/day) 28,075 Total Billed Flow at plant (gal/day) [3] 28,075Average MGD = 0.0281 Allocated Revenue Requirement with Proposed Adjustment [2] $104,951 Excess OverQuarterly Quarterly Maximum Minimum MaximumQuarterly Avg. Average Load Avg in Threshold Limit Threshold Daily Charge Loading Surcharge (Other than BOD) Flow in MGD (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [3] (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] $/Day SS0.028177918225059 123.95 $0.18 21.93 Phosphorus0.02813175.01 6.11 $2.96 18.08 Nitrogen0.028100205 0.00 $0.27 0.00 Total$40.00 Days in a Year365 Subtotal Other Loading Surcharge Annual Surcharge $14,601 Quarterly Quarterly Average Day Excess OverQuarterly Avg. Average Load Avg in Capacity Cap Average Cap Daily Charge BOD Loading Surcharge Flow in MGD (mg/l) [3] (lb/Day) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] $/Day BOD0.02813,73287483043.84 $0.22 $9.77365Annual Surcharge $3,565Excess OverPeak Day Maximum MaximumLoading Limit Threshold $/Billing Peak BOD Capacity Demand Charge(lb/Day) [3] (lb/Day) [4] (lb/Day) Rate/Pound [5] Period Highest Monthly Peak (December)2,149 830 1,319.00 $0.26 $339.96 Months in year 12 Total Peak Capacity Surcharge Net Capacity Demand Charge $4,080 Total Loading & Peak Capacity Charges $22,246 Total Annual Country Classic's Dairy Billing$127,198[1] From PDF of "Account Billing History" report for 2006 provided by City. [2] Allocated revenue requirement from Exhibit 12.[3] The averages were provided by City's project engineer and are based on actual sewer flows not billed flow.[4] Excess Load (lb/day, as calculated from mg/l) for SS were established by the City's Pre-Treatment Committee.[5] Rates/Pound are from Exhibit 15.237