Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plant ProjectsPROJECT DEFINITION UPDATEJerry Dobrovolny, P.Eng., MBACOMMISSIONER / CAO

Liquid Waste Committee, July 15, 202146344186

Presentation - Program Narrative Workshop - IIWWTP - 02-17-21

Peter Navratil, P.Eng., MPA Cheryl Nelms, P.Eng., Ph.D.GM, LIQUID WASTE SERVICES GM, PROJECT DELIVERY

5.1

1 of 60

OUTLINE

2

1. How we got to here2. Project definition3. July 2020 Board-endorsed Design Concept4. Challenges identified since July 20205. Addressing challenges

2 of 60

3

Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plant Projects Video Link:

http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/liquid-waste/projects-initiatives/iona-island-wwtp-project/Pages/default.aspx

3 of 60

PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH & THE ENVIRONMENT

44 of 60

Project Definition

5 of 60

PROJECT DEFINITION GOALS

Wastewater Treatment

Community and Park Integration

Resource Recovery

December 31, 2030 – Federal and Provincial Regulatory Deadline

6 of 60

PROJECT DEFINITION PROCESS

7

• Interdepartmental Metro Vancouver team• Multi-disciplinary consultant team• Integrated design process (8 workshops)• Public and First Nations engagement• Structured decision making (trade-off

analysis – 3 concepts)

7 of 60

EVALUATION OF CONCEPTS – 2020

8

Criteria Concept 1Base Secondary

Concept 2Tertiary Filtration

Concept 3 Tertiary MBR

Operational Complexity Medium Low High

Maintenance Requirements High Low High

Health and Safety Risks High Low High

Odour Release Risks High Medium Low

Footprint Large Medium Small

Ability to Adopt Future Technological Innovations Medium High Low

Net Energy Use Medium Low High

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Medium Low High

Capital Costs (2020 Dollars) Highest Lowest Medium

Annual Operating Cost Medium Lowest Highest

8 of 60

July 2020 Board-endorsed Design Concept

9 of 60

JULY 2020 BOARD-ENDORSED DESIGN CONCEPT

• Tertiary-level treatment (disk filtration), odour control, climate-change resiliency, adaptability to future technologies

• Further exploration of resource recovery opportunities

• Range of ecological projects

10 of 60

THE NEW TREATMENT PLANT

11

• Biologically enhanced primary treatment

• Activated sludge secondary treatment followed by clarification

• Tertiary filtration and UV disinfection• Reuse of existing assets• Effluent reuse for heat, district

energy and reclaimed water • Biogas upgraded to biomethane

11 of 60

RESOURCE RECOVERY OPPORTUNITIES

12

Inputs Recovered Resources

Wastewater

Trucked Liquid Waste

Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plant

Reclaimed Water(Onsite and Offsite use)

Effluent Heat Recovery(Onsite heating needs and export to District Energy System)

Renewable Natural Gas (Export to grid)

Biosolids(Land application and low-carbon fuel)

12 of 60

THE ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS

13

aa

13 of 60

Challenges identified since July 2020

14 of 60

Focus shifted to:TRANSITION TO DELIVERY

15

• Advancing Design Concept • Constructability review• Off-site and enabling project requirements• Delivery strategy and options• Risk assessment• Schedule refinement• Class 3 cost estimates • Applying new Metro Vancouver cost-

estimating framework

Possible crane locations (24) on a tight site

15 of 60

CHALLENGES

16

• Constructability• Regional solids management• Schedule constraints

Significantly higher than anticipated cost estimates

16 of 60

DESIGN CONCEPT DELIVERY SCHEDULE

17

Regulatory Deadline = 31 December 2030 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041

Revised PDR to Board

PMC Services Award

WWTP Design

Biosolids Stockpile Removal

Early & Enabling Works

Ground Improvements & Preload

Liquid Waste Treatment Upgrades

Secondary Treatment Compliance

Additional Digestion Capacity

Ecological Projects

17 of 60

DESIGN CONCEPT – PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE

18

$ shown in billions

Total Project Costs (2021 dollars) $6.7

Total Estimated Costs (over 20-year duration of projects including escalation and risk reserve) $10.4

range - low $8.7 range - high $11.4

18 of 60

COST ESTIMATE BY PHASE – DESIGN CONCEPT

19

PHASE 12021 – 2025

PHASE 22026 – 2034

PHASE 32035 – 2042

$750 M $6.7 B $3.0 B

• Early works • Ground improvements• Access roads and utilities• Ecological projects

