HomeMy Public PortalAboutExhibit MSD 5 - 2007 Rate ProposalFinal Report
Prepared by:
A and
Black and Veatch
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District
Wastewater and Stormwater Rate Proposal
February 2007
Exhibit MSD 5
A i
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Table of Contents.doc
Contents
Section 1 Executive Summary
1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Report Organization.................................................................................................1-2
1.3 Other Key Rate Proposal Assumptions.................................................................1-3
1.4 Rate Proposal Summary..........................................................................................1-6
1.5 Resulting Impact on Customer Monthly Bills....................................................1-11
Section 2 Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected Operating Costs and
Other Revenues
2.1 General.......................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Combined Wastewater and Stormwater Historical Operation and Maintenance
Expense ...................................................................................................................................2-2
2.3 Basis for Cost Allocation to Wastewater and Stormwater..................................2-2
2.4 Projected Wastewater Operating and Routine Capital Expenses......................2-2
2.5 Projected Stormwater Operating and Routine Capital Expenses......................2-7
2.6 Other Operating Revenue .....................................................................................2-13
2.7 Basis for Other Operating Revenue Allocation to Wastewater and Stormwater
...................................................................................................................................2-16
2.8 Wastewater Other Operating Revenue ...............................................................2-16
2.9 Stormwater Other Operating Revenue................................................................2-16
Section 3 Wastewater Rates
3.1 Historic and Existing Wastewater Rates...............................................................3-1
3.2 Wastewater Revenue................................................................................................3-4
3.3 Wastewater Utility Major Capital Costs/Financing............................................3-7
3.4 Other Revenue Requirements...............................................................................3-14
3.5 Wastewater Revenue Projections/Revenue Requirements..............................3-16
3.6 Cost of Service Allocations....................................................................................3-20
3.7 Distribution of Costs to Customer Classes .........................................................3-30
3.8 Wastewater Rate Adjustments..............................................................................3-33
Section 4 Stormwater User Charges
4.1 General.......................................................................................................................4-1
4.2 Existing Stormwater Rates and Taxes....................................................................4-1
4.3 Stormwater Capital and Operating Revenue Requirements..............................4-5
4.4 Stormwater Credit Policy........................................................................................4-8
4.5 Development of Impervious Rates.........................................................................4-9
4.6 OMCI Subdistrict Reconfiguration ......................................................................4-12
4.7 Stormwater Proposed Rates and Taxes and Revenue Requirements .............4-14
Table of Contents
Wastewater and Stormwater Rate Proposal
Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue
Requirements
5.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Wastewater and Stormwater Revenues ................................................................5-2
5.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Revenue Requirements.........................................5-3
5.4 Summary of Combined Wastewater and Stormwater Revenue Requirements...
.....................................................................................................................................5-6
5.5 Distribution of Costs/Revenues to Customer Classes........................................5-6
5.6 Rate Schedules ........................................................................................................5-10
5.7 Customer Bill Examples.........................................................................................5-10
A ii
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Table of Contents.doc
A 1-1
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
Section 1
Executive Summary
1.1 Overview
Since its inception in 1954, The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District has been
responsible for the treatment and disposal of the region’s wastewater. To
adequately fund this operation, the District’s Board of Trustees (BoT) effectively
established a policy to fairly allocate the costs for required wastewater services to all
customers within the District’s service area. This policy was predicated upon
satisfying the health, safety, and welfare of the region’s citizens related to the
management of wastewater in the most cost effective manner possible. Increased
regulatory requirements and the demands of an aging sewer infrastructure
necessitated evolving modifications to the District’s user charge structure to
adequately fund its wastewater operations.
In 1988, the District’s responsibilities expanded to include the collection, transport,
storage, and disposal of stormwater. Funding of these stormwater operations were
partially incorporated into the wastewater user charge with the remaining partially
funded by various tax rates applied to assessed property values and a per customer
flat fee. These funding mechanisms, however, have proven over time to be
insufficient to fully address the stormwater needs of the region’s customers,
increasing regulatory requirements and demands of an aging sewer infrastructure.
These increased demands have necessitated evolving modifications to the District’s
user charge structure. Part of this evolution included a November 2000 voter
approved amendment to the District’s Charter. This amendment provided District
authority to issue general and revenue type bonds and established an independent
Rate Commission for public input into future proposed rate changes.
The District submitted its first Rate Change Proposal to the Rate Commission in
May 2002 and revisions to the proposal in April 2003. The Rate Commission issued
its rate recommendation in the Rate Commission Report (May 2003). In this report
the Rate Commission recommended a three year rate increase plan which was
implemented beginning July 1, 2003. The Rate Commission also recommended the
District conduct a study to evaluate and recommend an allocation and cost recovery
method for Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) operation costs and review its policy and
charges related to Excess Strength Suspended Solids, additional working capital
requirements and resistance factors The findings of the I&I Study and
recommended policy review was to be presented to the Rate Commission before
any future rate change proposal.
The Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study (CDM, January 2005) and Rate
Commission Requested Policy Analysis (CDM, December 2004) were prepared to
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-2
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
address these issues. The findings of these two studies were presented to the Rate
Commission on June 28, 2005.
The District’s last wastewater increase was implemented July 1, 2005. In order to
continue to adequately address the District’s regulatory and customer demands, the
District’s BoT requested a reassessment of the current user charge structure and a 5-
year rate proposal be developed to separately meet the revenue requirements for
stormwater and wastewater, respectively.
In response to the BoT’s request, this rate proposal identifies two separate rate
structures for wastewater and stormwater management, respectively. The basis for
each system is technically quantified in Sections 2, 3, and 4. The results of these
technical evaluations are summarized in Section 5 with appropriate identification of
transition periods necessary to shift to a dual funding stream mechanisms. The
results of The Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study and Rate Commission
Requested Policy Analysis mentioned above have been incorporated into this rate
proposal.
1.2 Report Organization
Section 2 - Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
Section 2 of the Proposal presents the detailed technical analysis for these topics and
quantifies the methodologies used to appropriately allocate operating expenses and
other operating revenues for wastewater and stormwater to each management
system. Within these contexts, a summary of the projected operating expenses and
other operating revenues for wastewater and stormwater are generated for 2007
through 2012, with a test year established as 2008. Historical operating expenses
and other operating revenues for wastewater and stormwater are also presented for
2002 through 2006.
Section 3 - Wastewater Rates
Section 3 presents the detailed technical analysis of the revenue requirements for
2007 through 2012 and identifies the projected revenue needed to satisfy these
requirements for wastewater. This section provides a projection of wastewater rate
requirements for 2008 through 2012 that satisfies these revenue requirements solely
predicated upon billable wastewater quantities. Wastewater rates are calculated for
2008 in this section and projected for 2009 through 2012. Lastly, a brief comparison
of wastewater rates is provided for the impacts upon various categories of metered
and unmetered customers by class throughout the entire service area.
Section 4 - Stormwater User Charges
Section 4 of the Proposal presents the detailed technical analysis of the stormwater
revenue requirements for 2007 through 2012 and identifies the projected revenue
needed to satisfy these requirements. The significant difference between Section 3
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-3
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
and 4 is the proposal of a new stormwater rate methodology based on per parcel
impervious area with implementation beginning December 1, 2007. The total
stormwater revenue requirement is divided by the existing and projected
impervious area to obtain a per 100 square feet unit charge for 2008 through 2012.
This impervious area based revenue is proposed funding for a basis level of
stormwater service throughout the District’s entire service area. Basic service
includes pipe and structure repair; inlet cleaning; removal of creek obstructions;
concrete channel cleaning and repair, and creek inspections.
The specific revenues and expenses reflected in this section also incorporate the
transition from property tax and wastewater rate revenues to an independent
stormwater revenue source for an enhanced level of stormwater services. This
transition begins July 1, 2008 and is designed to provide funding for items such as
maintenance of residential detention basins; erosion control; construction of new
storm water systems; creek maintenance, and assistance with back yard ponding.
The proposal recommends the use of subdistrict tax levies as the basis for enhanced
service funding. The District currently taxes 23 Operation and Maintenance Capital
Improvement Subdistricts (OMCI subdistricts). 21 of which are stormwater specific
with the remaining two designated for wastewater projects only. This proposal
recommends the 23 existing subdistricts be reconfigured into 5 watershed-based
subdistricts through elections conducted within each watershed area. The tax levy
and type of enhanced services will be determined by a vote of the customers of each
watershed. These individual watershed proposals will be developed with input
from District customers and be brought forth for voter consideration as completed.
The District’s Rate Proposal assumes election results are obtained such that
certification of a revised tax rolls are accomplished by September 2008. Although
these proposals are dependent upon decisions rendered by the voters, projections
are presented to indicate the anticipated rates for each of the 5 proposed watershed
OMCI subdistricts.
Section 5 - Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of
Service and Revenue Requirements
In order to effectively evaluate this rate proposal, Section 5 combines the analyses
performed in Sections 2, 3, and 4 into proposed rates by customer classes for the
separate wastewater and stormwater revenue sources. In addition to proposing
rates for 2008 through 2012 for the separate revenue sources, comparisons are
provided to reflect the impact upon monthly bills within each customer class. These
impacts are summarized for the years 2008 through 2012.
1.3 Other Key Rate Proposal Assumptions
The rate proposal provided in this document has incorporated several changes to
the District’s cost allocation of customer user fees, and capital projects financing.
These changes are based on the impact of wastewater capital project requirements; a
shift to a Pay-As-You-Go wastewater funding approach, and recommendations
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-4
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
included in the Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study and Rate Commission
Requested Policy Analysis; These changes are presented below and used in the
analysis and determination of the proposed rates.
The District currently maintains a model to update and evaluate its wastewater
rates. This rate model has multiple modules linked together to produce rates and
charges for the current fiscal year and forecasted periods. These modules consist of
three essential components of ratemaking: Revenue Requirement, Cost of Service
Allocation and Rate Design.
Pay-As-You-Go Funding Shift
The District’s rate proposal reflects a shift in funding approach from its prior
combined Pay-As-You-Go / Bond Financing strategy to a 100% Pay-As-You-Go
basis. This shift is estimated to save the District approximately $400 million in
avoided debt service costs from the prior contemplated continued use of bond
financing. This strategic shift is also based on the following other factors:
• Regulatory picture is incomplete;
• Saves bonding capacity for future needs;
• Continues wastewater CIRP progress at a tapered rate;
• Maintains progress toward known regulatory goals, and
• Brings the St. Louis area to appropriate rates in a cost efficient manner (i.e.
avoids added debt interest costs).
Wastewater Capital Project Revenue Requirements
As mentioned above, the shift to a 100% Pay-As-You-Go funding approach does
require the District to taper the pace of its wastewater CIRP over the 5 years of the
rate proposal. Although tapered, the wastewater CIRP reflected in this second
phase remains robust as evidenced by the annual program levels outlined below for
a total proposed 5 year program of $660,857,000:
Fiscal Year 2008 $103,075,000
Fiscal Year 2009 $111,343,000
Fiscal Year 2010 $134,373,000
Fiscal Year 2011 $151,090,000
Fiscal Year 2012 $160,974,000
Total $660,857,000
Including the fiscal year 2007 efforts of $298,735,000, the wastewater CIRP reflects a
tapered, yet continued aggressive program just under $1 billion, totaling
$959,592,000.
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-5
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
Allocation of Inflow/Infiltration Cost to Customers
There are two primary factors that distribute Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) related cost to
cost causative components in the existing rate model. These are:
1. The estimated percentage of I/I to total flow transported by the collection system
and treated at the District facilities; and
2. The distribution of I/I costs to either customer or volume related costs in the cost
of service allocation.
The District’s previous rate model determined I/I costs based on a 45/55 percent
split between I/I and contributed wastewater flow and a 37/63 percent split
between customer and volume related costs, respectively. Analysis of wet weather
flow contributions and costs in the Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study
recommended a change to these two cost allocation factors. These factors have been
changed to a 50/50 split for I/I and contributed flow and a 40/60 split for customer
and volume related costs in this rate proposal.
Extra Strength Suspended Solids Surcharge
A statistical analysis of District plant flow influent indicated that the reduction in
extra strength suspended solids for surcharge revenue purposes included in the
May 2002 rate proposal was warranted. This rate proposal maintains the threshold
for suspended solids surcharge concentrations at 300 mg/l.
Resistance Factor
An analysis of the resistance to previous rate changes was evaluated to determine a
proposed factor for this rate proposal. The conclusion was reached that this factor should
be increased from 3 percent to 3.23 percent for fiscal year 2008 and reduced to 1.61 for
fiscal year 2009 and zero thereafter. The resistance factor is designed to adjust for reduced
water consumption and payment delays traditionally experienced with a rate increase.
The greater the percentage increase in rates, the greater the pressure to reduce
consumption. However, studies have shown, after the initial implementation, the impact
has already been factored and reduces gradually to zero.
Working Capital/Operating Reserve
The minimum working capital requirement of the existing bond covenants is 45
days. The 45 day allowance was a decrease from that of prior years, per the
recommendation of the Rate Commission. A recommended working capital
allowance of 60 days has been included in the rate proposal due to a significant
portion of the capital projects being financed on a Pay-As-You-Go basis creating
greater need for a cash buffer for timing issues.
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-6
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
1.4 Rate Proposal Summary
Wastewater User Fee Rate Revenue Requirements
Recommendations for wastewater user fee charges were based on the following:
Recovery of Operation and Maintenance Expenses plus Operating Reserve;
Routine Annual Improvement Expenses;
Debt Service;
Cash Financing of Major Improvements, and
Initial Years Stormwater Support.
Figure 1-1 presents the total projected revenue requirements for 2007 through 2012,
As can be seen from the figure, the revenue required increases substantially due to
capital needs.
Wastewater Net Revenue Requirements
(50,000,000)
0
50,000,000
100,000,000
150,000,000
200,000,000
250,000,000
300,000,000
350,000,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
YearsDollars Other Non-Operating
Revenue
Other OperatingRevenue
Stormwater Support
Operating Reserve
Capital
Debt Service
Operation & MaintenanceExpense
Figure 1-1
Wastewater Net Revenue Requirements
The wastewater net revenue requirements in Figure 1-1 are presented in in dollars
in Table 1-1.
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-7
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
Routine Annual Improvement Expenses;
Table 1-1
Wastewater Net Revenue Requirements
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Operation & Maintenance Expense $110,913,400 $114,654,700 $119,058,500 $123,379,800 $127,593,500
Debt Service 26,842,700 29,347,600 29,158,400 29,521,700 29,493,100
Capital 71,240,600 112,728,500 135,058,600 154,184,200 164,713,100
Operating Reserve 1,302,500 0 0 0 0
Stormwater Support 10,799,000 0 0 0 0
Other Operating Revenue (4,922,900) (5,276,600) (5,280,400) (5,284,100) (5,324,700)
Other Non-Operating Revenue (8,775,000)(8,864,100) (8,883,800) (8,910,600) (8,931,100)
Net Wastewater Revenue Requirements $207,400,300 $242,590,100 $269,111,300 $292,891,000 $316,475,000
The wastewater rates required to support the revenue requirements proposed above
are presented in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2
Recommended Wastewater Rates
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Base Charge - $/Bill
Billing & Collection Charge 2.30 2.30 2.45 2.55 2.70
System Availability Charge 8.40 9.55 10.65 11.70 12.25 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Total Base (Residential) Service Charge 10.70 11.85 13.10 14.25 14.95
Compliance Charge - $/Bill (b)27.40 28.40 29.65 30.90 32.10____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Total Nonresidential Service Charge 38.10 40.25 42.75 45.15 47.05
Volume Charge
Metered - $/Ccf 1.88 2.13 2.37 2.59 2.73
Unmetered - $/Bill
Each Room 1.23 1.39 1.55 1.69 1.78
Each Water Closet 4.59 5.20 5.79 6.32 6.67
Each Bath 3.83 4.34 4.82 5.27 5.56
Each Separate Shower 3.83 4.34 4.82 5.27 5.56
Extra Strength Surcharges - $/ton (b)
Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 218.90 220.54 239.59 260.17 270.74
BOD over 300 mg/l 529.90 601.02 659.66 722.36 752.92
COD over 600 mg/l 264.95 300.51 329.83 361.18 376.46
Stormwater User Fee Rate Revenue Requirements
Recommendations for stormwater impervious area charges were based on the
following:
Recovery of Operation and Maintenance Expenses for Basic level of stormwater
services;
Recovery of Operating Reserve;
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-8
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
nd
ance.
igure 1-2 presents the total projected stormwater revenue requirements for 2008
Stormwater Net Revenue Re
he stormwater operating fund net revenue requirements in Figure 1-2 are
Table 1-3
Stormwater Ne nts
Cash Financing of Major Improvements, a
Stormwater Policy Credit and Bad Debt Allow
F
through 2012, As can be seen from the figure, the revenue required increases
substantially in order to fully recovery operation and maintenance expenses.
Stormwater Net Revenue Requirements
(30,000,000)
(20,000,000)
(10,000,000)
0
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
70,000,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
YearsDollars Wastewater Support
Ad Valorem StormwaterTax
Ad Valorem
Administration Tax
Flat Rate Revenue
Interest
Other OperatingRevenue
Bad Debt Provisions
Stormwater Credit
Policy
Additions to Operating
Reserve
Capital & Basic Svc.
Operation and
Maintenance Expense
Figure 1-2
quirements
T
presented in dollars in Table 1-3.
t Revenue Requireme
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Operation and Maintenance Expense $35,440,000 $42,241,300 $46,464,300 $48,311,800 $50,064,900
Capital & Basic Services 8,265,800 6,455,400 5,240,500 5,277,700 5,315,800
Additions to Operating Reserve 0 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,200
Stormwater Credit Policy 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000
Bad Debt Provisions 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000
Other Operating Revenue (913,100) (1,185,800) (1,186,900) (1,188,100) (1,216,900)
Interest 0 (15,600) (51,900) (92,500) (125,500)
Flat Rate Revenue (514,500)0 0 0 0
Ad Valorem Administration Tax (4,914,900)0 0 0 0
Ad Valorem Stormwater Tax (7,755,900)0 0 0 0
Wastewater Support (10,799,000)0 0 0 0
Stormwater Net Revenue Requirements $20,366,400 $50,815,400 $54,209,100 $56,115,200 $57,562,500
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-9
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
he stormwater impervious area charges required to the proposed stormwater
Table 1-4
Stormwater Im rea Charges
tormwater OMCI Subdistrict Reconfiguration
ter impervious area charge, there
a
k
figuration will result in an expansion of the total area covered
hat each of the 5 reconfigured subdistricts
as
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Projected stormwater service charge $1.4400 $2.0758 $2.1935 $2.2495 $2.2865
per 100 square feet impervious area
(annualized rate - billable monthly)
Implemented December 1, 2007
Projected monthly charge per 100 square
feet impervious area $0.1200 $0.1730 $0.1828 $0.1875 $0.1905
T
program are presented in Table 1-4.
pervious A
S
In addition to the recommendation for a stormwa
are also changes proposed for the OMCI revenues. OMCI projects are planned to
continue to be financed by OMCI taxes and have been separately identified from
those projects to be funded by impervious area charges. The District is proposing
reconfiguration of the existing 23 OMCI subdistricts into 5 watershed based
subdistricts as a means to provide enhanced stormwater services as determined by a
vote of each subdistrict’s customers. The proposed 5-subdistrict reconfiguration
would be delineated as follows:
Missouri River
Coldwater Cree
Bissell
es Peres River D
Lower Meramec
T is proposed reconh
by subdistricts and provide the opportunity for more District customers to obtain
enhanced stormwater services by resident vote. It is assumed, for rate modeling
purposes, this reconfiguration and necessary votes would be completed in the
November 2007 election. The District intends to develop a priority project list for
each of the reconfigured OMCI subdistricts. Should voter approval not be received
for a given subdistrict, the previous OMCI subdistrict boundaries shall be retained
and the priority list revised accordingly.
It is assumed for purposes of this report t
will successfully approve a tax levy of $0.10 per $100 of assessed property value.
The revenue associated with the proposed expansion in the District wide OMCI
boundaries and the change in the OMCI ad valorem tax rate to a uniform $0.10 is
presented on Table 1-5. The OMCI revenue from the existing subdistricts as well
the reconfigured areas (for 2009 through 2012) are shown on Table 1-5.
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-10
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
OMCI Revenue, Expenditures and Fund Balances
10 2011 2012
Table 1-5
OMCI Revenue Reconfigured by Watershed
OMCI Revenue by Watershed 20 08 2009 2010 2011 2012
$0.10/$100 Assessed
Value
Coldwater Creek Watershed 1,882,300 1,913,900 2,064,200 2,118,400 2,174,000 2,231,000
Lower Meramec Watershed 238,900 251,700 4,502,700 4,620,900 4,742,200 4,866,700
River Des Peres Watershed 5,590,700 5,758,700 8,928,300 9,162,600 9,403,100 9,650,000
Missouri River Watershed 0 0 5,610,800 5,758,000 5,909,200 6,064,200
Total OMCI Revenue 8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,600
Tax Rate $0.10 per $100 Assessed Value
07 20
Taxes of $0.04 to
The stormwater OMCI fund revenue, expenditures and fund balances are presented
in Table 1-6.
Table 1-6
2007 2008 2009 20
OMCI Fund
OMCI Revenue nder Proposed
Rates 8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,600
U
Interest Income 1,144,600 00 0 0 0 1,263,600 915,0 672,70 558,10 501,60
Less: OMCI Existing Major
13,666,000 12,613,000 12,321,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 3,875,000 Improvements
Less: OMCI Reconfigured Enhanced
24 24 24 24,000,000 Service 0 0 ,000,000 ,000,000 ,000,000
Net OMCI Fund Annual Balance (3,976,200) (2,826,200) (((10,293,200) 3,555,400) 2,993,500) (230,800)
Beginning of Year Balance 38,092,19 34,115,990 0 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,690
End of Year Balance 34,115,990 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,690 14,216,890
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-11
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
1.5 Resulting Impact on Customer Monthly Bills
Single Family Residential Customers
The rate proposal results in the following monthly bills for an average single family
residential customer as presented in Table 1-7. These bills are based on typical
monthly water usage of 8 CCFs and an impervious area of 2,500 square feet.
Table 1-7
Single Family Residential Monthly Bill
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wastewater $22.38 $25.74 $28.89 $32.06 $34.97 $36.79
Stormwater .24 3.00 4.33 4.57 4.69 4.76
Total $22.62 $28.74 $33.22 $36.63 $39.66 $41.55
% Change NA 27.06% 15.59% 10.27% 8.28% 4.77%
Multi-Family Residential Customer
The rate proposal results in the following monthly bills for an average multi-family
residential customer as presented in Table 1-8. These bills are based on monthly
water usage of 40 CCFs and an impervious area of 2,700 square feet.
Table 1-8
Multi-Family Residential Monthly Bill
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wastewater $80.30 $85.90 $97.05 $107.90 $117.85 $124.15
Stormwater .24 3.24 4.67 4.94 5.06 5.14
Total $80.54 $89.14 $101.72 $112.84 $122.91 $129.29
% Change NA 10.68% 14.12% 10.94% 8.93% 5.19%
Final February 2007 Section 1
Executive Summary
A 1-12
C:\St Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_1_Final.doc
Non-Residential Customer
The rate proposal results in the following monthly bills for a medium size non-
residential customer as presented in Table 1-9. These bills are based on normal
strength, monthly water usage of 100 CCFs and an impervious area of 23,000 square
feet.
Table 1-9
Non-Residential Monthly Bill
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wastewater $201.45 $226.10 $253.25 $279.75 $304.15 $320.05
Stormwater .24 27.60 39.79 42.04 43.13 43.82
Total $201.69 $253.70 $293.04 $321.79 $347.28 $363.87
% Change NA 25.79% 15.51% 9.81% 7.93% 4.78%
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-1
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and
Projected Operating Costs and Other
Revenues
2.1 General
The District operates a combined wastewater and stormwater system, with the older
portion in the City of St. Louis comprised primarily of a combined wastewater and
stormwater conveyance system and the adjacent St. Louis County primarily a
separated wastewater and stormwater conveyance system. The primary functions of
the wastewater system are the conveyance and treatment of wastewater flow. The
primary functions of stormwater are more varied; conveyance of stormwater flow,
flood control, and the elimination of blockages preventing conveyance of flow. It is
the combination of functions that are similar in nature; the conveyance of flow and
the rehabilitation and maintenance of the pipeline system, as well as the lack of
sufficient dedicated stormwater revenue that created the necessity of wastewater
revenue supporting the stormwater system. The concept of a dedicated stormwater
fee based on impervious area has been discussed for approximately the last 15 years,
with the stormwater funding needs growing during that time period.
This section will quantify the required revenue and the schedule for all expenditures
from fiscal year 2007 through 2012. The revenue required to provide for the continued
operation of the District must be sufficient to meet these fiscal requirements:
(1) total system operation and maintenance expenses;
(2) expenditures for capital improvements met directly from revenues;
(3) total system debt service (consisting of principal and interest payments), and
(4) provision for an adequate operating reserve.
This section of the report will develop the basis for projecting revenue requirements
for the wastewater utility and stormwater utility as well as projections of the cash
requirements to meet the wastewater related expenditures. There is a transition
period during 2007 and 2008, in which the wastewater system will continue to
support the stormwater system in order to provide needed full funding of the
proposed stormwater program until the implementation of a stormwater impervious
rate. However, beginning in 2009, the wastewater system and stormwater system are
proposed to be independently funded, whereupon the wastewater support will cease
with this revenue returning to the wastewater program.
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-2
2.2 Combined Wastewater and Stormwater Historical
Operation and Maintenance Expense
Table 2-1 presents operation and maintenance expenses for the District’s combined
wastewater and stormwater operations for the years 2002 through 2006. Total
operation and maintenance expenses have increased from $100,952,611 in 2002 to
$116,146,531 in 2006 due largely to increases in expenses associated with Engineering,
Finance, and the Water Backup Program. The increase in Engineering costs coincides
with the expansion of the wastewater capital improvement program. The increase in
Finance costs primarily reflects collection agency commissions associated with the
District’s more aggressive collection efforts. These increased costs, however, are
offset 4 : 1 by the increase in collection of bad debt. The increase in water back up
costs reflects the volatile nature of wet weather events on this program.
2.3 Basis for Cost Allocation to Wastewater and
Stormwater
The direct costs of the District were allocated between wastewater and stormwater
based on an analysis of both personnel costs and other operating costs. District
Department heads were consulted during this analysis, with their input regarding the
percentage of time spent on various functions used to categorize the costs between
wastewater and stormwater. Table 2-2 presents the percentages used for the
allocation of direct costs.
2.4 Projected Wastewater Operating and Routine Capital
Expenses
Projections of the cash requirements to meet the wastewater portion of these
expenditures for the period of 2007 through 2012 are developed in this section. Figure
2-1 graphically presents the proportionate costs for each of these revenue requirement
elements.
Wastewater Revenue Requirements 2008
Stormwater
Support
5%
Operating
Reserve
1%
Capital
32%
Operation &
Maintenance
Expense
50%
Debt Service
12%
Figure 2-1
Wastewater Revenue Requirements
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-3
Table 2-1
Historical Wastewater and Stormwater Operating Costs
Line Historical
______________________________________________________________
No Department 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
___ _________________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
$ $ $ $ $
1 Board of Trustees 11,824 37,969 28,457 5,176 6,761
2 Rate Commission (a) 43,534 390,486 25,723 (10,905) 47,287
3 Civil Service Commission 1,120 9,150 855 3,775 1,297
4 Secretary - Treasurer 1,064,844 1,372,369 1,500,279 1,232,054 1,433,320
5 Executive Director 1,798,836 1,405,250 749,193 765,912 669,301
6 General Counsel 1,504,086 1,284,039 1,478,876 1,319,763 1,486,452
7 Office of Human Resources 15,270,097 17,554,305 19,328,048 8,248,765 8,093,929
8 Engineering 14,902,810 15,735,615 14,323,870 18,910,094 18,687,163
Operations
9 Collection System (b) 20,166,072 18,990,542 16,802,592 19,868,112 18,610,464
10 Pump Stations 6,259,912 6,238,792 6,255,158 6,529,714 6,966,237
11 Wastewater Treatment (c) 24,040,770 25,689,660 21,909,729 26,194,117 27,602,538
12 Support 2,733,903 2,564,527 6,392,528 3,978,080 6,078,589
__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
13 Total Operations 53,200,657 53,483,521 51,360,006 56,570,023 59,257,827
14 Finance 6,237,874 6,803,699 8,291,439 14,166,470 14,161,194
15 Information Systems 4,368,929 4,770,762 5,172,781 4,812,767 6,063,356
__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Subtotal (General Fund) 98,404,611 102,847,165 102,259,527 106,023,893 109,907,887
17 Water Backup Program 2,548,000 3,824,000 4,276,000 6,104,781 4,858,510
18 Headquarters Building (d) 0 0 1,140,000 1,001,854 1,380,134
__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Total O&M 100,952,611 106,671,165 107,675,527 113,130,528 116,146,531
(a) 2005 reflects reversal of prior year encumbrance.
(b) Includes Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize.
(c) Includes Lemay, Bissell, and County Treatment Plants.
(d) Expenditures offset by rental income.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-4
Table 2-2
Allocation of Direct Operating Costs
Between Wastewater and Stormwater
Wastewater Stormwater
Direct Direct Indirect
________ ________ ________
Personnel Services
Administration and Management
Board of Trustees 0.0% 110000..00%%
Rate Commission 0.0% 110000..00%%
Civil Service Commission 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of Secretary - Treasurer 0.0% 110000..00%%
Executive Director 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of General Counsel 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of Human Resources 0.0% 110000..00%%
Engineering 65.2%2299..44%% 55..44%%
Operations
Collection System 69.0%3311..00%% 00..00%%
Pump Stations 67.6%3322..44%% 00..00%%
Wastewater Treatment 100.0%00..00%% 00..00%%
Support 64.0%1155..22%% 2200..88%%
Finance 30.7%20.5% 48.8%
Information Systems 5.8%3.9% 90.3%
All Other
Administration and Management
Board of Trustees 0.0% 110000..00%%
Rate Commission 0.0% 110000..00%%
Civil Service Commission 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of Secretary - Treasurer 0.0% 110000..00%%
Executive Director 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of General Counsel 0.0% 110000..00%%
Office of Human Resources 0.0% 110000..00%%
Engineering 55.3%4444..33%% 00..44%%
Operations
Collection System 76.0%2244..00%% 00..00%%
Pump Stations 76.0%2244..00%% 00..00%%
Wastewater Treatment 100.0%00..00%% 00..00%%
Support 86.1%13.9% 00..00%%
Finance 54.4%36.3% 9.3%
Information Systems 5.8%3.9% 90.3%
Utilities
Operations
Pump Stations 84.9%1155..11%% 00..00%%
Wastewater Treatment 100.0%00..00%% 00..00%%
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-5
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Wastewater Operation and Maintenance Expense
Operation and maintenance expense projections for the years 2007 through 2012 are
based on budgeted 2007 expense amounts adjusted to recognize allowances for
known cost increases, the estimated effects of inflation, and anticipated system
growth. Future operation and maintenance expenses for the District are projected to
increase from $104,784,300 in 2007 to $127,593,500 in 2012. The projected wastewater
operation and maintenance expenses are summarized in Table 2-3.
The escalation factors that were used in the projections are as follows:
Wages, Salaries and Overtime 3%
Personnel Services and Benefits (except group insurance and pension) 4%
Group Insurance 10%
Supplies, Chemicals, Utilities 3%
Contractual Services 4%
Bond and Liability Insurance 5%
Pension (2008 – 7.6%, 2009 – 8.4%, 2010 – 9.3%, 2011 – 10.2%, 2012 – 11.4%)
Historically, inflation has been in the 2% to 4% range, depending on the nature of the
item, with personnel services tending toward the lower range of figures. Chemicals
and utility expenses have ranged towards
the upper end value. The pension plan
increase is designed to meet the required
funding needs. Figure 2-2 shows
graphically the historical increase in the
U.S. Average Consumer Price Index for
Urban Wage Earners (CPI-U) from 1997 to
2004. During this 9 year period, the growth
in costs due to inflation has increased by 16
percent.
Cost Impact Since 1997
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%1997 1999 2001 2003 Fiscal YearIncrease in CPI-U
Wastewater Routine Capital Improvements
Expenditures for routine annual capital
improvements include those costs that tend to be routinely incurred each year for
normal replacements such as vehicles, office equipment, and minor improvements or
repairs (capital outlay, Line 20) plus costs required for 2007 through 2009 included in
Line 21 related to the upgrade and replacement of the District’s current technology
system to be completed in three (3) phases. Since these costs are a continuing expense
to be met each year, the District finances these from current wastewater revenues. As
shown in Table 2-3, Capital Outlay costs are projected to increase from $2,393,700 in
2007 to $2,779,100 in 2012. An annual inflation rate of 3 percent was used, with
Figure 2-2
Cost Impact Since 1995
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-6
Table 2-3
Projected Wastewater Operating Costs
Line Projected
No Department 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012_____________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
D-14 through D-19
1 Board of Trustees 28,100 22,900 14,200 14,800 15,400 16,000
2 Rate Commission (a)214,900 1,800 1,100 1,100 250,500 2,200
3 Civil Service Commission 4,000 4,200 4,400 4,600 4,800 5,000
4 Secretary - Treasurer 1,096,800 945,100 979,300 1,206,800 1,051,500 1,089,500
5 Executive Director 656,500 679,800 703,800 728,700 754,500 781,400
6 General Counsel 1,495,200 1,549,200 1,605,200 1,663,300 1,723,600 1,786,100
7 Office of Human Resources 7,321,600 12,001,800 12,784,500 13,631,100 14,548,000 15,542,700
8 Engineering 14,599,000 15,134,900 15,791,700 16,459,500 17,016,100 17,592,000
Operations
9 Collection System (b)14,474,500 14,952,200 15,446,100 15,956,400 16,484,100 17,029,300
10 Pump Stations 5,388,300 5,560,000 5,737,200 5,921,200 6,111,300 6,308,500
11 Wastewater Treatment (c)30,985,000 31,985,400 33,019,000 34,091,300 35,199,200 36,348,500
12 Support 6,351,200 6,557,200 6,770,100 6,989,700 7,216,800 7,451,500__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
13 Total Operations 57,199,000 59,054,800 60,972,400 62,958,600 65,011,400 67,137,800
14 Finance 10,061,000 10,444,700 10,843,200 11,257,100 11,687,000 12,133,300
15 Information Systems 3,936,600 4,073,500 4,215,200 4,362,000 4,514,000 4,671,400__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Subtotal (General Fund)96,612,700 103,912,700 107,915,000 112,287,600 116,576,800 120,757,400
17 Water Backup Program 7,200,000 5,700,000 5,700,000 5,700,000 5,700,000 5,700,000
18 Headquarters Building (d)971,600 1,300,700 1,039,700 1,070,900 1,103,000 1,136,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Total O&M 104,784,300 110,913,400 114,654,700 119,058,500 123,379,800 127,593,500
20 Capital Outlay 2,393,700 2,394,600 2,536,500 2,619,600 2,698,200 2,779,100
21 Construction & Engineering (e)3,755,100 4,000,000 4,000,000 0 0 0__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
22 Subtotal Routine Annual Improvements 6,148,800 6,394,600 6,536,500 2,619,600 2,698,200 2,779,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
23 Total Operating Expense 110,933,100 117,308,000 121,191,200 121,678,100 126,078,000 130,372,600
1.06 1.03 1.00 1.04 1.03
(a) It is assumed that the Rate Commission will review proposed changes in wastewater rates every four years.
(b) Includes Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize.
(c) Includes Lemay, Bissell, and County Treatment Plants.
(d) Expenditures offset by rental income.
(e) Upgrade and replacement of District's current technology systems.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-7
additional capital required for the routine replacement of vehicles and equipment,
based on scheduled replacements. There is an additional amount of $3,755,100 in 2007
and $4,000,000 in 2008 and 2009 for the upgrade and replacement of the current
technology system.
Summary of Wastewater Operation and Maintenance Plus Routine Capital
Improvements
The information presented in
Table 2-3 displays the total
projected wastewater operation
and maintenance expense,
including routine capital
improvements, showing an
increase from $110,933,100 in 2007
to $130,372,600 in 2012. Figure 2-3
shows projected wastewater
operation and maintenance
expense as well as routine capital
improvement.
Projected Wastewater Operation
and Maintenance Expense and
Routine Capital Improvements
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Fiscal YearCost - $millionsFigure 2-3
Projected Wastewater Operation & Maintenance
and Routine Capital Improvement Expense
2.5 Projected Stormwater Operating and Routine Capital
Expenses
Projected Stormwater Existing Service Level Operating and Routine Capital
Expenses
The 2007 budget is the basis for projecting existing stormwater operation and
maintenance expenses. The 2007 budget is adjusted for the same inflation and growth
factors as wastewater. Table 2-4 presents the 2007 through 2012 projections for the
existing stormwater system operation and maintenance expenses. Table 2-4 also
presents amounts for routine capital expenditures. The routine stormwater capital
expenditures are for vehicles and equipment that are required to be replaced on an
ongoing basis. Due to the ongoing nature of these expenditures, they are shown in
conjunction with the operation and maintenance expenses. The 2007 stormwater
operation and maintenance expenses shown on Table 2-4 are $29,681,800, which with
escalation is projected to reach $35,376,200 by 2012. Finance, Engineering and the
Information Systems Departments provide direct services to the stormwater system as
well, with
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-8
Table 2-4
Projected Existing Stormwater Operating Costs
Line
No Department 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012_____________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
1 Board of Trustees 9,600 10,000 10,400 10,800 11,200 11,600
2 Rate Commission 73,900 76,800 79,800 83,000 86,300 89,800
3 Civil Service Commission 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
4 Secretary - Treasurer 360,500 373,800 387,700 402,000 416,900 432,400
5 Executive Director 210,600 218,100 225,900 234,000 242,400 251,000
6 General Counsel 489,900 507,700 526,200 545,400 565,200 585,700
7 Office of Human Resources 2,390,500 2,497,000 2,609,700 2,728,700 2,854,900 2,989,100
8 Engineering 7,307,100 7,556,500 7,814,600 8,081,800 8,358,200 8,644,200
Operations
9 Collection System (a)6,156,500 6,359,400 6,569,000 6,785,700 7,009,600 7,240,800
10 Pump Stations 1,767,800 1,825,200 1,884,500 1,945,800 2,009,000 2,074,300
11 Wastewater Treatment (b) 000000
12 Support (c)1,283,100 1,324,800 1,367,900 1,412,400 1,458,500 1,506,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
13 Total Operations 9,207,400 9,509,400 9,821,400 10,143,900 10,477,100 10,821,200
14 Finance 6,707,300 6,963,200 7,228,800 7,504,600 7,791,000 8,088,500
15 Information Systems 2,624,400 2,715,700 2,810,200 2,908,000 3,009,400 3,114,400__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Subtotal (General Fund)29,382,400 30,429,400 31,515,900 32,643,400 33,813,800 35,029,100
17Water Backup Program 000000
18 Headquarters Building 299,400 308,400 317,700 327,200 337,000 347,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Total O&M 29,681,800 30,737,800 31,833,600 32,970,600 34,150,800 35,376,200
20 Capital Outlay 751,400 773,800 796,900 820,700 845,300 870,500
21Construction & Engineering 950,000978,5000000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
22 Total Operating Expense 31,383,200 32,490,100 32,630,500 33,791,300 34,996,100 36,246,700
1.04 1.00 1.04 1.04 1.04
(a) Includes Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize.
(b) Includes Lemay, Bissell, and County Treatment Plants.
(c) Includes Garage/Shop and Materials Management.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-9
the portion of time spent on such activities estimated and allocated. In addition to the
direct operating expenses, there are various indirect expenses, which have been
allocated based on the proportion of stormwater expenses to total expenses as
displayed in Table 2-2.
Summary of Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plus Routine Capital
Improvements
The information presented in Table 2-4 displays the total projected stormwater
operation and maintenance expense, including routine capital improvements,
showing an increase from $31,383,200 in 2007 to $36,246,700 in 2012.