• Complete early works• Replace preliminary and

primary liquid treatment facilities

• Upgrade liquid stream to secondary/tertiary treatment

• Re-use of existing solids treatment facilities

• Ecological projects

• Two new digesters for extra sludge from liquid treatment process upgrades

• Ecological projects

19 of 60

COST ESTIMATE BY KEY COMPONENTS

20

Replace Existing Primary – 36%

Secondary & Tertiary – 52%

Access, Utilities, other Upgrades – 6%

Resource Recovery – 4%

Ecological Restoration & Community Amenities– 3%

Ground improvements and seismic resiliency ~ 20% of total costs

20 of 60

July 2020 Design ConceptPRELIMINARY HOUSEHOLD IMPACTS

21

• Determining ratepayer impacts is challenging for such a complex, lengthy project

• Average impact on Vancouver Sewerage Area households, based on Design Concept costs and cash flows, estimated to be in the order of additional $400 to $500 annually, calculated on a present value basis

• Other sewerage areas in the order of an additional $60 to $115 annually

• Further analysis on financial impact will continue to be undertaken as project definition work continues to be refined

21 of 60

Addressing Challenges

22 of 60

Value Engineering – Challenge Review

VALUE ENGINEERING & ALTERNATIVES

23

• Further evaluation of options, incorporating value engineering findings

• Revised structured decision-making process • Recommend a Revised Design Concept for Board

consideration

• Blue-ribbon panel - subject matter experts not involved in project definition

• Challenge design concept to look for cost savings and value-added opportunities

• Revisit alternative technologies, site footprint and address constructability challenges

Development of a Revised Design Concept

Blue-Ribbon PanelRoy Simm – StantecKen Abraham – HDR

Viji Fernando – GolderFrank Margitan (Rtd) – Kiewit

Jeff Plant – Major Projects AdvisorPippa Brasher – Scape Studio

Brendan Avery – Francl ArchitectureShannon Katt – PMA Consultants

Ryan Ziels – UBC

23 of 60

Critical activities – independent of ongoing evaluations – are continuing PRIORITY DELIVERY ACTIVITIES

24

• Removal of biosolids stockpiles and dewatering of sludge lagoons

• Geotechnical and environmental investigations• Technical studies for ecological projects• Wharf for materials transportation • Addressing land tenure issues• Permitting requirements• Exploring synergies with other projects• Updating member jurisdictions • Finalizing agreements with Musqueam

24 of 60

WORKING WITH MEMBER JURISDICTIONS

25

• Monthly updates to VSA jurisdiction staff• Council presentations, as requested• Quarterly updates to FIC, LWC, Board• Regular updates to REAC, RFAC and RAAC• Ongoing engagement on resource recovery opportunities

25 of 60

RECONCILIATION THROUGH PARTNERSHIP

26

• Apprenticeship training• Employment• Procurement• Economic partnerships

and development opportunities

26 of 60

Fall 2021PUBLIC AND FIRST NATIONS ENGAGEMENT

27

• Provide project update• Engage on aspects of the projects that

could potentially be revised• Key stakeholders, public, First Nations• Report findings to committees and

Board in November

27 of 60

28

STAGE GATE PROCESS

28 of 60

COMMITTEE & BOARD REPORTING

29

Nov 2021FIC/LWC/Board

Early 2022FIC/LWC/Board

To present:• Value engineering outcomes• Results of options evaluation• Recommended revised design concept

Recommendation: Approve revised design concept; staff to finalize PDR with refined schedule and budget

To present:• Final PDR• Revised design concept w/ Class 3

cost estimates/budget, schedule, and delivery strategy

Recommendation: Approve indicative design and budget

29 of 60

Successful delivery of the IIWWTP projects over the next 20 years will:WHAT SUCCESS LOOKS LIKE