Existing Stormwater Level of Service
Revenue collected from the existing stormwater sources only funds a portion of the
current level of stormwater operations and maintenance while providing no monies
for rehabilitation and preventative maintenance. The majority of the stormwater
operation and maintenance activities are the result of failures in the existing collection
and conveyance system or as a reaction to customer complaints. The specific
operating divisions that provide direct service to the stormwater system are as
follows:
Collection System – Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize services;
Facilities, Garages and Shops;
Operation Support Services (includes Materials Management, Customer Care and
Administration);
Pump Stations.
The stormwater management system is characterized by a combination of open
channels, drainage pipelines, and flood control structures. Table 2-5 provides an
estimate of the inventory of the stormwater management system.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-10
Item Description Quantity
Main Channel (thousand linear feet)1,074
Tributary Channel (thousand linear feet) 3,058
Total Open Channel Length (thousand linear feet)4,133
Combined Sewers (thousand linear feet)3,893
Storm Sewers (thousand linear feet)14,993
Outfall Pipe (thousand linear fee)198
Total Stormwater Drainage Pipelines (thousand linear
feet)
15,192
Trapped Inlets (combined, multiple & grate inlets)32,323
Untrapped Inlets (storm, multiple & grate inlets)91,843
Pump Stations (Bissell and Lemay areas)34
Gate Structures 200
Flood Control Components
Table 2-5
District Stormwater and Combined Stormwater System Inventory - 2005
Open Channels
Drainage Components
Operation and maintenance of the stormwater management system is based on
response to customer calls, system failures and blockages and includes activities such
as removing blockages, open channel clearing, repair of storm sewer line failures, and
limited inlet inspections and cleanings as displayed in Table 2-6. Limited investment
in renewing stormwater infrastructure is provided under the existing stormwater
operation and maintenance program in 2007, while the CIRP budget contains the
stormwater infrastructure renewal program in the subsequent years.
Two areas of flood protection are operated by the District; the Bissell Service area
provides flood protection on the Mississippi River, and the Lemay Service area
provides flood protection on River Des Peres. The Bissell Service area has 24 pump
stations, and the Lemay Service area has 10 pump stations, 15 gate structures and
other operations. The Pump Station costs on Table 2-4 provide for the preventative
maintenance of these facilities on either monthly, semi annual or annual basis.
Projected Increased Service Level Operating and Routine Capital Expenses
An increase in the stormwater operating and maintenance services along with an
investment in the rehabilitation of the existing stormwater infrastructure is needed to
provide a minimum basic level of service. The District’s stormwater inventory
consists of 124,166 inlets and approximately 15.2 million feet of pipeline to be
maintained. Assuming that the industry guideline of a 50-year life is used, 2,483 inlets
and 20,000 feet of pipeline must be rehabilitated or replaced annually, the current
level of operation and maintenance services does not provide for this level of service.
No annual investment in the replacement or renovation of inlets or storm sewers is
provided in the District’s current stormwater programs.
Table 2-6 summarizes the recommended minimum level of basic operation and
maintenance services required for the stormwater system.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-11
Operation and Maintenance
Activity Description
Annual Maintenance
Activities
Type
Inlet Cleaning (Trapped)16,000 Annual Activity
Inlet Cleaning (Untrapped)(a)2,500 Annual Activity
Structure Repair/Rehabilitation (a)3,000 Infrastructure Renewel
Point Repairs 170 As Needed
Inspections/Dye Testing 2,200 As Needed
Backfill/Grout/Seal Joints
for Cave-Ins 1,700 Annual Activity
Creek/Tree Removal Maintenance 300 Annual Activity
Pipe Cleaning (a)250,000 feet Annual Activity
Dye Testing to Verify
Connections 1,000 As Needed
Pipe Rehabilitation (a)20,000 feet Infrastructure Renewel
Pump Station Flood Control,
Bissell and Lemay
34 pump stations,
15 gate structures Annual Activity
(a) Notes new or significant expansion of operation and maintenance activities under proposed basic level of
service requirements.
Table 2-6
District’s Proposed Basic Level of Service
The objective of increasing the stormwater funding source with the implementation of
a stormwater impervious area charge is to generate sufficient revenues to provide
cleaning and repair of inlets and implement a sufficient annual program of
stormwater pipe replacement and maintenance improvements. The proposed
stormwater operation and maintenance program meets the basic level of service and
investment required to begin maintaining the existing stormwater infrastructure over
a 50-year period.
The incremental operating costs related to the stormwater collection system services
are presented in Table 2-7. In order to provide the basic services outlined in Table 2-6,
a combination of additional work crews and increased contractual services has been
identified, with the increased costs estimated at $4,702,200 in 2008 (partial year of
implementation) increasing to $14,688,700 in 2012. The capital costs on Table 2-7
represent the vehicles and equipment required for the new work crews.
Proposed stormwater operation and maintenance activities do not address
unimproved channels, detention basin maintenance, swale, gutter, drainage culverts,
trench drains, road culverts, bridges and sink holes. Maintenance and repair of these
facilities will remain the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation, local
municipalities, and property owners.
There is a combination of stormwater operating and administrative costs (public
information, billing, collection and software programming) that are projected to
increase, either for purposes of implementing a stormwater impervious area charge or
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-12
Table 2-7
Projected Incremental Stormwater Operating Costs
Line
No Department 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012_____________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
E-20 through E-25
1 Board of Trustees 0 (2,200) (5,600) (5,800) (6,000) (6,200)
2 Rate Commission (76,400) (79,400) (82,600) (300) (89,100)
3Civil Service Commission 000000
4Secretary - Treasurer 000000
5 Executive Director 0 144,000 149,800 155,800 162,000 168,500
6General Counsel 000000
7 Office of Human Resources 0 1,341,300 1,475,400 1,623,000 1,785,300 1,963,800
8 Engineering 0 45,000 448,000 600,900 624,900 649,900
Operations
9 Collection System (a)0 2,494,700 7,564,300 10,316,100 10,676,600 11,050,000
10 Pump Stations 000000
11 Wastewater Treatment (b) 000000
12 Support (c)0 87,800 179,800 185,200 190,800 196,500__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
13 Total Operations 0 2,582,500 7,744,100 10,501,300 10,867,400 11,246,500
14 Finance 0 590,000 672,300 697,900 724,400 751,900
15 Information Systems 0 78,000 3,100 3,200 3,300 3,400__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Subtotal (General Fund)0 4,702,200 10,407,700 13,493,700 14,161,000 14,688,700
17Water Backup Program 000000
18Headquarters Building 000000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Total O&M 0 4,702,200 10,407,700 13,493,700 14,161,000 14,688,700
20 Capital Outlay 0 3,192,000 408,500 419,800 432,400 445,300
21 Construction & Engineering (d)0 (978,500)0 0 0 0__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
22 Total Operating Expense 0 6,915,700 10,816,200 13,913,500 14,593,400 15,134,000
1.56 1.29 1.05 1.04
(a) Includes Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize.
(b) Includes Lemay, Bissell, and County Treatment Plants.
(c) Includes Garage/Shop and Materials Management.
(d) Adjustment for costs presented in Table 2-4 that are being projected as part of the 2008 CIRP budget.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-13
in order to provide for the rehabilitation of stormwater infrastructure. These
incremental costs are also presented on Table 2-7.
The administrative costs for the program are identified as future operating budget
items as follows:
Billing and collection costs ($590,000 initial cost plus $78,000 for one-time charge
for software billing set-up);
Public information efforts ($144,000/year);
Engineering costs related to stormwater billing and administration ($45,000 in
2008 and $448,000 in 2009).
Lines 1 and 2 on Table 2-7 represent adjustments to the existing 2007 budget, with
decreases projected. The decreases primarily reflect the change in the timing of future
Rate Commission deliberations. Line 7, Office of Human Resources, is an increase
that is designed to fund accrued expenses for post-employment benefits per the
requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement
No. 45. These expenses are not considered incremental costs relative to an improved
level of service, however, they are reflected in the amounts presented in the above
discussion needed to correctly reflect the allocation of these costs to the stormwater
operation. Line 21 represents an adjustment to the 2008 projection on Table 2-4,
providing for the elimination of the construction and engineering expenses due to
their inclusion in the budgeted CIRP expenditures.
Projected Combined Service Level Operating and Routine Capital Expenses
Table 2-8 presents the combined existing and proposed operation and maintenance
costs for the stormwater system from 2007 through 2012. The total cost of the
proposed stormwater operation and capital outlay expenses is estimated at
$39,405,800 in 2008 increasing to $51,380,700 in 2012.
2.6 Other Operating Revenue
Historical other revenue is presented in Table 2-9 for the District’s combined
wastewater and stormwater operations. All of these revenues are used to meet
operating costs. Wastewater billing adjustment revenue, such as late fees, refunds,
provision for bad debt and other adjustments, increased over the five-year period due
largely to decreases in the provision for bad debt and a continuation of present
activities to maintain high collection rates. Increases in Miscellaneous Revenue are
primarily a result of increases in rental income beginning in 2003.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-14
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Table 2-8
Projected Stormwater Operating Costs
Line
No Department 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
_____________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
E-14 through E-19
1 Board of Trustees 9,600 7,800 4,800 5,000 5,200 5,400
2 Rate Commission 73,900 400 400 400 86,000 700
3 Civil Service Commission 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
4 Secretary - Treasurer 360,500 373,800 387,700 402,000 416,900 432,400
5 Executive Director 210,600 362,100 375,700 389,800 404,400 419,500
6 General Counsel 489,900 507,700 526,200 545,400 565,200 585,700
7 Office of Human Resources 2,390,500 3,838,300 4,085,100 4,351,700 4,640,200 4,952,900
8 Engineering 7,307,100 7,601,500 8,262,600 8,682,700 8,983,100 9,294,100
Operations
9 Collection System (a)6,156,500 8,854,100 14,133,300 17,101,800 17,686,200 18,290,800
10 Pump Stations 1,767,800 1,825,200 1,884,500 1,945,800 2,009,000 2,074,300
11 Wastewater Treatment (b) 000000
12 Support (c)1,283,100 1,412,600 1,547,700 1,597,600 1,649,300 1,702,600__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
13 Total Operations 9,207,400 12,091,900 17,565,500 20,645,200 21,344,500 22,067,700
14 Finance 6,707,300 7,553,200 7,901,100 8,202,500 8,515,400 8,840,400
15 Information Systems 2,624,400 2,793,700 2,813,300 2,911,200 3,012,700 3,117,800__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Subtotal (General Fund) 29,382,400 35,131,600 41,923,600 46,137,100 47,974,800 49,717,800
17Water Backup Program 000000
18 Headquarters Building 299,400 308,400 317,700 327,200 337,000 347,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Total O&M 29,681,800 35,440,000 42,241,300 46,464,300 48,311,800 50,064,900
20 Capital Outlay 751,400 3,965,800 1,205,400 1,240,500 1,277,700 1,315,800
21 Construction & Engineering 950,00000000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
22 Total Operating Expense 31,383,200 39,405,800 43,446,700 47,704,800 49,589,500 51,380,700
1.26 1.10 1.10 1.04 1.04
(a) Includes Mintert, Sulphur, and Grand Glaize.
(b) Includes Lemay, Bissell, and County Treatment Plants.
(c) Includes Garage/Shop and Materials Management.
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-15
Table 2-9
Historical Other Operating Revenue
Line Historical
No. Description 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006_________________________________________________________
$$$$$
1 Wastewater Billing Adjustment (a)(919,826) 831,456 3,310,200 2,324,443 2,084,885
Other Fees
2 Construction Inspection Fees 640,214 643,406 663,642 631,530 548,146
3 Waste Hauler Permits 957,812 953,453 1,089,798 1,709,052 1,080,132
4 All Other Fees (b)453,094 454,645 424,149 495,755 490,171_________ _________ _________ _________ _________
5 Subtotal 2,051,120 2,051,504 2,177,589 2,836,337 2,118,449
6 Miscellaneous Revenue (c)650,853 2,424,625 1,419,834 1,648,545 2,118,745_________ _________ _________ _________ _________
7 Total Other Operating Revenue 1,782,147 5,307,585 6,907,623 6,809,325 6,322,079
8 Connection Fee Revenue (d)3,862,355 7,429,469 4,941,721 3,715,365 3,096,339
_________ _________ _________ _________ _________
9 Total Other Revenue 5,644,502 12,737,054 11,849,344 10,524,690 9,418,418
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d) Revenue available for improvements financed out of improvement fund.
Includes Late Charges, Refunds, Adjustments, Bad Debt Provision, Wastewater Lien Interest and Fees, and Other
Adjustments including revenue from Arnold. Negative balance in 2002 due to $4.7 million for Bad Debt and
Adjustments.
Includes Plan Review Fees, Submittal Fees, Wastewater Monitoring Cost Fees, Pretreatment Discharge Permits, and all
other fees.
Includes Reimbursements, Sale of Fixed Assets, Reimbursable Engineering & Maintenance, and all other miscellaneous
revenue.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-16
2.7 Basis for Other Operating Revenue Allocation to
Wastewater and Stormwater
Table 2-10 provides the basis for the allocation of Other Operating Revenue between
wastewater and stormwater. Those revenues identified as Connection and Other Fees
that are pertinent to both operations were allocated evenly between wastewater and
stormwater. The Miscellaneous Revenues were allocated 75 percent to wastewater
and 25 percent to stormwater. Wastewater Revenue Adjustments were allocated 99
percent to wastewater and 1 percent to stormwater based on consultations with
District Staff. Capital Improvement Related Revenue is allocated 100 percent to
wastewater as there are currently no capital charges specific to stormwater.
2.8 Wastewater Other Operating Revenue
Projected other wastewater utility revenue is presented in Table 2-11. Wastewater
billing adjustments are determined based on current budget estimates and are
projected in proportion to the increase in wastewater service revenue shown on Table
3-5 in Subsection 3.2. These adjustments include late charges, refunds, provision for
bad debt, and other adjustments. The provision for bad debt is projected to decrease
beginning in 2007, due to enhanced collection efforts. The balance of the wastewater
billing adjustment revenue is estimated to remain stable. Revenue from inspection,
plan review fees and submittal fees are expected to increase from the 2007 amount,
based on increases in the fees. Miscellaneous revenue is projected to increase 0.5
percent per year from the 2007 amount currently budgeted, based on historical trends.
Total other operating revenue is therefore projected to increase from $4,673,300 in
2007 to $5,324,700 in 2012. The addition of connection fee revenue increases the Other
Revenue from $9,273,300 in 2007 to $10,158,700 in 2012.
2.9 Stormwater Other Operating Revenue
Historical and projected other stormwater utility revenue is presented in Table 2-12.
Included in the other operating revenue are stormwater billing adjustments. These
adjustments include late charges, refunds, and other adjustments. Late charge
revenue is projected to decrease slightly between 2008 and 2012, with the balance of
the stormwater billing adjustment projected to remain stable. Revenue from
inspection, plan review fees and submittal fees are expected to increase from the 2007
amount, based on increases in the fees. Miscellaneous revenue for reimbursable items
and other revenue is projected to increase 0.5 percent per year from the 2007 amount
currently budgeted, based on historical trends. Miscellaneous revenue for
reimbursements and the sale of fixed assets is projected to remain stable. Total other
operating revenue is therefore projected to increase from $756,200 in 2007 to
$1,216,900 in 2012.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-17
Table 2-10
Allocation of Miscellaneous Income
Between Wastewater and Stormwater Wastewater Stormwater Allocation Allocation Connection and Other Fees Construction Inspection Fees (105) 50.0% 50.0%
Plan Review Fees (106) 50.0% 50.0%
Submittal Fees (107) 50.0% 50.0%
Waste Hauler Permits (109) 100.0% 0.0% Wastewater Monitoring Costs Fees (110) 100.0% 0.0% Pretreatment Discharge Permits (111) 100.0% 0.0% All Other Machine Tap Fees (101) 100.0% 0.0%
Conn Permits and Insp. (103) 50.0% 50.0%
Construction Permits Fees (104) 50.0% 50.0%
Miscellaneous Revenue Reimbursements Reimbursement of District Costs 75.0% 25.0% Other Reimbursements 75.0% 25.0% Reimbursement of Engr., Survey,
Inspection, and Other Engr. Costs 75.0% 25.0%
Sale of Fixed Assets 75.0% 25.0%
All Other
Sale of Scrap (Metal, Paper) 75.0% 25.0%
Provision for Doubtful Misc. Receivables 75.0% 25.0% Engineering Prints and Specifications 75.0% 25.0%
Refund of Court Cts & Attorney fees 75.0% 25.0%
Rental Income 75.0% 25.0%
Liquidation of Contractual Encumbrances 75.0% 25.0%
NSF Fees 75.0% 25.0%
Miscellaneous Income 75.0% 25.0%
Forfeited Deposits 75.0% 25.0%
Project Bid Fees 75.0% 25.0%
Wastewater Revenue Adjustments
Late Charges 99.0% 1.0%
Refunds 99.0% 1.0%
Adjustments 99.0% 1.0%
Bad Debt Provision 99.0% 1.0%
Wastewater Lien Interest and Fees 99.0% 1.0%
Other (Includes revenue from Arnold) 99.0% 1.0%
Capital Improvement Related Miscellaneous Revenue
Connection and Other Fees
Construction Funds
Caulks Creek Surcharge 100.0% 0.0%
Williams Creek 100.0% 0.0%
Improvement Fund
Connection Fees 100.0% 0.0%
Miscellaneous Revenue
Construction Funds 100.0% 0.0%
Liquidation of Contractual Encumbrances 100.0% 0.0%
Special Funds (Except WBU Fund) 100.0% 0.0%
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-18
Table 2-11
Projected Wastewater Other Operating Revenue
Line
No. Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012_________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
1 Wastewater Billing Adjustment (a) 2,018,600 2,024,300 2,017,800 2,011,800 2,005,800 2,000,100
Other Fees
2 Construction Inspection Fees 350,000 409,500 470,500 470,500 470,500 484,500
3 Waste Hauler Permits 1,200,000 1,206,000 1,212,000 1,218,000 1,224,000 1,230,000
4 All Other Fees (b)370,000 545,000 834,500 834,500 834,500 857,000_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
5 Subtotal 1,920,000 2,160,500 2,517,000 2,523,000 2,529,000 2,571,500
6 Miscellaneous Revenue (c)734,700 738,100 741,800 745,600 749,300 753,100_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
7 Total Other Operating Revenue 4,673,300 4,922,900 5,276,600 5,280,400 5,284,100 5,324,700
8 Connection Fee Revenue (d) 4,600,000 4,646,000 4,692,000 4,739,000 4,786,000 4,834,000
_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
9 Total Other Revenue 9,273,300 9,568,900 9,968,600 10,019,400 10,070,100 10,158,700
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d) Revenue available for improvements financed out of improvement fund.
Includes Late Charges, Refunds, Adjustments, Bad Debt Provision, Wastewater Lien Interest and Fees, and Other Adjustments
including revenue from Arnold.
Includes Plan Review Fees, Submittal Fees, Wastewater Monitoring Cost Fees, Pretreatment Discharge Permits, and all other
fees.
Includes Reimbursements, Sale of Fixed Assets, Reimbursable Engineering & Maintenance, and all other miscellaneous
revenue.
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 2
Wastewater and Stormwater Historical and Projected
Operating Costs and Other Revenues
A 2-19
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_2_Final.doc
Table 2-12
Projected Stormwater Other Operating Revenue
Line
No. Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
_________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
Stormwater Billing Adjustment Prior year's revenue adjusted for growth.
1 Late Charges 39,200 39,700 39,600 39,500 39,400 39,300
2 Refunds (6,000) (6,100) (6,100) (6,100) (6,100) (6,000)
3 Adjustments (5,000) (5,100) (5,100) (5,100) (5,100) (5,000)
4 Stormwater Lien Interest and Fees 700 700 700 700 700 700
5 Other (Includes revenue from Arnold)2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
6 Subtotal 31,400 31,700 31,600 31,500 31,400 31,500
Other Fees Prior year's revenue adjusted for growth.
7 Construction Inspection Fees 350,000 409,500 470,500 470,500 470,500 484,500
8 Plan Review Fees 75,000 112,500 209,500 209,500 209,500 216,000
9 Submittal Fees 55,000 113,500 227,000 227,000 227,000 234,000
10 Waste Hauler Permits 000000
11 Stormwater Monitoring Costs Fees 000000
12 Pretreatment Discharge Permits 000000
13 All Other 000000_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
14 Subtotal 480,000 635,500 907,000 907,000 907,000 934,500
Miscellaneous Revenue Prior year's revenue adjusted for growth.
15 Reimbursements 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000
16 Sale of Fixed Assets 11,200 11,200 11,200 11,200 11,200 11,200
17 Reimbursable Engr. & Maint.50,000 50,200 50,500 50,700 51,000 51,200
18 All Other 176,600 177,500 178,500 179,500 180,500 181,500_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
19 Subtotal 244,800 245,900 247,200 248,400 249,700 250,900_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
________
20 Total Other Operating Revenue 756,200 913,100 1,185,800 1,186,900 1,188,100 1,216,900
21Connection Fee Revenue 000000
A 3-1
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Section 3
Wastewater Rates
This section of the report will develop the basis for projecting revenue for the
wastewater utility to meet all wastewater related expenditures. There is also a
transition period during 2007 and 2008, in which the wastewater system will continue
to partially support the stormwater system. However, beginning in 2009, the
wastewater system and stormwater system are planned to be independently funded
upon implementation of a stormwater impervious area charge.
3.1 Historic and Existing Wastewater Rates
The District has derived revenue from basic charges for wastewater service and from
other revenue sources that include:
Extra strength surcharges;
Connection fees;
Waste hauler permits, and
Late charges and other operating income.
The first sewer service charge imposed by the District became effective on January 1,
1956, and was applied on a district-wide basis. The charge for single family metered
and unmetered customers was $6.00 per year. Over the years, separate wastewater
rate schedules were imposed on existing and new service areas acquired or formed by
the District. At one time, the District had 14 separate rate schedules for wastewater
service.
Missouri voters approved an amendment to the state Constitution in November 1980,
commonly referred to as the Hancock Amendment, which provides specific controls
to guard against disproportionate increased fees/taxes to the people without a vote.
Subsequently, the District implemented a series of ordinances on July 1, 1981,
(Ordinances 4424 through 4436) that increased charges to excess wastewater strength
customers. These charges vary with the use of the system, and were not challenged
under the Hancock Amendment.
In 1984, numerous subdistrict rates still existed for both the user charge and capital
charge portions. All subdistricts and service areas were finally consolidated into a
single rate schedule in 1986.
The District was successful in gaining approval from the qualified voters on March 8,
1988 for new District-wide user charges, which were later codified by Ordinance 7450.
These rates included a $4.18 per month flat rate for all single family residential
customers regardless of whether or not their water usage was metered. Also in 1988,
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-2
in order to satisfy a Consent Decree for wastewater system improvements, a capital
improvement surcharge of $6.50 per month was approved by the voters. This
increased the existing wastewater service charge for single family residential
customers from $4.18 to $10.68 per month.
With impending regulatory mandates and the impacts from Hancock Amendment
considerations, the District attempted various user charge modifications from 1988
through 1992. These user charge changes were challenged and overturned by court
cases. On October 1, 2001, the United States Supreme Court denied a motion to
review the settlement agreement between the District and the original plaintiffs of the
1992 rate increase. This decision ended the 10-year old court case and cleared the way
for the District to make refunds to its customers for the non-voter approved increase
paid from July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993.
On July 1, 1993, under Ordinances 9029 and 9031, the District replaced the flat rate
residential user charge with a system of volume-based rates and implemented the
current low-income assistance program. Following lengthy legal challenges, the
Missouri Supreme Court upheld the validity of the rates on April 29, 1997. The 1993
rates were increased in 1997 by Ordinance 10177 without any legal challenges.
In November 2000, the Board of Trustees submitted four propositions to the voters to
amend the 1954 Plan; all four propositions were passed by the voters. One of the
changes to the 1954 Plan was the establishment of an independent Rate Commission.
This Commission is charged with the responsibilities to review and make
recommendations to the Board regarding all proposed changes in revenue generated
by the District.
After lengthy technical conferences with the newly formed Rate Commission to
consider the District’s case for increased wastewater charges, the Rate Commission
approved proposed rate increases for 2004, 2005, and 2006. Alternative wastewater
charges were also approved pending the outcome of a February 2004 ballot initiative
concerning revenue bond authorization. At that time, the Board acted on the Rate
Commission’s recommendations by increasing wastewater charges for fiscal year
2004, to be effective August 1, 2003, through Ordinance 11553 with the understanding
that wastewater rate increases required for fiscal year 2005 and 2006 would be enacted
after the outcome of the revenue bond authorization election was known.
Following voter approval on February 3, 2004, of authorization for $500 million in
new revenue bonds, the Rate Commission recommended a series of rate increases,
known as Option D for 2005 and 2006. The 2005 and 2006 increases were approved by
the Board through Ordinance 11692, on March 11, 2004. The final wastewater rate
increase from this series became effective on July 1, 2005. A summary of historical
wastewater rates is presented in Table 3-1.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-3
Table 3-1
Historical Wastewater Charges
Fiscal Year Ending June 30,
____________________________________________
Line
No. Type of Monthly Charge 1994 1998 2004 2005 2006
____ _____________________ _______ ______ ______ ______ ______
(a) (c)
Ordinance 9029 10177 11553 11692 12019
Adopted Date 06/16/93 09/11/97 07/24/03 03/11/04 07/14/05
Effective Date 07/01/93 10/01/97 08/01/03 07/01/04 07/01/05
Base Charge - $/Bill
1 Billing & Collection Charge 0.37 0.74 0.85 0.85 0.85
2 System Availability Charge 3.72 4.83 5.30 6.45 7.05
____ ____ ____ ____ ____
3 Total Base (Residential) Service Charge 4.09 5.57 6.15 7.30 7.90
4 Compliance Charge - $/Bill (b) 7.40 8.56 11.80 12.15 12.55
____ ____ ____ ____ ____
5 Total Nonresidential Service Charge 11.49 14.13 17.95 19.45 20.45
Volume Charge
6 Metered - $/Ccf 0.99 1.05 1.34 1.66 1.81
Unmetered - $/Bill
7 Each Room 0.64 0.69 0.88 1.08 1.18
8 Each Water Closet 2.41 2.58 3.28 4.04 4.42
9 Each Bath 2.01 2.15 2.74 3.37 3.69
10 Each Separate Shower 2.01 2.15 2.74 3.37 3.69
Extra Strength Surcharges - $/ton (b)
11 Suspended Solids over 350 mg/l 127.40 87.20
12 Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 162.88 200.15 218.90
13 Biochemical Oxygen Demand over 300 mg/l 244.10 217.90 319.24 412.58 461.44
14 Chemical Oxygen Demand over 600 mg/l 122.05 108.95 159.62 206.29 230.72
Ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
mg/l - milligram per liter
(a) These rates were judged by courts to be user charges that are not subject to the requirements of the
Hancock Amendment. Rates for qualified low-income customers were established at 50 percent
of the general service charges.
(b) Applicable only to non-residential customers.
(c) Current rates as recommended by the Rate Commission and adopted by the Board of Trustees.
These rates were also adopted by Ordinance 11692 and reaffirmed by Ordinance 12019.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-4
Existing wastewater rates for the District are presented in Table 3-2 and have been in
effect since July 1, 2005. The rates currently consist of:
monthly service charges;
a uniform volume charge;
and extra strength surcharges for:
- Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) in excess of 300 milligrams per liter (mg/l);
- Chemical oxygen demand (COD) in excess of 600 mg/l, and
- Suspended solids (SS) in excess of 300 mg/l.
The service charges include a billing and collection charge, and a system availability
charge that are applicable to all customer classes, and a compliance charge that is only
applicable to non-residential customers.
3.2 Wastewater Revenue
Wastewater revenues under existing rates are projected by applying the existing
wastewater rates to the number of bills, estimated billable wastewater volume and
extra strength loadings. In order to properly quantify these values for effective
revenue projections, historical data for each customer class served by the District was
reviewed.
Customer Growth
Table 3-3 presents a summary of the historical and projected average number of
wastewater customers served by the District. As indicated by this table, the number
of metered customers is projected to increase nearly 1.5 percent from 347,300 in 2007
to 352,600 in 2012 and the number of unmetered customers is projected to decrease
nearly 1.2 percent from 84,100 in 2007 to 83,100 in 2012. The total number of customer
accounts is expected to increase at a modest 0.2 percent per year throughout the six-
year study period. The projected percentage increase in the number of customers is
based on the historical trend in customer bills between 2002 and 2006.
Billed Wastewater Volume
Billed wastewater volume is the estimated amount of water volume contributed to the
sewer system by residential and non-residential customers. Since the City of St. Louis
(City) serves many unmetered residential water customers and the City is a large part
of the District; the amount of contributed wastewater volume for unmetered
residential customers needs to be determined based upon estimates of indoor water
usage for these properties. As a result of previous studies that developed water rates
for unmetered water customers in the City, the following dwelling unit water
consumption values are used to estimate billable wastewater volumes for unmetered
single family and multifamily residential properties:
16 gpd for each room;
60 gpd for each water closet, and
50 gpd for each bath or separate shower.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-5
Table 3-2
Existing Wastewater Rates
(Effective July 1, 2005)
Metered
_____________________
Line
No.
Type of Monthly Charge Unmetered
Residential
Residential Non-
Residential
____ ____________________ __________ __________ __________
$ $ $
1 Billing and Collection Charge 0.85 0.85 0.85
2 System Availability Charge 7.05 7.05 7.05
3 Compliance Charge 12.55
Volume Charge
4 per Ccf 1.81 1.81
5 per room 1.18
6 per water closet 4.42
7 per bath 3.69
8 per separate shower 3.69
Extra Strength Surcharge - $/ton
9 Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 218.90
10 BOD over 300 mg/l 461.44
11 COD over 600 mg/l 230.72
Ccf - hundred cubic feet
mg/l - milligrams per liter
Note: Rates for qualified low income residential users are 50 percent of the
regular rates above.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
inal February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates 3-6 |\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Projected Table 3-3 Historical and Projected Wastewater Customer Accounts Line Historical ________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 83,100 No. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Metered Customers 1 Single Family 296,713 296,811 297,921 299,383 301,122 300,600 301,800 303,000 304,200 305,400 306,600 2 Multifamily 21,244 21,110 21,367 20,982 20,825 21,000 20,900 20,800 20,700 20,600 20,500 3 Non-Residential 25,831 25,670 25,839 25,200 25,712 25,700 25,700 25,600 25,600 25,500 25,500 4 Total 343,787 343,591 345,127 345,565 347,659 347,300 348,400 349,400 350,500 351,500 352,600 Unmetered Customers 5 Single Family 60,275 60,415 60,621 60,365 60,010 60,400 60,200 60,000 59,800 59,600 59,400 6 Multifamily 23,965 23,837 23,898 23,820 23,757 23,700 23,700 23,700 23,700 23,700 23,700 7 Total 84,240 84,252 84,518 84,185 83,767 84,100 83,900 83,700 83,500 83,300 Total Customer Accounts 8 Single Family 356,988 357,226 358,541 359,748 361,132 361,000 362,000 363,000 364,000 365,000 366,000 9 Multifamily 45,209 44,947 45,264 44,802 44,582 44,700 44,600 44,500 44,400 44,300 44,200 10 Non-Residential 25,831 25,670 25,839 25,200 25,712 25,700 25,700 25,600 25,600 25,500 25,500 11 Total 428,027 427,843 429,645 429,750 431,426 431,400 432,300 433,100 434,000 434,800 435,700 0.2% FAC: 12 Annual Percentage Change N/A 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-7
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Billable wastewater volumes for all single family customers with metered water usage
are determined on the basis of water used during the period best equated to
contributed wastewater volume. For District customers, this “best equated” period is
from November 1 through April 30. Billed wastewater volume for non-residential
customers is equal to their actual metered water usage less exemption allowances for
any water that does not enter the sewer system.
Metered multifamily customers are either billed based on actual annual water usage
or the average annual water usage established during the best equated period,
depending on the billing method selected by each multifamily customer. The selected
billing basis is permanent and can not be changed. Projected volumes are based on
the recognition of historical billing volumes and trends. Also considered are
projections of numbers of customers and average historic billed volume per customer.
Total wastewater volumes for all categories of customers, which are summarized in
Table 3-4, decreased approximately 3 percent from 2002 through 2006. This was due
mainly to the decrease in wastewater volume for metered customers, primarily non-
residential customers. Since conservation measures and pretreatment costs have been
impacting these customers, local entities have revised water use strategies to reduce
utility cost impacts. Therefore, total wastewater volumes for both metered and
unmetered customers are expected to decrease 0.4 percent during the six-year study
period from 2007 to 2012.
Wastewater Revenue Under Existing Rates
A summary of historical and projected wastewater revenues under existing rates is
presented in Table 3-5 for the period 2002 through 2012. Projected billed wastewater
revenues do not include allowances for bad debt, refunds or billing adjustments.
These billing adjustments are included with other operating revenues in Table 2-9,
Subsection 2.7. Revenues from normal and excess strength wastewater billings under
present rates are projected to decrease nearly 1.6 percent from $195,104,100 in 2007 to
$192,028,700 in 2012. This decrease is due to a combination of factors; among them is a
projected decrease in excess strength wastewater revenue due to more extensive pre-
treatment programs and also due to projected decreases in non-residential wastewater
volume that is consistent with historical trends.
3.3 Wastewater Utility Major Capital Costs/Financing
Wastewater Major Capital Costs
As a result of previous evaluations conducted for wastewater program needs
throughout the District, specific individual projects have been identified for both the
collection system and the wastewater treatment facilities. Table 3-6 presents the total
projected expenditures for 2007 through 2012. Costs for wastewater projects funded
by special assessment subdistricts are excluded from Table 3-6 because they do not
affect the rate design process. The total capital improvement and replacement
program (CIRP) project cost for this six-year period is projected to be $959.6 million.
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates Table 3-4Historical and Projected Contributed Wastewater VolumeLineHistoricalProjected_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________No. Customer Class2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf CcfMetered CustomersB-7B-7 B-7 B-7 B-7 B-9B-9B-9B-9B-9B-91 Single Family27,084,987 26,738,437 27,386,280 27,228,68227,437,644 27,356,400 27,470,500 27,585,100 27,699,700 27,814,300 27,928,9002 Multifamily10,467,778 10,334,643 10,115,069 9,731,407 9,763,965 10,189,700 10,137,200 10,084,700 10,032,100 9,979,600 9,927,1003 Non-Residential33,385,559 32,368,056 30,206,847 25,292,888 31,600,536 29,402,000 29,304,200 29,207,500 29,138,100 29,069,000 29,025,700_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 4 Total70,938,324 69,441,136 67,708,196 62,252,977 68,802,145 66,948,100 66,911,900 66,877,300 66,869,900 66,862,900 66,881,700Unmetered Customers (a)5 Single Family7,100,437 7,061,615 7,082,767 7,112,749 7,068,871 7,274,900 7,231,800 7,187,400 7,142,600 7,098,100 7,053,6006 Multifamily5,154,386 5,120,587 5,117,850 5,098,4455,044,805 5,062,000 5,059,000 5,056,200 5,053,800 5,051,000 5,048,500_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 7 Total12,254,824 12,182,202 12,200,617 12,211,193 12,113,676 12,336,900 12,290,800 12,243,600 12,196,400 12,149,100 12,102,100Total Contributed Wastewater Volume8 Single Family34,185,424 33,800,052 34,469,047 34,341,43134,506,515 34,631,300 34,702,300 34,772,500 34,842,300 34,912,400 34,982,5009 Multifamily15,622,164 15,455,230 15,232,919 14,829,852 14,808,770 15,251,700 15,196,200 15,140,900 15,085,900 15,030,600 14,975,60010 Non-Residential33,385,559 32,368,056 30,206,847 25,292,888 31,600,536 29,402,000 29,304,200 29,207,500 29,138,100 29,069,000 29,025,700_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 11 Total83,193,148 81,623,338 79,908,81374,464,170 80,915,821 79,285,000 79,202,700 79,120,900 79,066,300 79,012,000 78,983,80012 Annual Percentage IncreaseN/A -1.9% -2.1% -6.8% 8.7% -2.0% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% 0.0%(a) Ccf = hundred cubic feet (748 gallons)Unmetered wastewater volume is determined by multiplying the number of fixtures by their respective unit usage values. Unit usage values are 16 gallons per day (gpd) per room, 60 gpd per water closet, and 50 gpd per bath or separate shower. A 3-8 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates A 3-9 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-5Historical and Projected Billed Wastewater Service RevenueUnder Existing RatesLineHistoricalProjected____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________No. Customer Class2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$$$$$$Metered CustomersB-13B-13 B-13 B-13 B-13 B-15B-15 B-15 B-15 B-15 B-151 Single Family48,091,200 47,747,300 57,669,200 71,210,200 77,985,843 77,779,100 77,853,000 77,904,700 77,956,200 78,007,800 78,059,4002 Multifamily12,409,100 12,260,100 14,874,700 17,992,100 19,646,971 20,435,700 20,330,400 20,225,100 20,119,700 20,014,400 19,909,100 Non-Residential3 Normal Strength39,434,700 38,339,200 45,245,300 47,867,600 63,506,777 59,522,400 59,335,200 59,149,900 59,014,100 58,878,800 58,790,2004 Excess Strength3,451,700 3,728,700 5,301,200 5,713,700 6,782,384 7,260,600 7,100,200 7,100,200 7,100,200 7,100,200 7,100,200__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 5 Total103,386,700 102,075,300 123,090,400 142,783,600 167,921,974 164,997,800 164,618,800 164,379,900 164,190,200 164,001,200 163,858,900Unmetered Customers6 Single Family11,364,600 11,344,300 13,625,600 16,858,100 18,282,428 18,676,900 18,318,700 17,931,900 17,544,700 17,157,500 16,770,7007 Multifamily7,042,800 7,000,400 6,941,400 10,539,300 11,399,822 11,429,400 11,422,800 11,416,600 11,411,100 11,404,900 11,399,100__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 8 Total18,407,400 18,344,700 20,567,000 27,397,400 29,682,249 30,106,300 29,741,500 29,348,500 28,955,800 28,562,400 28,169,800Total Wastewater Service Revenue9 Single Family59,455,800 59,091,600 71,294,800 88,068,300 96,268,271 96,456,000 96,171,700 95,836,600 95,500,900 95,165,300 94,830,10010 Multifamily19,451,900 19,260,500 21,816,100 28,531,400 31,046,793 31,865,100 31,753,200 31,641,700 31,530,800 31,419,300 31,308,20011 Non-Residential42,886,400 42,067,900 50,546,500 53,581,300 70,289,161 66,783,000 66,435,400 66,250,100 66,114,300 65,979,000 65,890,400__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 12 Total Wastewater121,794,100 120,420,000 143,657,400 170,181,000 197,604,224 195,104,100 194,360,300 193,728,400 193,146,000 192,563,600 192,028,70013 Annual Percentage IncreaseN/A -1.1% 19.3% 18.5% 16.1% -1.3% -0.4% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3%
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates A 3-10 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc 0_ 00_ 0_ 00000_ 0_ 0Table 3-6Wastewater Capital Improvement and Replacement ProgramLineFiscal Year Ending June 30, ______________________________________________________________________No. Description2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total____ ______________________________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________$$$$$$ $Sanitary Sewer System1 Sanitary Sewers7,500,000 7,000,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 40,500,0002 Sanitary Sewer Overflows102,171,000 20,935,00028,580,000 14,467,000 75,397,000 114,405,000 355,955,00__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________3 Subtotal109,671,000 27,935,000 35,080,00020,967,000 81,897,000 120,905,000 396,455,00Combined Sewer System4 Combined Sewers7,500,000 7,000,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,000,000 40,000,0005 Combined Sewer Overflows33,039,000 4,035,000 9,857,000 17,806,000 15,595,000 3,000,000 83,332,0006 Cityshed - Condition 2,000,000255,00000002,255,007 Cityshed - Capacity20,510,00000 1,000,0000 6,400,000 27,910,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________8 Subtotal63,049,000 11,290,000 16,357,00025,306,000 22,095,000 15,400,000 153,497,00Other Sewer Projects9 District Wide Planning9,650,000 8,850,000 7,800,000 7,100,000 7,100,000 6,100,000 46,600,00010 CMOM Regulations (a)7,500,000 10,000,0007,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 52,500,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________11 Subtotal17,150,000 18,850,000 14,800,000 15,100,000 17,100,000 16,100,000 99,100,000Wastewater Treatment12 Baumgartner4,000,000000004,000,0013 Bissell Point1,000,000000001,000,0014 Coldwater Creek000 10,000,00000 10,000,00015 Fenton670,00000000670,0016 Grand Glaize33,600,0000000033,600,0017 Lemay10,150,000 45,000,000 42,220,00000 3,000,000 100,370,0018 Lower Meramec River6,145,0000 2,386,000 26,500,0000 5,569,000 40,600,00019 Missouri River53,300,0000 500,000 36,500,000 30,000,0000 120,300,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________20 Subtotal108,865,000 45,000,000 45,106,000 73,000,000 30,000,000 8,569,000 310,540,00__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________21 Total 298,735,000 103,075,000 111,343,000 134,373,000 151,092,000 160,974,000 959,592,00
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-11
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Wastewater Capital Cost Financing
Capital improvements are commonly funded by a combination of debt and cash
financing. By debt financing a portion of the major capital improvements that are of a
non-recurring nature, the financing burden is appropriately shared by both present
and future users of the facilities who will benefit from the improvements. For those
capital improvements that tend to be routinely incurred each year for normal
replacements (i.e., extensions and minor improvements), these costs are reasonably
financed annually from current wastewater service revenue.