30

• Provide reliable tertiary wastewater treatment for generations to come

• Enhance protection of human health and the marine environment

• Significantly improve water quality in the Salish Sea and Fraser River estuary

• Enhance protection of salmon and southern resident killer whales

• Meaningfully integrate Musqueam cultural values and interests

• Stimulate the local economy through job creation Provide these far-reaching benefits in a

financially responsible manner

30 of 60

31

Discussion31 of 60

Draft Liquid Waste Services 2022-2026 Capital Plan

Peter NavratilGeneral Manager, Liquid Waste Services

Liquid Waste Committee, July 15, 202146220315

Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant

5.2

32 of 60

Liquid Waste ServicesCUSTOMER LEVEL OF SERVICE OBJECTIVES

2

1. Eliminate Discharges from the Sewer System

2. Ensure that Authorized WWTP Discharges Meet RegulatoryRequirements

3. Improve Environmental Stewardship(Nutrient Recovery, Energy Use, GHG Emissions, Odour Emissions)

4. Minimize Timeline to recover from a Major Event (Seismic, Power Interruption and Climate Change)

33 of 60

CUSTOMER LEVEL OF SERVICE OBJECTIVES

3

Customer Level of Service Objective KPI Metric Current Target

(2030) Goal

Eliminate Discharges from the Sewer System

Sanitary Sewage Overflow (SSO) events (#) 88 40 0 (2040)

Combined Sewage Overflow (CSO) volume (ML) 34,000 30,000 0 (2075)

Rainfall derived inflow and infiltration (RDII) (ML) 43,500 20,000 0 (2040)

Facilities not meeting basic service or regulations in next 10 years (%) 34% 15% 0% (2035)

Protect Public Health and the Environment –Authorized WWTP Discharges

Duration of events not in compliance with operational certificates & WSER (hrs) 8,760 0 0 (2030)

Recreational water quality (% of tests not meeting criteria) 1.6% 0 0 (??)

Improve Environmental Stewardship

Biosolids beneficially used (%) 99.5% 100% 100% (2030)

Net energy use (GJ / ML Treated) 1.05 0.80 0 (2050)

Net GHG emissions (kg of CO2 / ML treated) 16.2 8.9 0 (2050)

Odour complaints (#) 18 10 0 (2035)

Minimize Timeline to Recover from a Major Event

Targeted assets resilient to seismic event (%) Undefined Defined 100% (2050)

Targeted assets resilient to power outage event (%) 97% 100% 100% (2035)

Targeted assets resilient to climate change event (%) Undefined Defined 100% (2100)

34 of 60

Liquid Waste ServicesCAPITAL PLAN DRIVERS

4

Driver Outcome % 2022-2026Capital Plan

Growth Accommodate population and economic growth 46%

UpgradeProvide enhanced levels of service (e.g. secondary treatment) or achieve a level of service

31%

Maintenance Maintain assets in a state of good repair 16%

Opportunity Reduce life-cycle cost of services, progress Board strategic goals 6%