After much review and evaluation, the District has developed a proposed capital
improvement financing plan for the wastewater utility and the results are displayed
in Table 3-7. This plan anticipates that proposed capital improvements will be
financed from a combination of available funds on hand, revenue bond proceeds,
Missouri Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan proceeds, commercial paper
obligations, grants and contributions, annual operating revenues, and interest income.
The recent November 2006 issuance of the Series 2006-C revenue bonds in the
principal amount of $60,000,000 plus a $3,400,000 bond premium is shown on
Line 2 of Table 3-7. November 2006 proceeds from a SRF loan is shown on Line 3 of
Table 3-7 and proposed commercial paper obligations are shown in Line 4 of
Table 3-7. When the commercial paper obligations are issued in 2008, the District’s
current $500 million revenue bond authorization will have been fully utilized. The
following items delineate the breakdown of existing bond authorization balances for
the study period as itemized on Lines 2, 3, and 4 of Table 3-7.
Revenue Bonds - $60 million
SRF Loans - $14.205 million
Commercial Paper Notes - $40 million
Total - $114.205 applied to available debt authorization
These bonds, loans and notes are expected to finance approximately 12 percent of the
total six-year program costs (revenue bonds, SRF loan proceeds, and commercial
paper notes as a percent of the total application of funds from Line 13 of Table 3-7).
The amount for each of these issues was developed considering capital program
needs, current policies, other sources of capital improvement program financing, and
debt service coverage requirements related to the outstanding District-wide revenue
bonds.
The District has considered seeking voter authorization for an additional $300 million
of revenue bonds to help finance the wastewater CIRP. However, after intense
internal discussions it was determined that such additional bond authority, if
obtained, would only facilitate the completion of needed CIRP projects a few years
sooner than a Pay-As-You-Go option but would utilize a large portion of the District’s
debt limitation before the District had clear direction from regulatory authorities
concerning potential mandated wastewater improvements. In addition, the District
would incur a significant increase in annual debt service obligations that would
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates A 3-12 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-7Wastewater Capital Improvement Program FinancingLineFiscal Year Ending June 30,___________________________________________________________________No Description2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total__________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$ $Source of Funds1 Beginning of Year Balance 163,317,300 2,117,800 6,784,700 3,214,500 2,031,400 3,231,200 163,317,3002 Revenue Bond Proceeds63,400,00000000 63,400,0003 State Revolving Loan Proceeds 14,205,00000000 14,205,0004 Commercial Paper0 40,000,0000000 40,000,0005 Cash Financing of Construction 60,100,000 64,846,000 106,192,000 132,439,000 151,486,000 161,934,000 676,997,0006 Grants & Contributions (a)1,504,400 1,526,300 1,549,200 1,573,100 1,598,000 1,624,000 9,375,0007 Interest Income (b)10,552,700 3,894,600 2,031,600 1,177,800 1,207,800 1,292,500 20,157,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 8 Total Funds Available313,079,400 112,384,700 116,557,500 138,404,400 156,323,200 168,081,700 987,451,300Application of Funds9 Major Capital Improvements 298,735,000 103,075,000 111,343,000 134,373,000 151,092,000 160,974,000 959,592,00010 Improvement Fund Projects4,072,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 14,572,00011 Issuance Costs (c)972,800 25,0000000 997,80012 Revenue Bond Reserve Fund (d) 7,181,80000000 7,181,800__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 13 Total Application of Funds310,961,600 105,600,000 113,343,000 136,373,000 153,092,000 162,974,000 982,343,60014 End of Year Fund Balance2,117,800 6,784,700 3,214,500 2,031,400 3,231,200 5,107,700 5,107,700 (a) Includes anticipated contributions from the City of Arnold to reserve capacity in the Lower Meramec River Wastewater Treatment Plant. (b) Interest Income is estimated at 3.5% of the average of the beginning and end of year balances. (c) (d) The required balance in the Revenue Bond Reserve Fund is determined to be the maximum principal and interest payment on senior debt.Issuance Costs are estimated at 1.40% of the issue amount for Revenue Bonds, 0.60% of the issue amount for SRF Loans, and $25,000 per issue for commercial paper.
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-13
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
reduce future cash financing of the CIRP for up to 30 years. The District believes that
until regulatory requirements are better defined, the additional debt service cost
associated with more bonds is currently not a fiscally responsible use of rate payer
monies. Therefore, the District now intends to defer seeking additional bond
authorization and immediately cash finance the remaining projects on a Pay-As-You-
Go basis. This will allow the District greater financial flexibility in the future to
construct projects necessary to meet potential Consent Decree requirements, to
respond to the uncertainty of future EPA requirements and provide additional funds
to meet emergency situations.
With the proposed level of debt obligations, the cash financing of capital
improvements from annual revenues is expected to total $676,997,000 for the study
period as indicated on Line 5 of Table 3-7. Projected revenue from District-wide
connection fees is also included in Line 5. The Pay-As-You-Go cash financing is
expected to provide about 69 percent of total program costs over the six-year study
period.
The District anticipates receiving grants and contributions of $9,375,000 during the
six-year study period, primarily from miscellaneous grants related to various
improvement projects to be constructed during the study period. A capital
contribution from the City of Arnold (Arnold) for the repayment of principal on a
District loan related to Arnold’s share of capacity in the new Lower Meramec River
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant accounts for $3,375,000 of the total amount of
grants and contributions shown on Line 6 of Table 3-7.
Interest earnings recognize an estimated 3.5 percent average annual interest rate on
funds maintained in the construction account and a 4.0 percent average annual
interest rate for funds maintained in the Emergency Fund. The District also had a
reserve for capital improvement encumbrances of $174,969,000 at the beginning of
fiscal year 2007. Although these authorized funds and related projects are not
included in Table 3-7, the unspent but committed monies are available to earn interest
income while held by the District. For interest income calculation purposes, this
encumbrance level was assumed to decrease to $20,000,000 by the end of the study
period. Line 7 indicates the estimated interest income earned on capital improvement
program balances. Total revenues obtained from grants, contributions, and interest
income will provide about 3 percent of the total program needs for the six-year study
period. Line 8 shows a total of $987.4 million available to finance the capital
improvement and replacement program.
Line 9 in Table 3-7 displays the $959.6 million in wastewater utility major capital
improvement expenditures projected for the study period from Table 3-6. Costs and
funding for these projects are recorded in the Sanitary Replacement Fund.
Improvement Fund projects, which are primarily financed from connection fee
revenues, are shown on Line 10 of Table 3-7. Based upon the anticipated revenue
bond, SRF loan, and commercial paper obligation requirements, Line 11 of Table 3-7
displays the debt issuance costs. These costs are estimated to be 1.4 percent of the total
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-14
principal amount of each traditional revenue bond issue, 0.6 percent of the total
principal amount of each SRF loan, and $25,000 per issue for each commercial paper
obligation, payable when the bonds, loans or obligations are issued. Line 12 of Table
3-7 indicates the amount of revenue bond reserve payments required by existing bond
covenants to maintain a reserve fund equal to the maximum principal and interest
payment of all outstanding revenue bonds that are not part of the SRF loan program.
Line 13 shows the total application of funds and Line 14 displays the remaining
balance at the end of each fiscal year exclusive of the 60 day operating reserve
maintained at 16 percent of annual operating expenses. The drawdown of these
balances over the study period will provide approximately 16 percent of program
needs.
3.4 Other Revenue Requirements
In addition to the operation and maintenance expenses presented in Section 2 of this
report, and cash financing of a portion of the CIRP discussed in Subsection 3.3, the
District must also fund its annual obligations for debt service, routine annual capital
improvements, and meet an annual operating reserve requirement. These
requirements are discussed below and in Subsection 3.5.
Existing and Projected Debt
The District issued its first District-wide revenue bonds in April 2004 in the principal
amount of $175,000,000. A second series of District-wide revenue bonds (Series 2006-
C) was recently issued in November 2006 in the principal amount of $60,000,000 plus
a $3,400,000 bond premium. The District has also participated in four subordinate
series of revenue bonds issued under the Missouri State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan
program, including a recent November 2006 issuance of $14,205,000. The total amount
of SRF loans issued to date is $225,000,000. These loans, together with the two series
of revenue bonds, have used $460,000,000 of the District’s $500,000,000 total revenue
bond authorization. The District expects to issue the remaining $40,000,000 in 2008 as
commercial paper obligations. The total annual debt service requirement is expected
to increase from $22,946,300 in 2007 to $29,493,100 in 2012 as displayed in Table 3-8.
Operating Reserve
The operating reserve is a balance maintained in the Revenue Fund to accommodate
fluctuations in annual revenues and expenditures. The District plans to maintain an
operating reserve fund balance equal to 60 days or about 16.4 percent of annual
operating expenses. Operating expense is equal to the sum of operation and
maintenance expense and normal annual capital improvements. The existing revenue
bond covenants only require the District to maintain a minimum balance in the
Revenue Fund equal to the next 45 days of operation and maintenance expense. The
operating reserve is projected to increase to $21,827,000 by the end of the study period
through annual payments from revenues to maintain a 60-day policy requirement.
The increased operating reserve will provide a buffer to allow for potential timing
issues involved with funding major capital contracts on a Pay-As-You-Go basis,
provide increased operational flexibility and help enhance future bond ratings.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-15
Table 3-8
Projected Debt Service Requirements
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Commercial
Fiscal Revenue Revenue SRF SRF Paper
Year Bonds Bonds Loans Loans Notes Total________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
Payments to Sinking Fund
2007 9,636,600 1,717,000 11,467,000 125,700 0 22,946,300
2008 9,611,000 2,902,000 12,127,700 202,000 2,000,000 26,842,700
2009 9,593,400 2,902,000 13,949,200 903,000 2,000,000 29,347,600
2010 9,643,900 2,902,000 13,709,600 902,900 2,000,000 29,158,400
2011 9,778,600 2,902,000 13,938,400 902,700 2,000,000 29,521,700
2012 9,903,100 2,902,000 13,780,700 907,300 2,000,000 29,493,100
Payments to Bondholders
2007 9,640,700 1,233,400 10,481,200 0 0 21,355,300
2008 9,615,600 2,902,000 11,679,800 226,700 2,000,000 26,424,100
2009 9,587,900 2,902,000 12,443,900 202,000 2,000,000 27,135,800
2010 9,621,100 2,902,000 13,361,400 899,500 2,000,000 28,784,000
2011 9,758,200 2,902,000 13,901,800 899,400 2,000,000 29,461,400
2012 9,880,400 2,902,000 13,760,200 899,100 2,000,000 29,441,700
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-16
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
3.5 Wastewater Revenue Projections/Revenue
Requirements
A pro forma cash flow statement showing projected wastewater revenues and
wastewater revenue requirements for the District during the study period is
presented in Table 3-9. Wastewater revenues must be at least sufficient to finance the
wastewater utility’s operation and maintenance expense, routine annual capital
improvements, and debt service costs on existing and proposed bonds and loans,
while maintaining an adequate operating reserve and complying with all revenue
bond debt service coverage requirements. Annual revenues can also be used to
finance a portion of the wastewater utility’s major capital improvement program.
When all cost components are considered, Table 3-9 indicates that annual wastewater
revenues under existing rates are not sufficient to meet the total revenue requirements
of the wastewater utility during the study period without future revenue increases.
Line 1 of Table 3-9 shows projected wastewater revenue under existing rates, as
previously presented in Table 3-5, Line 12. In order to balance the revenue and the
revenue requirements through 2012, Lines 2 through 8 show projected increases in
wastewater revenues assumed to be in effect for the number of months indicated for
each fiscal year. The magnitude of the increase shown for each year was selected
based on consideration of three principal criteria:
(1) Total revenue necessary to meet cash requirements for normal wastewater
operations including consideration of reduced wastewater volumes due to
anticipated customer resistance and a one month lag in the receipt of additional
user charge revenues due to increased rates,
(2) Annual increases in wastewater revenues available to cash finance wastewater
utility related major capital improvements, and
(3) Wastewater revenue required to provide a reasonable margin of debt service
coverage in excess of minimum bond covenant requirements.
In addition to the wastewater revenue generated from wastewater user charges, other
revenue identified in Lines 10 through 15 of Table 3-9 include other operating revenue
and connection fee revenue (previously presented on Table 2-11, Lines 7 and 8,
Subsection 2.8), plus interest earnings. The estimated interest rate for reserve funds is
estimated to be 4 percent per year, while interest on operating balances is estimated to
be 3.5 percent per year. Interest earnings received from the City of Arnold represents
the interest portion of their loan with the District to finance their share of the Lower
Meramec Regional Treatment Plant. Total other revenue ranges from $13,270,500 in
2007 to $14,255,800 in 2012. Total revenue is projected to be $208,374,600 in 2007 and
increase to $321,781,500 in 2012 as shown by Line 16 of Table 3-9, or an overall
increase of 54 percent during this time period.
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-17
Table 3-9
Comparison of Projected Wastewater Revenue Under Existing
Rates With Projected Revenue Requirements
Line Fiscal Year Ending June 30,_____________________________________________________________________
No. Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
1 Revenue Under Existing Rates (a)195,104,100 194,360,300 193,728,400 193,146,000 192,563,600 192,028,700
Additional Revenue Required
Fiscal Revenue Months
Year Increase Effective____________________
220070.0%12 000000
3 2008 13.0% 7 13,044,000 25,185,000 25,109,000 25,033,000 24,964,000
4 2009 12.0% 12 23,669,000 26,191,000 26,112,000 26,039,000
5 2010 11.0% 12 24,657,000 26,808,000 26,733,000
6 2011 9.0% 12 22,326,000 24,279,000
72012 5.0% 12 13,482,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
8 Total Additional Revenue 0 13,044,000 48,854,000 75,957,000 100,279,000 115,497,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
9 Total Service Charge Revenue 195,104,100 207,404,300 242,582,400 269,103,000 292,842,600 307,525,700
10 Other Operating Revenue 4,673,300 4,922,900 5,276,600 5,280,400 5,284,100 5,324,700
11 Connection Fee Revenue 4,600,000 4,646,000 4,692,000 4,739,000 4,786,000 4,834,000
12 Interest Income - Reserve Funds 2,493,500 2,773,000 2,839,100 2,836,000 2,841,800 2,841,400
13 Interest Income - Operations 198,700 72,900 72,800 72,500 71,500 70,400
14 Interest Income - Arnold 1,305,000 1,283,100 1,260,200 1,236,300 1,211,300 1,185,300__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
15 Subtotal Other Revenue 13,270,500 13,697,900 14,140,700 14,164,200 14,194,700 14,255,800__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
16 Total Revenue 208,374,600 221,102,200 256,723,100 283,267,200 307,037,300 321,781,500
17 Operation and Maintenance Expense 104,784,300 110,913,400 114,654,700 119,058,500 123,379,800 127,593,500
18 Stormwater Program Support (b)19,223,100 10,799,000 0 0 0 0__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
19 Net Revenue 84,367,200 99,389,800 142,068,400 164,208,700 183,657,500 194,188,000
Debt Service
20 Existing Senior Revenue Bonds 9,636,600 9,611,000 9,593,400 9,643,900 9,778,600 9,903,100
21 Proposed Senior Revenue Bonds 1,717,000 2,902,000 2,902,000 2,902,000 2,902,000 2,902,000 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
22 Total Senior Revenue Bonds 11,353,600 12,513,000 12,495,400 12,545,900 12,680,600 12,805,100
23 Existing State Revolving Fund Loans (c) 11,467,000 12,127,700 13,949,200 13,709,600 13,938,400 13,780,700
24 Proposed State Revolving Fund Loans (c) 125,700 202,000 903,000 902,900 902,700 907,300 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
25 Total State Revolving Fund Loans 11,592,700 12,329,700 14,852,200 14,612,500 14,841,100 14,688,000
26 Commercial Paper 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
27 Total Debt Service 22,946,300 26,842,700 29,347,600 29,158,400 29,521,700 29,493,100
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-18
Table 3-9 (Continued)
Comparison of Projected Wastewater Revenue Under Existing
Rates With Projected Revenue Requirements
Line Fiscal Year Ending June 30,_____________________________________________________________________
No. Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________________________________________
$$$$$$
28 Routine Annual Improvements 6,148,800 6,394,600 6,536,500 2,619,600 2,698,200 2,779,100
29 Cash Financing of Major Improvements 60,100,000 64,846,000 106,192,000 132,439,000 151,486,000 161,934,000
30Additions to Operating Reserve 2,366,7001,302,500000
31 Net Annual Balance (d)(7,194,600) 4,000 (7,700) (8,300) (48,400) (18,200)
32 Beginning of Year Balance (e)9,274,400 2,079,800 2,083,800 2,076,100 2,067,800 2,019,400
33 End of Year Balance (e)2,079,800 2,083,800 2,076,100 2,067,800 2,019,400 2,001,200
Actual Debt Service (f)
34 Senior Bonds 10,874,100 12,517,600 12,489,900 12,523,100 12,660,200 12,782,400
35 SRF Loans 10,481,200 11,906,500 12,645,900 14,260,900 14,801,200 14,659,300
Debt Service Coverage
36 Revenue Bonds (g)776.0% 794.0% 1137.0% 1311.0% 1451.0% 1519.0%
37 Total Debt (h)395.0% 407.0% 565.0% 613.0% 669.0% 708.0%
(a) Existing wastewater rates effective July 1, 2005.
(b) Transitional support of the stormwater program during conversion of tax based to user charge based revenues.
(c) Debt service on SRF Loans are net of the state's interest subsidy.
(d) Negative balances indicate need to drawdown available fund balance.
(e) Does not include funds set aside for a minimum operating reserve equal to 60 days of operating expenses.
(f) Payment to Bondholders per Table 3-8, paid through Sinking Fund.
(g) The Bond Ordinance requires net revenue to equal or exceed 1.25x actual debt service.
(h) The Bond Ordinance requires net revenue to equal or exceed 1.15x actual debt service.
0
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-19
The wastewater utility’s operation and maintenance expenses were presented in Table
2-3, Line 19, Subsection 2.4, and is shown on Line 17 of Table 3-9. The amount of
wastewater revenue required to continue supporting the stormwater program during
the transition period (i.e., FY 2007 and 2008) is shown on Line 18 of Table 3-9. Line 19
shows the estimated net revenue remaining after deducting projected wastewater
related operation and maintenance expense (Line 17) and the costs required to
support the stormwater program during the user charge transition period (Line 18)
from total wastewater revenues (Line 16).
Anticipated debt service requirements on revenue bonds, SRF loans, and commercial
paper notes are presented on Lines 20 through 27, as presented previously on Table 3-
8, for 2007 through 2012. As previously described, it is projected that revenue bonds
and SRF loan proceeds, in the aggregate amounts of $60,000,000 and $14,205,000,
respectively, will be issued to help finance major capital program expenditures. The
use of commercial paper obligations in the aggregate amount of $40,000,000 will
provide the District greater flexibility for the financing of major capital
improvements. These debt obligations will utilize all the District’s remaining revenue
bond authorization.
Line 28 of Table 3-9 shows the total amount of routine annual improvements, which
are completely financed by annual revenues and as previously presented on Table 2-3,
Line 22. Funds used to finance a portion of the major capital improvement program
are reported as a cost on Line 29 of Table 3-9 and as a source of revenue on Line 5 of
Table 3-7. Reserve deposits required to maintain an operating reserve equal to the
next 60 days of combined operation and maintenance expense (Line 17) and routine
annual improvements (Line 28) are shown on Line 30. A 45 day operating reserve has
been maintained through fiscal year 2006 as proposed in the prior rate change
proceedings. The net annual balance of annual revenues less expenditures is
presented on Line 31. Negative balances indicate the need to use available fund
balances.
Lines 32 and 33 of Table 3-9 show the projected combined beginning and ending cash
balances of the wastewater utility, exclusive of the operating reserve and other
restricted funds.
An additional consideration in measuring the adequacy of revenues is the provision
of sufficient debt service coverage to meet bond covenant requirements for the
issuance of revenue bonds. Lines 34 and 35 of Table 3-9 show the actual debt service
on the senior revenue bonds and on the subordinate SRF loans. Line 36 of Table 3-9
shows the debt service coverage of the revenue bond debt service (i.e., the ratio of net
revenue (Line 19) to total revenue bond debt service (Line 34) for each year of the
study period). Line 37 shows the debt service coverage of the combined revenue bond
and state revolving fund debt service (i.e., the ratio of net revenue (Line 19) to total
debt service (Lines 34 and 35) for each year of the study period). Current wastewater
revenue bond covenants require the District to provide debt service coverage equal to
at least 125 percent of the annual principal and interest payment on all wastewater
revenues bonds and 115 percent of the combined annual principal and interest
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-20
payment on all wastewater revenue bonds and all junior lien state revolving fund
loans.
For planning purposes and to allow for possible fluctuations in revenues and
operating expenses, such as may occur periodically due to possible unexpected
increases in costs of system operations, a revenue bond debt service coverage of at
least 150 percent and a combined debt service coverage level of at least 125 percent
should be provided. This will provide reasonable assurance that minimum coverage
requirements can be maintained each year and enhance the marketability of projected
bond issues. Under the proposed financing plan, these target levels are exceeded in
each year as shown on Lines 36 and 37.
3.6 Cost of Service Allocations
Cost of service allocations provide a means of determining the proportionate
responsibility of each customer class for the service provided. Cost responsibilities are
based upon allocating the costs of service according to the relative service
requirements to each respective customer class. Factors considered in determining
service requirements include the volume of wastewater contributed, peak wastewater
contributions, wastewater strength, number of accounts, and the relative
responsibility for infiltration/inflow entering the wastewater sewer system. The
analysis of total costs of service by customer class provides the basis for the
subsequent design of user charges that will equitably recover costs from those classes.
Fiscal year 2008 is selected as the test year for all subsequent tables presented in this
report. Test year refers to the year used to design rates. The analyses presented below
were also performed for subsequent years by changing the test year. This was
necessary in order to determine proposed rates for future years.
Costs of Service to be Allocated
The costs of service to be allocated consist of the total revenue requirements for the
2008 test year as derived from Table 3-9, Lines 17 and 18 and 27 through 30,
and summarized on Lines 1 through 6 of Table 3-10. In determining costs of service to
be met from wastewater charges; other operating and non-operating revenues will be
used to offset the revenue requirements and are therefore deducted from total test
year revenue requirements shown on Line 7 of Table 3-10.
In order to allocate the cost of service to the most appropriate components, the costs
are assigned to the two cost categories of operating costs and capital costs. Operating
costs include the District's total operation and maintenance expense plus any funds
set aside to maintain an adequate operating reserve. For this report, the operating
reserve is set equal to the next 60 days of the operation and maintenance and routine
annual capital improvement costs. Operating cost to be recovered by wastewater
charges is net of other operating revenue, interest income, and any special
adjustments that will be used to offset projected operating expenses. Other Operating
Revenues are shown on Line 8 through 10 of Table 3-10. The Interest Income was
previously presented on Table 3-9, Lines 12 through 14.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-21
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Table 3-10
Wastewater Cost of Service
Test Year 2008
Line
No.Operating Capital Total______________________________
$$ $
Revenue Requirements
1 Operation & Maintenance Expense 110,913,400 110,913,400
2 Debt Service 26,842,700 26,842,700
3 Routine Capital Improvements 6,394,600 6,394,600
4 Cash Financing of Major Improvements 64,846,000 64,846,000
5 Additions to Operating Reserve 1,302,500 1,302,500
6 Stormwater Support 10,799,000 10,799,000__________ __________ __________
7 Total 123,014,900 98,083,300 221,098,200
Revenue Requirements met from Other Sources
Other Operating Revenue
8 Wastewater Billing Adjustments 2,024,300 2,024,300
9 Inspection and Other Fees 2,160,500 2,160,500
10 Miscellaneous Revenue 738,100 738,100 __________ __________ __________
11 Subtotal 4,922,900 0 4,922,900
12 Interest Income 4,129,000 4,129,000
13 Connection Fee Revenue 4,646,000 4,646,000
14 Change in Available Fund Balances (4,000) (4,000)
15 Rate Adjustments (a)(12,223,000)(12,223,000)__________ __________ __________
16 Total (3,171,100) 4,642,000 1,470,900__________ __________ __________
17 Net Costs to be met from Charges 126,186,000 93,441,300 219,627,300
Net Operating Capital Cost
(a) Required to adjust for any partial year implementation of increased wastewater rates,
potential customer resistance to increased rates, and possible billing lag.
Total Cost of Service
Net Operating Cost
57%
Capital Cost
43%
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-22
Additional adjustments may be required to compensate for potential customer
resistance to increased rates, and to recognize the impact of billing lag. The resistance
factor is projected to be 3.23 percent of increased revenues for 2008, 1.61 percent for
2009, and no resistance for the subsequent years. The District experiences about a one
month lag in the receipt of revenues under increased user charges so a billing
adjustment factor of 8.3 percent (1/12) is also factored into the first year of revenue
under any increased charges. The result of Rate Adjustment factors is presented on
Line 15 of Table 3-10.
Capital costs consist of debt service requirements on existing and proposed debt
issues as well as routine and major capital improvements financed from annual
revenues. Capital costs to be recovered by wastewater charges are net of revenue from
district-wide connection fees and any drawdown of available operating balances.
Connection Fee Revenue was previously presented on Table 2-11, Line 8. The change
in the available fund balance was previously presented on Table 3-9, Line 31.
The total test year (2008) cost of service to be recovered by wastewater charges is
equal to $219,627,300 with net operating expense equal to $126,186,000 and net capital
costs equal to $93,441,300.
Functional Cost Components
The costs of service to be recovered from wastewater charges are analyzed by system
function as a basis for the subsequent allocation of costs to customer classes. In this
analysis, costs are apportioned to the functional cost components of volume, capacity,
wastewater strength, and customers. Costs attributable to a particular class of
customers (i.e., those for treating high-strength wastewater or the federal
requirements to monitor certain non-residential customers) are assigned directly to
that class. The separation of costs into functional components provides a means for
distributing such costs to the various customer classes on the basis of respective
responsibilities for each particular type of service. The following are the principal
functional components:
Volume Costs are those which vary directly with the quantity of wastewater
contributed and include capital costs related to investment in system facilities
sized on the basis of wastewater volume and operation and maintenance expense
related to those facilities.
Capacity costs are related to facilities that are designed to meet the maximum or
peak rates of wastewater flow.
Wastewater Strength Costs consist of the operation and maintenance expense and
capital costs related to system facilities that are designed principally on the basis
of the quantity of pollutants in the wastewater. Strength costs are further
separated into biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and suspended solids related
costs. The District also monitors chemical oxygen demand (COD) at the treatment
plant and for certain high strength customers. Since historic data has consistently
indicated that about two pounds of COD are equivalent to one pound of BOD, the
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-23
COD and BOD surcharge units of service are combined as equivalent BOD units
and presented as a single functional cost component.
Customer Costs are those that tend to vary in proportion to the number of
customers served. These costs are further separated into costs related to all
customers and costs related to non-residential customers.
Allocation of Plant Investment and Capital Costs
The investment in wastewater facilities is allocated to appropriate cost components to
determine the proportionate share of capital costs to be assigned to wastewater
activities and to determine customer class responsibility. The estimated test year 2008
plant investment consists of plant in service as of June 30, 2006, the 2006 construction
work in progress and the estimated costs of proposed capital improvements placed in
service through the 2008 test year. Total plant investment, on an original cost less
accumulated depreciation basis, is allocated to functional cost components in
Table 3-11, Line 23.
Each element of investment is allocated to functional cost components based on the
parameter or parameters having significant influence on the magnitude of that
element of investment. For example, the investment in the sanitary sewer system, and
the sanitary portion of the combined sewer system, both consisting of mains and
pumping stations, is related to maximum rates of flow and are allocated to the
capacity cost component. District staff has determined that 30 percent of the
combined sewer investment is related to sanitary sewer conveyance with the
remaining 70 percent related to stormwater conveyance.
Wastewater treatment plant facilities such as raw wastewater pumping, preliminary
treatment, and outfall works are also primarily designed to meet maximum rates of
flow and are assigned to the capacity component. Sedimentation, recirculation
pumping, and disinfection facilities are assigned to the volume cost component.
Aeration and trickling filter facilities are allocated to the BOD cost component to
reflect the primary cost causative factor influencing their design. Sludge treatment
facilities are assumed to be equally related to the BOD and suspended solids cost
components. Administration and general plant facilities are allocated to plant
components on the basis of the allocation of all other plant components.
Test year plant investment, on an original cost less depreciation value basis, is
projected total $1.46 billion in 2008. The allocation of total plant investment (Line 23)
is used as the basis to allocate total routine capital improvements (Line 24 - presented
in Table 3-10, Line 3), connection fee revenue (Line 28 – presented in Table 3-10, Line
13), the change in available fund balances (Line 29 – presented in Table 3-10, Line 14),
debt service (Line 31 - presented in Table 3-10, Line 2) , and annual depreciation
expense (Line 33). Cash financed improvements (presented in Table 3-10, Line 4) are
first allocated to collection system (Line 25), wastewater treatment (Line 26), and land
and general plant (Line 27) categories based on the relative projected
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-24
Table 3-11
Allocation of Estimated Wastewater Plant
Investment and Other Capital Costs
to Functional Cost Components
Test Year 2008
(1)(2)(3)(4) (5)
Line Suspended
No. Description Total (a) Volume Capacity Solids BOD________________________________________________________________________
$$$$$
Collection System
H-6
1 Sanitary Sewers 688,176,000 688,176,000
2 Combined Sewers 72,102,000 72,102,000
3 Pumping Stations 62,537,000 62,537,000____________ __________
4 Total Collection System 822,815,000 822,815,000
Treatment Facilities
5 Raw Wastewater Pumping 84,735,000 84,735,000
6 Preliminary Treatment 15,303,000 15,303,000
7 Primary Sedimentation 11,779,000 11,779,000
8 Aeration/Reaeration/Nitrification 85,640,000 85,640,000
9 Basins
10 Equipment
11 Secondary Sedimentation 56,828,000 56,828,000
12 Recirculation Pumping 3,706,000 3,706,000
13 Chlorination 1,810,000 1,810,000
14 Lagoons & Aeration Equipment 3,964,000 3,964,000
15 Sludge Treatment 50,955,000 25,478,000 25,477,000
16 Dewatering 18,578,000 9,289,000 9,289,000
17 Incineration 56,622,000 28,311,000 28,311,000
18 By Pass & Outfall Works 16,794,000 16,794,000
19 Administrative & General (b)188,876,000 34,423,000 54,256,000 29,293,000 70,904,000____________ __________ __________ __________ __________
20 Total Treatment Facilities 595,590,000 108,546,000 171,088,000 92,371,000 223,585,000____________ __________ __________ __________ __________
21 Subtotal Estimated Plant Investment 1,418,405,000 108,546,000 993,903,000 92,371,000 223,585,000
22 Land & General Plant (c)40,448,000 3,095,000 28,343,000 2,634,000 6,376,000____________ __________ __________ __________ __________
23 Total Estimated Plant Investment 1,458,853,000 111,641,000 1,022,246,000 95,005,000 229,961,000
24 Routine Capital Improvements (d)6,394,600 489,400 4,480,800 416,400 1,008,000
Cash Financing of Improvements
25 Collection System 43,860,800 43,860,800
26 Wastewater Treatment (e)20,985,200 3,824,500 6,028,200 3,254,600 7,877,900
27 Land & General Plant (c)0 0 0 0 0
28 Less: Connection Fee Revenue 4,646,000 355,500 3,255,500 302,600 732,400
29 Change in Funds Available (d)(4,000) (300) (2,800) (300) (600)__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
30 Net Cash Financed Capital Costs 66,598,600 3,958,700 51,117,100 3,368,700 8,154,100
31 Debt Service (d)26,842,700 2,054,100 18,809,200 1,748,100 4,231,300__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
32 Total Net Capital Costs 93,441,300 6,012,800 69,926,300 5,116,800 12,385,400
33 Annual Depreciation Expense (d)56,608,100 4,332,000 39,666,400 3,686,500 8,923,200__________ __________ __________ __________ __________
34 Net Other Capital Cost 36,833,200 1,680,800 30,259,900 1,430,300 3,462,200
(a) Excludes $623,912,000 of investment related to the Stormwater system.
(b) Allocated based on all other Treatment Facilities.
(c) Allocated based on Line 21.
(d) Allocated based on Line 23.
(e) Allocated based on Line 20.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-25
test year capital improvement expenditures for the three categories. Cash financed
collection system costs are allocated directly to the capacity cost component,
wastewater treatment costs are allocated based on total treatment plant investment
(Line 20), and land and general plant costs are allocated on the basis of all plant
investment except land and general plant (Line 21). The cash financed improvements
are reduced by the connection fee revenue (Line 28) and change in fund balance (Line
29) to derive the net cash financed capital costs (Line 30). These costs plus debt service
costs projected for the test year (Line 31) equal the total net capital costs as shown on
Line 32 in Table 3-11 and as previously presented on Line 17 of Table 3-10. The net
capital costs were then reduced by depreciation expense on Line 33, with the result
equal to the amount of net other capital costs on Line 34.
Allocation of Operation and Maintenance Expense
Operating expense items are allocated directly to appropriate cost components based
primarily on information provided by District staff. Costs related to treatment
facilities are first allocated to the individual plant facilities and then allocated to cost
components in generally the same manner as plant investment. General and
administrative cost elements are allocated based on the allocation of the direct costs
with which they are most nearly related.
Operation and maintenance cost distribution percentages are shown in Table 3-12
and are based on detailed analyses of staff time and other elements of cost. All
operating costs originally attributable to combined sewers by District staff have been
allocated 50 percent to sanitary sewers (capacity) and 50 percent to stormwater sewers
(which are not shown on this table). The resulting allocation of projected operation
and maintenance expense for fiscal year 2008 is shown in Table 3-13. The total
operation and maintenance expense on Line 26 agrees with the amount from Table 3-
10, Line 1. The Other Revenue on Lines 28 through 30 was previously presented on
Table 3-10, Lines 8 through 10. Interest Income on Line 31 was previously shown on
Table 3-10, Line 12. The Full Year Rate Adjustment on Line 32 was previously shown
on Table 3-10, Line 15. The Stormwater Support amount shown on Line 34 was
previously presented on Table 3-10, Line 6. The net operation and maintenance
expense of $126,186,000 is presented on Line 35 and equals the amount presented in
Table 3-10, Line 17.
The annual wastewater utility’s share of the operating reserve requirement (Line 27)
is allocated to cost components in proportion to the allocation of total wastewater
operation and maintenance expense (Line 26). This requirement was previously
shown in Table 3-10, Line 5.
Portions of the total operation and maintenance expense are partially funded from
revenue derived from sources other than wastewater charges. Costs met from other
revenue are allocated to functional cost components in a manner similar to that for
operation and maintenance expenses.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
F AC: inal February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates 3-26 |\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-12Percentage of Wastewater Operation and MaintenanceExpense by Functional Cost ComponentsTest Year 2008Direct_______________________________________________________________________________Non-LineSuspendedAll ResidentialNo. DescriptionTotal Indirect Total Volume Capacity Solids BOD Customers Customers_______________________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$$$$Personnel Services1 Administration and Management (a)0.0% 100.0% 0.0%2 Engineering100.0% 5.4% 94.6% 5.7% 43.3% 0.5% 0.5%50.1% Operations3 Collection System100.0% 0.0% 100.0%100.0%4 Pump Stations100.0% 0.0% 100.0%100.0%5 Wastewater Treatment100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 18.3% 12.1% 28.8% 40.8%6 Support100.0% 20.8% 79.2% 6.9% 44.2% 10.9% 15.4% 22.5%7 Finance100.0% 48.8% 51.2%100.0%8 Information Systems100.0% 90.3% 9.7%100.0%9 Average100.0%7.6% 50.4% 9.6% 13.6% 5.1% 13.6%All Other10 Administration and Management (a)0.0% 100.0% 0.0%11 Engineering100.0% 0.4% 99.6% 5.5% 78.1% 0.5% 0.5%15.4% Operations12 Collection System100.0% 0.0% 100.0%100.0%13 Pump Stations100.0% 0.0% 100.0%100.0%14 Wastewater Treatment100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 17.9% 17.4% 25.4% 39.3%15 Support100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 11.9% 44.7% 16.9% 26.1% 0.5%16 Finance100.0% 9.3% 90.7%100.0%17 Information Systems100.0% 90.3% 9.7%100.0%18 Average100.0%7.8% 34.3% 10.4% 16.0% 30.1% 1.4%
F AC:inal February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates 3-27 |\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-12 (Continued)Percentage of Wastewater Operation and MaintenanceExpense by Functional Cost ComponentsTest Year 2008Direct_______________________________________________________________________________Non-LineSuspendedAll ResidentialNo. DescriptionTotal Indirect Total Volume Capacity Solids BOD Customers Customers_______________________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$$$$UtilitiesOperations19 Pump Stations100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 56.0% 44.0%20 Wastewater Treatment100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 16.9% 16.9% 23.0% 43.2%21 Average100.0%23.6% 21.6% 19.0% 35.7% 0.0% 0.0%22 Water Backup Program100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100%0.0%23 Headquarters Building100.0% 0.0% 100.0%100.0%24 Total O&M Expense100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 14.2% 39.5% 10.3% 16.0% 12.3% 7.8%25 Allocations to Operating Reserve100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 14.2% 39.5% 10.3% 16.0% 12.3% 7.8%Less Costs Met From Other Revenue Other Revenue26 Wastewater Revenue Adjustments100.0%90.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0%27 Connection and Other Fees100.0%21.0% 19.9% 28.5% 26.2% 0.0% 4.4%28 Miscellaneous Revenue100.0%25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0% 0.0%29 Interest Income100.0%11.3% 31.5% 8.2% 12.7% 30.0% 6.3%30 Stormwater Program Revenues0.0%31 Full Year Rate Adjustment100.0%17.7% 49.4% 12.9% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0%32 Average100.0%-24.0% 135.8% 19.6% 42.5% -62.9% -11.1%33 Net O&M Expense100.0%12.0% 47.1% 9.7% 15.3% 9.3% 6.7%(a) Includes Board of Trustees, Rate Commission, Civil Service Commission, Office of Secretary - Treasurer, Executive Director, Office of General Counsel, and Office of Human Resources.