Resilience Endure impacts resulting from seismic events and climate change 1%

46%Growth

31%Upgrade

16%Maintenance

6%Opportunity

1%Resilience

35 of 60

5

KEY PROJECTS AND CHANGES - GROWTH

Burnaby Lake North Interceptor

750-2100 mm – 6 km

South Surrey Interceptor Twinning

3000 mm – 2 km

Annacis Island WWTP Digester No.5

Stoney Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer

750 mm – 4 kmAnnacis Island WWTPDigesters, Delta

36 of 60

6

KEY PROJECTS AND CHANGES - UPGRADES

Ocean Park Trunk Sewer Air Management Facility

North Surrey Interceptor Flow Management

North Surrey Interceptor Odour Control

New CSO Management GatesNew Westminster Interceptor

Highbury Air Management Facility, Vancouver

37 of 60

7

AIWWTP Trickling Filters Refurbishment

KEY PROJECTS AND CHANGES - MAINTENANCE

Gilbert/Brighouse Trunk Pressure Sewer

AIWWTP Influent System Remediation

New Westminster Interceptor and Columbia Extension

Rehabilitation

Port Coquitlam PumpStation Refurbishment

North Surrey Interceptor Rehabilitation

LIWWTP Secondary Trickling Filter and Secondary Clarifier

Refurbishment

Crescent Beach Forcemain Replacement

Glen Eagles Pump Stations and Forcemain

Refurbishment

Westridge Pump Stations Refurbishment

38 of 60

8

KEY PROJECTS AND CHANGES - RESILIENCE

Vancouver Sewerage Area Pump Stations Emergency

Backup Power

IIWWTP, LIWWTP and NLWWTP Emergency Power

Reliability

Sapperton Pump Station Emergency Backup Power

39 of 60

9

KEY PROJECTS AND CHANGES - OPPORTUNITY

Biosolids DryerLIWWTP Effluent Heat

Recovery

Hydrothermal Processing Pilot

LIWWTP Pilot Digestion Optimization Facility

Lulu Island WWTP Renewable Natural Gas

Facility, Richmond

40 of 60

10

Northwest Langley Wastewater Treatment Program (Growth)

North Shore WWTP Secondary Upgrade, Conveyance and Decommissioning (Upgrade)

Iona Secondary Wastewater Treatment (Upgrade)

HIGHEST VALUE, RISK AND CONSEQUENCE PROJECTS

AIWWTP Stage 5 Expansion & Outfall System (Growth)

41 of 60

11

2020 2030

North Shore WWTP Upgrade

Construction

2010

Design

North Shore Land Purchase

Iona Island WWTP Upgrade

Northwest Langley WWTP Expansion

HIGHEST VALUE, RISK AND CONSEQUENCE PROJECTSTIMELINES

Annacis WWTP Stage 5 Expansion

2022-2026FINANCIAL PLAN

42 of 60

LIQUID WASTE 2022-2026 CAPITAL PLAN

12

62%67% 72% 73%

64%

38% 33% 28% 27% 36%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Liquid Waste - HVRC Liquid Waste

2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Annual Capital Expenditures (millions)

LWS $258.9 $323.5 $296.3 $277.1 $303.3

LWS-HVRC $416.9 $655.6 $762.8 $759.7 $538.9

Drivers:• LWS –130+ projects in 2022-2026 capital plan• Highest Value, Risk and Consequence –

Four projects in the 2022-2026 capital plan

43 of 60

2022-2026 CAPITAL PLAN EXPENDITURESLIQUID WASTE

13

Overview:• 2022-2026 Capital Plan: $4.6B• 2022 cash flow: $675.8M

Drivers:• Tertiary Treatment Upgrade (NSWWTP / IIWWTP)• FSA Treatment Expansions (AIWWTP / NLWWTP)• Maintenance / Betterments

0200400600800

1,0001,200

2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Milli

ons

2022 – 2026 Liquid Waste Services Capital Plan

Collections Treatment Plants

44 of 60

LIQUID WASTE PROPOSED 2022-2026 CAPITAL PLAN

14

($ Millions)

Prior CycleCapital Plan2021-2025

Cashflow2021

Adjustments to 2022-2025 Capital PlanCashflow

2026

DraftCapital Plan2022-2026

Carry-Forward

Deferrals/Accel. Risk Scope Total

$4,205 ($935) $174 ($182) $379 $110 $480 $842 $4,593

45 of 60

NEXT STEPS

15

1. Incorporate feedback from Committee in the 2022-2026 Capital Plan

2. Present revised 2022-2026 Capital Plan and 2022 Operating and Capital Budgets for Committee consideration in October

3. Continue to examine and implement continuous improvement strategies

46 of 60

16

Thank you

First Nation Drum – Heather Place Opening

47 of 60

Wet Weather Surcharge for Inflow and Infiltration Action

Rick GallileeDirector, Shared Services & Strategic Initiatives, LWS

Liquid Waste Committee, July 15, 202146484071

Peter NavratilGeneral Manager, Liquid Waste Services

Sanitary Sewer Overflow

5.3

48 of 60

The ProblemINFLOW AND INFILTRATION

2

• Frequency of wet weather Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) is increasing- 25 to 45 over the last 5 years

• Cause of wet weather SSOs is Inflow and Infiltration (I&I)- I&I primarily occurs on private sewer laterals and stormwater piping- Leaks in sewer laterals + connection of stormwater piping to sanitary sewers

• Metro Vancouver solution is expansion of capacity of trunk sewers- Expensive solution compared to addressing issue at source

• MV has had limited success in encouraging source reduction actions

49 of 60

The ProposalWET WEATHER SURCHARGE AND RESERVE

3

• Wet Weather Surcharge- Incentivize action to address Inflow and Infiltration at source