F AC:inal February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates 3-28 |\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-13Allocation of Wastewater Operation and MaintenanceExpense to Functional Cost ComponentsTest Year 2008Direct_______________________________________________________________________________Non-LineSuspendedAll ResidentialNo. DescriptionTotal Indirect Total Volume Capacity Solids BOD Customers Customers__________________________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$$$ $Personnel Services1 Administration and Management (a) 8,244,400 8,244,40002 Engineering13,421,000 724,700 12,696,300 723,600 5,495,000 59,700 59,7006,358,300 Operations3 Collection System12,632,7000 12,632,70012,632,7004 Pump Stations2,356,2000 2,356,2002,356,2005 Wastewater Treatment14,312,5000 14,312,500 2,619,200 1,731,800 4,122,000 5,839,5006 Support3,603,900 749,600 2,854,300 197,700 1,262,300 311,200 440,900 642,2007 Finance2,887,700 1,409,000 1,478,7001,478,7008 Information Systems2,848,800 2,572,500 276,300276,300__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 9 Total60,307,200 13,700,200 46,607,000 3,540,500 23,478,000 4,492,900 6,340,100 2,397,200 6,358,300All Other10 Administration and Management (a) 5,483,000 5,483,000011 Engineering2,097,800 8,400 2,089,400 115,000 1,631,800 10,400 10,400321,800 Operations12 Collection System2,684,7000 2,684,7002,684,70013 Pump Stations1,062,1000 1,062,1001,062,10014 Wastewater Treatment7,496,7000 7,496,700 1,341,900 1,304,400 1,904,200 2,946,20015 Support3,056,7000 3,056,700 363,000 1,366,300 515,100 797,000 15,30016 Finance7,632,700 707,200 6,925,5006,925,50017 Information Systems1,292,200 1,166,900 125,300125,300__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 18 Total30,805,900 7,365,500 23,440,400 1,819,900 8,049,300 2,429,700 3,753,600 7,066,100 321,800__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 19 Subtotal Direct Expenses70,047,400 5,360,400 31,527,300 6,922,600 10,093,700 9,463,300 6,680,10020 Total Indirect (b)21,065,700 21,065,700 1,612,100 9,481,400 2,081,900 3,035,500 2,845,900 2,008,900
F AC:inal February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates 3-29 |\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-13 (Continued)Allocation of Wastewater Operation and MaintenanceExpense to Functional Cost ComponentsTest Year 2008Direct_______________________________________________________________________________Non-LineSuspendedAll ResidentialNo. DescriptionTotal Indirect Total Volume Capacity Solids BOD Customers Customers__________________________________________________________________________________________________$$$$$$$$ $UtilitiesOperations21 Pump Stations2,209,5002,209,500 1,237,300 972,20022 Wastewater Treatment10,590,10010,590,100 1,789,800 1,789,700 2,435,700 4,574,900__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 23 Subtotal12,799,60012,799,600 3,027,100 2,761,900 2,435,700 4,574,900 24 Water Backup Program5,700,0005,700,000 5,700,00025 Headquarters Building1,300,7001,300,7001,300,700__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 26 Total O&M Expense110,913,400110,913,400 15,699,600 43,770,600 11,440,200 17,704,100 13,609,900 8,689,000027 Add't to Operating Reserve (c)1,302,5001,302,500 184,500 514,000 134,300 207,900 159,800 102,000Less Costs Met From Other Revenue Other Revenue28 Wastewater Revenue Adjustments2,024,3002,024,300 1,821,900000 202,400029 Connection and Other Fees2,160,5002,160,500 453,700 429,900 615,100 566,8000 95,00030 Miscellaneous Revenue738,100738,100 184,500000 553,600031 Interest Income (d)4,129,0004,129,000 466,300 1,300,200 339,800 525,900 1,238,700 258,10032 Full Year Rate Adjustment (e)(12,223,000)(12,223,000) (2,165,500) (6,037,500) (1,578,000) (2,442,000)__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 33 Total(3,171,100)(3,171,100) 760,900 (4,307,400) (623,100) (1,349,300) 1,994,700 353,10034 Stormwater Program Support10,799,00010,799,00010,799,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 35 Adjusted Net O&M Expense126,186,000126,186,000 15,123,200 59,391,000 12,197,600 19,261,300 11,775,000 8,437,900(a)(b) Allocated based on Line 19.(c) Allocated based on Line 26.(d) Allocated 30.0% of interest income directly to All Customers based on relative revenue receipts with remainder allocated based on Line 26 less All Customer costs.(e) Allocated based on Line 26 less All Customers, and Nonresidential Customers costs.Includes Board of Trustees, Rate Commission, Civil Service Commission, Office of Secretary - Treasurer, Executive Director, Office of General Counsel, and Office of Human Resources.
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-30
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
3.7 Distribution of Costs to Customer Classes
The total cost responsibility for each customer class is determined by developing unit costs of
service for each cost component and applying the unit costs to the respective service
requirements of each class. In accomplishing this, each customer class is allocated the share of
volume, capacity, strength, and customer costs for which it is responsible.
Customer Classifications
Customers are divided into customer classes that represent a particular type of service
requirement or load on the system. The residential customer class includes residents living in
single family and multifamily dwellings. The non-residential class includes all customers
(commercial, government, industrial, etc.) not included in the residential class. Wastewater
strengths in excess of the normal wastewater strength threshold levels, which are contributed
by a portion of the non-residential class, are segregated into a separate surcharge customer
group.
Units of Service
The determination of customer class responsibility for costs of service requires that the
customer classes be allocated a portion of the volume, capacity, strength, and customer costs
of service according to their respective service requirements. Service requirements or units of
service for the respective customer classes are developed in Table 3-14 for fiscal year 2008.
Annual contributed wastewater volume and number of bills are based on the projected
number of wastewater customers served by the District:
As previously discussed, billable wastewater volume for unmetered customers is based on
indoor water usage values while billable wastewater volume for metered customers is based
on water usage during the best equated period. Total wastewater volume as shown in Table
3-14 includes this contributed or billable wastewater volume and infiltration/inflow.
Infiltration/inflow includes flow entering
the sewer system from illegal roof and
foundation drains, groundwater
infiltration through sewer service pipe and
main joints, and stormwater runoff or
inflow from the combined sewer system.
District-wide infiltration/inflow is
approximately 50 percent of the total
wastewater flow reaching the treatment
plants on an annual basis (Table 3-14,
column 2).
The Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study, (CDM,
January 2005), identified 17 percent of the wet weather
volume as being treated at the plant, with an
additional 16 percent of the wet weather volume not
being treated (a total of 33 percent of the flow handled
by the conveyance system was identified as wet
weather related). The distinction is thus made between
wet weather volume and treated volume, with wet
weather being a greater volume and thus a smaller
percentage is actually treated. The remainder of the 50
percent I/I volume (50 percent less 17 percent) is
primarily attributed to infiltration which occurs
throughout the year during both wet and dry weather
conditions due to groundwater entering the sewers
through cracks and joints.
Each customer class should bear its
proportionate share of the costs associated
with infiltration/inflow, as the wastewater
system must be adequate to convey and
process the total wastewater flow. The
amount of I/I to be recovered directly from wastewater service charges is assigned to
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates A 3-31 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-14Wastewater Units of ServiceTest Year 2008(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)VolumeCapacityWastewater StrengthNon-____________________________________________________________________________________LineInfiltration TotalInfiltration Total SuspendedAll ResidentialNo. Customer ClassContributed Inflow Treated Contributed Inflow Treated Solids BODCustomers Customers______________________________________________________________________________________________________Ccf Ccf Ccf Ccf/day Ccf/day Ccf/day pounds pounds bills billsJ-7J-7(1) + (2)J-7 J-7(4) + (5)J-6J-6 J-5Metered Customers1 Single Family27,470,500 38,599,800 66,070,300130,203 443,105 573,307 54,897,100 36,019,400 3,621,0602 Multifamily10,137,200 7,614,800 17,752,00048,048 87,414 135,461 18,189,800 12,257,700 250,9003 Non-Residential29,304,200 19,462,600 48,766,800138,894 223,420 362,314 51,786,90035,036,400 307,802 307,802__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 4 Total66,911,900 65,677,200 132,589,100 317,144 753,938 1,071,082 124,873,800 83,313,500 4,179,762 307,802Unmetered Customers5 Single Family7,231,800 8,750,900 15,982,70034,277 100,456 134,732 14,011,900 9,262,200 722,2906 Multifamily5,059,000 4,774,700 9,833,700 23,978 54,811 78,789 9,381,700 6,269,300 284,750__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 7 Total12,290,800 13,525,600 25,816,400 58,255 155,266 213,522 23,393,60015,531,500 1,007,0408Surcharge21,700,000 20,600,000Total System9 Single Family34,702,300 47,350,700 82,053,000164,479 543,560 708,039 68,909,000 45,281,600 4,343,35010 Multifamily15,196,200 12,389,500 27,585,70072,026 142,225 214,250 27,571,500 18,527,000 535,65011 Non-Residential29,304,200 19,462,600 48,766,800138,894 223,420 362,314 51,786,90035,036,400 307,802 307,80212 Surcharge21,700,000 20,600,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 13 Total79,202,700 79,202,800 158,405,500 375,399 909,205 1,284,604 169,967,400 119,445,000 5,186,802 307,802Ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-32
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
customer classes on the premise that 40 percent of the total is distributed on the basis
of the number of customers within each class, with the remaining 60 percent
allocated on the basis of contributed wastewater volume.
In order to reconcile the recommendations per the Wet Weather Flow Cost Allocation Study , (CDM, January
2005) with the rate model methodology used in designing the proposed wastewater rate, an adjustment was
made from 60 percent customer related to 40 percent customer related. The volume component was also
adjusted for the same reason from 40 percent to 60 percent. The rationale involved with this adjustment
appears below:
The billed versus treated volume is currently 50/50. In order to adjust the 33 percent wet weather volume (I/I)
and the 60 percent customer/capacity allocation, the following relationship was established between the two:
33% times 60% = 20% of the I/I costs are related to customer/capacity
In order to match this percent (20%), using the billed versus treated volume of 50 percent, the
customer/capacity percent would be 40 percent, resulting in the same proportion of the I/I costs for
customer/capacity per the calculation below:
50% times 40% = 20% of the I/I costs are related to customer/capacity
The responsibility for collection system capacity related costs varies with the peak
flow of both contributed wastewater and infiltration/inflow attributable to each
customer class. Infiltration/inflow is estimated to have a peak to average flow ratio
of 2.4 times the contributed wastewater volume.
The BOD and suspended solids responsibility of each customer class is based on
average strength concentrations and contributed wastewater volume for each class.
Recent operational statistics for the existing wastewater treatment plants indicate that
the average strength of wastewater is 120 milligrams per liter (mg/l) for BOD and 170
mg/l for suspended solids. Deducting allowances for infiltration/inflow and excess
strength units subject to surcharge from the total wastewater strength units, results in
an average contributed wastewater strength of approximately 175 mg/l for BOD and
250 mg/l for suspended solids. Average contributed wastewater strengths are
estimated to be the same for all customer classes recognizing that the type of
residential and non-residential development in the District suggests that differences
in average wastewater strengths among the classes are not likely to be significant.
The projection of suspended solids and BOD strengths in excess of normal strength
limits are assigned to the surcharge customer classification, and are shown separately.
The projections are based on extra strength data maintained and utilized by the
District for current surcharge billings.
The costs of service to be recovered from wastewater charges include net operation
and maintenance costs from Table 3-13, Line 35, and total net capital costs from Table
3-11, Line 32. For purposes of this report, replacement costs are assumed to be equal
to the District’s projected annual depreciation expense for the test year. Other capital
costs (Table 3-11, Line 34) are equal to the total test year net capital costs shown in
Table 3-11 less the annual depreciation expense (Table 3-11, Line 33). These costs are
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-33
distributed to the various customer classes by application of unit costs of service to
respective service requirements, as shown in Table 3-15. Unit costs of service for each
functional cost component are based on the total cost divided by the total applicable
units of service. Applying these common unit costs of service to the respective service
requirements of each customer class determines the total allocated cost of service for
each class. This allocated cost of service is compared to revenue under existing rates
on Table 3-16 to show the magnitude of indicated revenue increases for each
customer class on a cost of service basis.
3.8 Wastewater Rate Adjustments
The principal consideration in designing wastewater rate schedules is to establish
charges to customers that are reasonably commensurate with the cost of providing
wastewater service. Theoretically, the only method of assessing entirely equitable
charges for wastewater service would be determination of each customer's bill based
upon the customer's particular service requirements. Since this is impractical for the
thousands of customers served by the District, schedules of rates are normally
designed to meet average conditions for groups of customers having similar service
requirements. Practicality also requires that rates be reasonably simple to apply,
recover costs proportionately from all classes, and be subject to as few
misinterpretations as possible.
Existing Wastewater Rates
The existing schedule of rates for wastewater service, shown in Table 3-2, Subsection
3.1, became effective on July 1, 2005. The rates consist of monthly service charges, a
uniform volume charge, and extra strength surcharges for BOD in excess of 300 mg/l
or COD in excess of 600 mg/l and suspended solids in excess of 300 mg/l. The service
charges include a billing and collection charge and system availability charge that are
applicable to all customer classes and a compliance charge that is only applicable to
non-residential customers. The uniform volume charge for metered customers is also
applied to the room and plumbing fixture based wastewater volumes recognized for
billing unmetered customers.
Proposed Wastewater Rates
The proposed wastewater rates presented in Table 3-17 are based on cost of service
and policy considerations. These values are designed to increase wastewater revenue
by 13 percent. They are assumed to be effective on December 1, 2007 (during the
District’s fiscal year 2008). Table 3-17 presents the proposed rates in two components.
The user charge portion of the proposed rates recovers the operation, maintenance,
and replacement costs of the wastewater system. This portion of the wastewater rates
is subject to the proportionate cost recovery requirements of EPA’s user charge
regulations. The capital charge portion of the wastewater rates recovers all other
capital costs not recovered by the replacement component of the operation,
maintenance and replacement (OM&R) charge. Table 3-18 shows the proposed
wastewater rates developed in Table 3-17 for fiscal year 2008 by customer class.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates A 3-34 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc Table 3-15Allocation of Wastewater Cost of Service to Customer ClassesTest Year 2008(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)LineWastewater Strength AllNon-Residential____________________No. DescriptionTotal Volume Capacity TSS BOD Customers Customers____________________________________________________________________________Costs of Service1 Net O&M Expense I-2 126,186,000 15,123,200 59,391,000 12,197,600 19,261,300 11,775,000 8,437,9002 Net Replacements I-4 56,608,100 4,332,000 39,666,400 3,686,500 8,923,200__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 3 Total OM&R182,794,100 19,455,200 99,057,400 15,884,100 28,184,500 11,775,000 8,437,9004 Net Capital Costs I-4 36,833,200 1,680,800 30,259,900 1,430,300 3,462,200__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 5 Total219,627,300 21,136,000 129,317,300 17,314,400 31,646,700 11,775,000 8,437,900 Number of Units6 Units of Service J-8158,405,500 1,284,604 169,967,400 119,445,000 5,186,802 307,802Ccf Ccf/day pounds pounds Bills BillsUnit Costs - $/unit7OM&RLine 3 / Line 60.12282 77.11124 0.09345 0.23596 2.27018 27.413408TotalLine 5 / Line 60.13343 100.66707 0.10187 0.26495 2.27018 27.41340Single FamilyMetered9 Units of Service66,070,300 573,307 54,897,100 36,019,400 3,621,06010 Cost - $Line 9 x Line 889,885,000 8,815,700 57,713,200 5,592,300 9,543,300 8,220,500Unmetered11 Units of Service15,982,700 134,732 14,011,900 9,262,200 722,29012 Cost - $Line 11 x Line 821,216,800 2,132,600 13,563,100 1,427,400 2,454,000 1,639,700
Final February 2007 Section 3 Wastewater Rates Table 3-15 (Continued)Allocation of Wastewater Cost of Service to Customer ClassesTest Year 2008(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)(6)(7)LineWastewater Strength AllNon-Residential____________________No. DescriptionTotal Volume Capacity TSS BOD Customers Customers____________________________________________________________________________Multi FamilyMetered13 Units of Service17,752,000 135,461 18,189,800 12,257,700 250,90014 Cost - $Line 13 x Line 821,675,400 2,368,600 13,636,500 1,853,000 3,247,700 569,600Unmetered15 Units of Service9,833,700 78,789 9,381,700 6,269,300 284,75016 Cost - $Line 15 x Line 812,506,700 1,312,100 7,931,500 955,700 1,661,000 646,400Non-Residential17 Units of Service48,766,800 362,314 51,786,900 35,036,400 307,802 307,80218 Cost - $Line 17 x Line 866,675,000 6,507,000 36,473,000 5,275,500 9,282,800 698,800 8,437,900Surcharge19 Units of Service21,700,000 20,600,00020 Cost - $Line 19 x Line 87,668,4002,210,500 5,457,900__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 21 Total Cost - $219,627,300 21,136,000 129,317,300 17,314,400 31,646,700 11,775,000 8,437,900Ccf - hundred cubic feetA 3-35 C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-36
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Table 3-16
Comparison of Wastewater Cost of Service
With Revenue Under Existing Rates
Test Year 2008
(1) (2) (3)
Revenue
Allocated Under Indicated
Line Cost of Existing Revenue
No. Customer Class Service Rates Increase____
________________________________________
$$%
Metered Customers J-9 B-15 (1) / (2)
1 Single Family 89,885,000 77,853,000 15.5
2 Multifamily 21,675,400 20,330,400 6.6
3 Non-Residential (a)74,343,400 66,435,400 11.9__________ __________
4 Total 185,903,800 164,618,800 12.9
Unmetered Customers
5 Single Family 21,216,800 18,318,700 15.8
6 Multifamily 12,506,700 11,422,800 9.5__________ __________
7 Total 33,723,500 29,741,500 13.4
Total System
8 Single Family 111,101,800 96,171,700 15.5
9 Multifamily 34,182,100 31,753,200 7.6
10 Non-Residential 74,343,400 66,435,400 11.9__________ __________
11 Total 219,627,300 194,360,300 13.0
(a) Includes Cost of Service associated with Surcharges.
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-37
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Table 3-17
Proposed Wastewater Rates
User/Capital Charge Breakdown
(Rates Effective December 1, 2007)
Total
Line User Capital Wastewater
No.Type of Monthly Charge Charge Charge Charge
______________________________________________________
Base Charge - $/Bill
1 Billing & Collection Charge 2.30 0.00 2.30
2 System Availability Charge 6.62 1.78 8.40_____ _____ _____
3 Total Base (Residential) Service Charge 8.92 1.78 10.70
4 Compliance Charge - $/Bill (a)27.40 0.00 27.40_____ _____ _____
5 Total Nonresidential Service Charge 36.32 1.78 38.10
Volume Charge
6 Metered - $/Ccf 1.53 0.35 1.88
Unmetered - $/Bill
7 Each Room 1.00 0.23 1.23
8 Each Water Closet 3.77 0.82 4.59
9 Each Bath 3.14 0.69 3.83
0 Each Separate Shower 3.14 0.69 3.83
Extra Strength Surcharges - $/ton (a)
1 Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 186.91 31.99 218.90
2 BOD over 300 mg/l 471.93 57.97 529.90
3 COD over 600 mg/l 235.97 28.99 264.95
Ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
mg/l - milligram per liter
a) Applicable only to nonresidential customers.
1
1
1
1
(
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-38
Table 3-18
Proposed Wastewater Rates
by Customer Class
(Rates Effective December 1, 2007)
Metered_____________________
Line Unmetered Non-
No Type of Monthly Charge Residential Residential Residential____________________________________________________
$$$
Base Charge - $/Bill
1 Billing and Collection Charge 2.30 2.30 2.30
2 System Availability Charge 8.40 8.40 8.40_____ _____ _____
3 Total Base (Residential) Service Charge 10.70 10.70 10.70
4 Compliance Charge 27.40_____
5 Total Nonresidential Service Charge 38.10
Volume Charge
6 per Ccf 1.88 1.88
7 per room 1.23
8 per water closet 4.59
9 per bath 3.83
10 per separate shower 3.83
Extra Strength Surcharge - $/ton
11 Suspended Solids over 300mg/l 218.90
12 BOD over 300 mg/l 529.90
13 COD over 600 mg/l 264.95
Ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
mg/l - milligram per liter
Note: Rates for qualified low income residential users are 50 percent of the
regular rates above.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-39
Table 3-19 shows a comparison between existing (fiscal year 2006 and 2007 rates) and
proposed test year 2008 wastewater rates. Wastewater charges currently indicated for
Fiscal Years 2009 through 2012 are also shown in Table 3-19.