• Annual Surcharge based on wet weather flow- Small proportion of the GVS&DD Levy

• Establish a dedicated Reserve (not applied to general revenues)- Funding assistance for projects targeted at managing I&I at source- Projects submitted annually- Selection on basis of efficacy of source management of I&I- Allow actions on source management of Fats, Oils & Grease (FOG)

50 of 60

The PrinciplesWET WEATHER SURCHARGE AND RESERVE

4

• Focused on I&I and FOG source management

• Tier I charge - dedicated reserve for each sewerage area

• Surcharge proportionate to wet weather performance - Municipal and Sewerage Area performance

• Funding not limited by contribution

• Shared funding of projects (50-50)

• Annual review of surcharge and reserve capacity / demand

51 of 60

Thank you

Sanitary Sewer Overflow

52 of 60

Engagement Plan for Liquid Waste Development Cost Charge Program UpdateJoe SassDirector, Financial Planning & Operations / Deputy CFO

Liquid Waste Committee July 15, 202146339771

Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plant, 2017

5.4

53 of 60

INTRODUCTION

Infrastructure costs due to growth should be paid for by growth development• Board direction – in Board Strategic Plan• Key principle

There is a future funding gap for DCCs for liquid waste services• Growth represents 31% of the liquid waste capital program

If endorsed by the GVS&DD, DCC rates in principle will be used in engagement with relevant levels of government, First Nations, stakeholders, and the public

254 of 60

Liquid waste capital projectsSYSTEM GROWTH REQUIREMENTS

3

Growing region~1.5% annually

Increasing service demands

Infrastructure expansion

Development pays for growth

55 of 60

4

Growth Capital

31%

Non-growth Capital69%

Liquid Waste Capital Plan LIQUID WASTE SERVICESGROWTH REQUIREMENTS

$ MillionsGrowth Capital 2,610Non-growth Capital 5,749Total Capital Plan 8,359

56 of 60

INDUSTRY CAPACITY ANALYSIS

5

Findings regarding development industry’s capacity to absorb DCC rate increases:

• Increased DCC rates can reduce pace of new construction, reducing supply while demand continues, leading to market-wide price increases

• Industry’s capacity by housing type• Single family: significant room through region• Townhouse & apartment: room in some areas but little to none in most Fraser locations• Non-residential: little to none for offices in most locations; mixed results for industrial

• Except for single family, increases need to be modest/low to avoid impacts on financial viability of redevelopment

• Capacity for DCC rate increases likely to increase over time

57 of 60

Existing and proposedLIQUID WASTE DCC RATES

7

Sewerage Area

Single-Family(per unit)

Townhouse(per unit)

Apartment(per unit)

Non-Residential(per ft2 of floor area)

Existing Proposed(% change) Existing Proposed

(% change) Existing Proposed(% change) Existing Proposed

(% change)

Fraser $5,428 $6,254(15.2%)

$4,695 $5,390(14.8%)

$3,531 $4,269(20.9%)

$2.67 $3.30(23.6%)

Lulu Island West $2,214 $3,313(49.6%)

$1,915 $2,756(43.9%)

$1,388 $2,042(47.1%)

$1.05 $1.54(46.7%)

North Shore $2,300 $3,300(43.5%)

$2,076 $2,786(34.2%)

$1,416 $2,030(43.4%)

$1.20 $1.67(39.2%)

Vancouver $1,811 $3,335(84.2%)

$1,618 $2,983(84.4%)

$1,072 $1,988(85.4%)

$0.93 $1.63(75.3%)

Compared to the current five-year plan, introducing the proposed DCC rates will result in a 2% reduction in liquid waste’s household impact (HHI) by 2025, with further reductions in following years.

58 of 60

2020 2021

REVIEW & ENGAGEMENT TIMELINE

8

Advisory Committees

Online forums: members /

industry / public

DCC webpage & mailing list

Letters to members, UEL, First Nations

DCC program review

DCC rate capacity report

Submission to Province

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Engagement Analysis

MV Committees

& Board

Review Revisions

Incorporate feedback

today

Review Report / bylaw

Discussions with Province

Incorporate feedback

First Nations engagement

MV Committees

& Board

DCC rates in principle

development

59 of 60

960 of 60