Low Income Charges
Wastewater charges applicable to eligible low-income residential customers are
expected to be 50 percent of those presented in Tables 3-17 and 3-18 (i.e., established
as a District policy). The Water Quality Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-4) states that:
"A system of user charges which imposes a lower charge for low-income residential
users (as defined by the Administrator) shall be deemed to be a user charge system
meeting the requirements of clause (A) of this paragraph if the administrator
determines that such system was adopted after public notice and hearing."
The first low-income rate was adopted by the Board of Trustees in 1993 by Ordinance
9031. Current policy defines low income credit eligibility as residential customers that
qualify for home energy assistance through the state's Division of Family Services.
The District is currently developing eligibility criteria which will expand the
availability of low-income assistance to residential customers. The cost impact of the
District’s current low-income program on a typical single family residential customer
not eligible for low-income assistance and discharging 8 Ccf per month of wastewater
is expected to be about $0.11 per month in fiscal year 2008. The impact of the low
income subsidy is calculated by dividing the total revenue subsidy provided to low-
income customers under the proposed rates by the general service volume. This
impact is expected to increase in subsequent years as the District continues to actively
promote this program and increase the number of qualified low-income customers.
Wastewater Revenue Under Proposed Rates
A comparison of allocated cost of service for the 2008 test year with wastewater
revenue under the proposed rates is shown in Table 3-20. As indicated, revenues
under the proposed rates will adequately recover the total cost of service, and
reasonably recovers the allocated cost of service from each customer class. The
variances in revenue as a percent of cost of service from a full 100 percent cost
recovery level are due to the impact of the low-income assistance program and
rounding of wastewater charges.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-40
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Table 3-19
Comparison of Existing and Proposed Wastewater Rates
Line Proposed Wastewater Charges
____________________________________________________________________
No. Type of Monthly Charge Existing 2007 2008 (a) 2009 2010 2011 2012_________________________________________________________________________________
K-1 K-1 K-1 K-1 K-1 K-1 K-1
Base Charge - $/Bill
1 Billing & Collection Charge 0.85 0.85 2.30 2.30 2.45 2.55 2.70
2 System Availability Charge 7.05 7.05 8.40 9.55 10.65 11.70 12.25 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
3 Total Base (Residential) Service Charge 7.90 7.90 10.70 11.85 13.10 14.25 14.95
4 Compliance Charge - $/Bill (b)12.55 12.55 27.40 28.40 29.65 30.90 32.10____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
45.15 47.05
2.59 2.73
5 1.69 1.78
9 6.32 6.67
2 5.27 5.56
2 5.27 5.56
9 260.17 270.74
6 722.36 752.92
3 361.18 376.46
4 21.60 22.65
32 13.37 14.14
5 Total Nonresidential Service Charge 20.45 20.45 38.10 40.25 42.75
Volume Charge
6 Metered - $/Ccf 1.81 1.81 1.88 2.13 2.37
Unmetered - $/Bill
7 Each Room 1.18 1.18 1.23 1.39 1.5
8 Each Water Closet 4.42 4.42 4.59 5.20 5.7
9 Each Bath 3.69 3.69 3.83 4.34 4.8
10 Each Separate Shower 3.69 3.69 3.83 4.34 4.8
Extra Strength Surcharges - $/ton (b)
11 Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 218.90 218.90 218.90 220.54 239.5
12 BOD over 300 mg/l 461.44 461.44 529.90 601.02 659.6
13 COD over 600 mg/l 230.72 230.72 264.95 300.51 329.8
Typical Residential Bill - $/Bill (c)
14 User Charge Portion 21.12 21.12 21.16 20.00 20.7
15 Capital Charge Portion 1.26 1.26 4.58 8.89 11. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
6 34.97 36.7916 Total 22.38 22.38 25.74 28.89 32.0
Ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
mg/l - milligram per liter
(a) 2008 rates effective December 1, 2007.
(b) Applicable only to nonresidential customers.
Final February 2007 Section 3
Wastewater Rates
A 3-41
Table 3-20
Comparison of Wastewater Cost of Service
With Revenue Under Proposed Rates
Test Year 2008
(1) (2) (3)
Revenue Revenue As
Under Allocated a Percent
Line Proposed Cost of of Cost of
No. Customer Class Rates Service Service________________________________________________
$$%
Metered Customers
K-3 J-9 (1) / (2)
1 Single Family 89,842,700 89,885,000 100.0
2 Multifamily 21,742,500 21,675,400 100.3
3 Non-Residential (a)74,620,400 74,343,400 100.4__________ __________
4 Total 186,205,600 185,903,800 100.2
Unmetered Customers
5 Single Family 20,794,189 21,216,800 98.0
6 Multifamily 12,584,893 12,506,700 100.6__________ __________
7 Total 33,379,082 33,723,500 99.0
Total System
8 Single Family 110,636,889 111,101,800 99.6
9 Multifamily 34,327,393 34,182,100 100.4
10 Non-Residential (a)74,620,400 74,343,400 100.4__________ __________
11 Total 219,584,682 219,627,300 100.0
(a) Includes revenue and allocated cost of service associated with
surcharge customers.
C:|\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_3_Final.doc
Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
4.1 General
In order to accomplish the District’s objective to establish a fully funded stormwater
program, there is a transition period during 2007 and 2008, with impervious area
charges proposed for implementation December 1, 2007. Wastewater is assumed to
continue financing a portion of the stormwater costs prior to the implementation of
the stormwater impervious area charge in 2008. Beginning in 2009, it is planned that
the wastewater and stormwater systems be funded independently from one another
and be self-sustaining.
4.2 Existing Stormwater Rates and Taxes
District stormwater revenue is currently derived principally from ad valorem and
dedicated subdistrict ad valorem taxes known as Operation and Maintenance Capital
Improvement’s (OMCI taxes). Other sources of income include revenues from a
minimal flat rate charge of $0.24 per monthly customer bill, interest earnings, late
charges and other operating income. Existing stormwater operating rates for the
District, are presented in Table 4-1. These include administration and stormwater
taxes (in effect since 1954) and a flat charge per bill (in effect since May 11, 1988). No
revenue increases other than minimal periodic increases in assessed property value
associated with the ad valorem taxes have occurred (i.e. the annualized increase in the
ad valorem tax revenue from 2002 to 2006 averaged 2.38 percent). Since 1988, the
growth in other costs due to inflation for the Metropolitan St. Louis area has increased
approximately 62 percent (as measured by the U.S. Average Consumer Price Index for
Urban Wage Earners).
Table 4-1
Existing Stormwater Rates and Taxes
Original Co.
Boundary Type of Monthly Charge City County Annexed
____________________ __________ __________ __________
$ $ $
Flat Charge per Bill 0.24 0.24 0.24
Administrative Tax per $100
Assessed Value (a) 0.0186 0.0186 0.0186
Stormwater Tax per $100
Assessed Value 0.05 0.05
(a)The Administrative Tax has fluctuated between $0.019 per $100 assessed value and $0.02
per $100 assessed value. Revenues have been projected based on $0.0186 per $100
assessed value.
The stormwater revenues consist of monthly flat fee charges and ad valorem taxes for
administration and stormwater operating costs. The application of stormwater ad
A 4-1
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
A 4-2
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
valorem taxes vary according to the stormwater boundaries (City, County and
annexed County areas). An additional revenue source consists of stormwater
dedicated subdistrict assessments (OMCI taxes) which fund projects specific to each
subdistrict’s geographic area.
Flat Rate Charges and Ad Valorem Tax Revenue
A summary of historical and projected stormwater revenues under existing rates is
presented in Table 4-2 for the period 2002 through 2012. The historical stormwater
revenues shown in Table 4-2 were developed from detailed records provided by
District staff. Projected billed stormwater revenues do not include allowances for bad
debt, refunds or billing adjustments. These billing adjustments are reflective within
the Other Operating Revenue shown in Table 2-12, Subsection 2.9.
The flat rate revenue is billed based on the number of customers projected for 2007
through 2012 multiplied times the $0.24 monthly flat stormwater fee.
The Ad Valorem Tax revenue for both the administrative and operating fee
elements is based on the increase in the assessed property values for 2008 through
2012. In order to project these values, the average yearly increase from 2002 through
2006 was applied to the actual value for 2007 and each subsequent year through
2012. The 2007 through 2012 assessed property values were then multiplied by the
administrative and stormwater operating tax rates in calculating the projected ad
valorem tax revenue.
Stormwater OMCI Taxes
A portion of the Stormwater Capital and Improvement and Replacement Plan projects
are funded by Operation and Maintenance Capital Improvement taxes (OMCI). These
are projects that benefit specific geographic areas known as subdistricts. A summary
of historical and projected stormwater OMCI revenues under existing rates is presented
in Table 4-3 for the period 2002 through 2012. The historical stormwater revenues
shown in Table 4-3 are developed from detailed records provided by District staff.
The projected stormwater revenues in Table 4-3 are based on 2007 assessed valuations
adjusted by the average annual increase in assessed value for the previous 5 years.
The annual average increase was extrapolated through 2012 to obtain the future
assessed property values which were then calculated for each geographic subdistrict
area. The stormwater OMCI revenue equals the resulting assessed values times the
tax rates shown for each subdistrict area on Table 4-3.
Final February 2007 Section 4 Stormwater User Charges Table 4-2 Historical and Projected Billed Stormwater Revenue Under Existing Rates and Taxes Line Historical Projected __________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ No. Customer Class 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 ____ _____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ C-10C-10 C-10 C-10 C-10 C-12C-12 C-12 C-12 C-12 C-12 Stormwater User Charge Revenue 1 Flat Rate 1,226,668 1,226,517 1,232,056 1,232,816 1,237,938 1,237,600 1,234,700 1,231,500 1,228,100 1,224,700 1,221,500 Impervious Area Charges 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ad Valorem Taxes 3 Administration 4,069,968 4,271,100 4,266,241 4,698,139 4,601,860 4,787,400 4,914,900 5,042,400 5,169,900 5,297,400 5,424,900 4 Stormwater 6,022,435 6,608,058 6,588,126 6,919,560 6,749,957 7,568,100 7,755,900 7,943,700 8,131,500 8,319,300 8,507,100 ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ 5 Total 11,319,070 12,105,675 12,086,423 12,850,515 12,589,755 13,593,100 13,905,500 14,217,600 14,529,500 14,841,400 15,153,500 A 4-3 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
F A C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\F inal February 2007 Section 4 Stormwater User Charges 4-4 eb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc Table 4-3 Historical and Projected Stormwater OMCI Revenue Under Existing Rates and Taxes Historical Projected Line ______________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ No.Subdistrict2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1 Coldwater Cr. ($0.07/$100) 1,447,686 1,477,498 1,483,563 1,482,672 1,525,934 1,599,600 1,628,300 1,657,000 1,685,700 1,714,400 1,743,100 2 Wedgewood ($0.06/$100) 24,457 24,202 25,599 26,383 28,330 33,600 34,700 35,800 36,900 38,000 39,000 3 Upper Paddock Cr. ($0.06/$100) 17,971 19,156 18,714 18,760 20,831 21,300 21,500 21,700 21,900 22,000 22,200 4 Paddock Cr. ($0.06/$100) 80,340 81,146 82,484 82,536 92,257 93,400 94,300 95,200 96,100 97,000 97,900 5 Fountain Cr. ($0.10/$100) 112,274 114,330 115,371 117,383 131,107 134,400 135,100 135,800 136,500 137,200 137,900 6 Maline Creek ($0.07/$100) 411,292 419,525 417,656 430,655 445,722 469,100 471,200 473,300 475,400 477,500 479,600 7 Black Jack-Dellwood ($0.06/$100) 135,111 134,462 136,195 141,060 146,409 150,100 151,000 151,900 152,800 153,700 154,600 8 Watkins Cr. ($0.06/$100) 93,229 87,627 89,305 91,981 94,877 95,100 95,700 96,300 96,900 97,500 98,100 9 Sugar Cr. Res ($0.063/$100) 166,685 174,676 191,957 203,621 216,404 238,900 251,700 264,600 277,500 290,400 303,200 10 Deer Creek ($0.06/$100) 1,854,961 1,847,565 1,937,889 1,977,280 2,101,960 2,232,200 2,304,200 2,376,200 2,448,200 2,520,200 2,592,200 11 Clayton Central ($0.06/$100) 187,547 197,406 198,150 202,957 184,064 212,900 220,100 227,300 234,500 241,700 248,900 12 Creve Coeur/Frontenac ($0.05/$100) 232,613 223,561 236,262 247,669 252,882 265,000 274,500 284,000 293,500 303,000 312,500 13 Black Creek ($0.06/$100) 722,550 729,123 762,953 770,930 788,464 873,300 900,300 927,300 954,300 981,300 1,008,300 14 University City RDP ($0.07/$100) 580,324 579,846 603,599 618,579 651,082 676,600 692,700 708,800 724,900 741,000 757,100 15 Gravois Creek ($0.06/$100) 825,786 834,842 872,601 885,859 958,305 1,007,600 1,037,600 1,067,600 1,097,600 1,127,600 1,157,600 16 Loretta-Joplin ($0.06/$100) 12,511 12,491 12,946 13,733 15,337 15,000 15,200 15,400 15,600 15,700 15,900 17 N. Affton Area ($0.06/$100) 36,799 36,654 38,531 39,296 43,800 44,000 45,200 46,400 47,600 48,800 50,000 18 Wellston ($0.08/$100) 36,272 34,758 35,158 35,984 35,677 36,700 35,600 34,600 33,600 32,500 31,500 19 Seminary Branch-RDP ($0.06/$100) 156,255 155,235 169,981 165,118 183,575 185,700 190,800 195,900 201,000 206,100 211,200 20 Marlborough ($0.04/$100) 21,485 21,312 22,313 21,680 24,025 24,600 25,000 25,400 25,900 26,300 26,800 21 Shrewsbury-RDP ($0.06/$100) 13,913 13,621 14,071 15,138 16,893 17,100 17,500 17,900 18,400 18,800 19,200 ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ 22 Total 7,170,061 7,219,036 7,465,298 7,589,274 7,957,935 8,426,200 8,642,200 8,858,400 9,074,800 9,290,700 9,506,800
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
4.3 Stormwater Capital and Operating Revenue
Requirements
It is the District’s objective to implement a stormwater funding methodology by
which its stormwater customers provide sufficient revenues to meet the cash
requirements to support a basic level of stormwater service. The basic level of
stormwater revenue requirements are composed of operation and maintenance
expenses from Table 2-4, Subsection 2.5; capital expenditures, and the build-up of an
operating reserve for 2009 through 2012. The operation and maintenance expenses
were developed in Section 2. This section will develop the stormwater revenue and
capital requirements, other than vehicles and equipment, since they were previously
presented in Table 2-4, Subsection 2.5, as capital outlay and a stormwater operating
reserve
Proposed Stormwater Capital Improvement and Replacement Program and Cash
Financing of Basic Services
The proposed stormwater capital improvement and replacement program as well as
the cash financing of basic service costs for the period 2007 through 2012 were
obtained from District Staff, and totals $174,025,000.
General stormwater projects equal $23,550,000. The general stormwater projects
consist of such items as stream flow gauges, streambank mitigation, urban stream
stability and watershed facility mapping. It is these general projects that are estimated
to be funded by the stormwater impervious area charge. In addition, District-wide
long range stormwater planning has been budgeted.
The OMCI projects are planned to continue to be financed by subdistrict specific
OMCI taxes and have been separately identified from those projects to be funded by
stormwater impervious area charges. The cost for stormwater projects benefiting from
existing OMCI taxes equals $54,475,000. The plan is to provide customers the
opportunity to obtain enhanced stormwater service through the reconfiguration of the
current 23 OMCI taxing subdistricts into 5 watershed based areas. This
reconfiguration will include voter participation during 2008 and is projected to
expand the total service area eligible for enhanced stormwater services. The potential
revenue generated by this expanded OMCI area is discussed in more detail in
Subsection 4.6. The costs for projects within this expanded area totals $96,000,000.
The proposed OMCI reconfiguration will require voter approval in each individual
OMCI subdistrict. The District will develop a priority project list for each of the
reconfigured OMCI subdistricts. Should voter approval not be received for a given
subdistrict, the previous OMCI subdistrict boundaries shall be retained and the
priority list revised accordingly.
A 4-5
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Proposed Stormwater Operating Reserve
The stormwater operating reserve is designed to stabilize the revenue fund and add a
layer of protection for unexpected events such as an increase in bad debts or for
unplanned expenses. A reserve equal to 60 days of operating and maintenance expense
has been calculated to meet this policy requirement. The operating reserve calculation
is equal to 60 days of the next year’s operation and maintenance expenses plus the
vehicle and equipment capital costs, less the operating reserve requirement from the
previous year.
This calculation was based on the combined 60 day requirement for wastewater and
stormwater, less the previous year’s combined requirement. This operating reserve
amount was then attributed to the stormwater system, as there is currently no
stormwater operating reserve and the goal is to phase-in a 60 day reserve. The 60-day
wastewater operating reserve requirement is met in 2008. The up and down nature of
the annual operating reserve requirement for stormwater is due to the fluctuations in
year-to-year operation and maintenance and vehicle and equipment needs for both
wastewater and stormwater. The stormwater operating reserve requirement is
presented below:
Stormwater Operating Reserve (a)
Fiscal Year Ending June 30
________________________________________________________
____
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
______
__
______
__
_______
_ ________ ________ ________
$ $ $ $ $ $
Annual Requirement 0 0 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,200
780,100
1,813,200
2,813,500
3,459,700 Cumulative Balance 0 0
(a) 60 days of next year’s operating requirements.
Proposed Stormwater Revenue Requirement
Table 4-4 presents a summary of all existing stormwater revenue streams and
proposed revenue requirements for 2007 through 2012 in a pro forma cash flow
format.
Lines 1 through 3 present the projected stormwater revenues based on the existing
rates and taxes from Lines 1 through 4 in Table 4-2. Line 4 presents Other Revenue
from Table 2-12, Line 20. Line 5, Interest Income from the operating reserve fund, is
based on the average of the beginning of year and end of year balances times a 4
percent interest rate. Line 6 equals the current level of funds required for stormwater
support from the wastewater fund in 2007 and 2008 from Table 3-9, Line 18. Line 7
equals the total existing stormwater operating revenues supporting the District’s
proposed stormwater program for 2007 through 2012.
A 4-6
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Table 4-4
Comparison of Projected Stormwater Revenue Under Existing
Rates and Taxes With Projected Revenue Requirements
Line
No.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012______________________________________________
$$$$$$
Stormwater Operations
Stormwater User Charge Revenue
1 Flat Rate 1,237,600 1,234,700 1,231,500 1,228,100 1,224,700 1,221,500
Ad Valorem Taxes
2 Administration 4,787,400 4,914,900 5,042,400 5,169,900 5,297,400 5,424,900
3 Stormwater 7,568,100 7,755,900 7,943,700 8,131,500 8,319,300 8,507,100
4 Other Revenue 756,200 913,100 1,185,800 1,186,900 1,188,100 1,216,900
5 Interest Income - Reserve Funds 0 0 15,600 51,900 92,500 125,500
6 Wastewater Support 19,223,100 10,799,000 0 0 0 0_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
7 Total Stormwater Operating Revenue 33,572,400 25,617,600 15,419,000 15,768,300 16,122,000 16,495,900
8 Operation and Maintenance Expense 29,681,800 35,440,000 42,241,300 46,464,300 48,311,800 50,064,900
9 Capital Outlay 1,701,400 3,965,800 1,205,400 1,240,500 1,277,700 1,315,800
10 Cash Financing of Basic Services (a)2,000,000 4,300,000 5,250,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
11 Additions to Operating Reserve 0 0 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,200_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
12 Total Revenue Requirements - Basic Service 33,383,200 43,705,800 49,476,800 52,737,900 54,589,800 56,026,900
13 Net Annual Balance 189,200 (18,088,200) (34,057,800) (36,969,600) (38,467,800) (39,531,000)
14 Beginning of Year Balance 0 189,200 (17,899,000) (51,956,800) (88,926,400) (127,394,200)
15 End of Year Balance 189,200 (17,899,000) (51,956,800) (88,926,400) (127,394,200) (166,925,200)
OMCI Fund
16 OMCI Revenue Under Existing Rates 8,426,200 8,642,200 8,858,400 9,074,800 9,290,700 9,506,800
17 Interest Income 1,263,600 1,144,600 1,053,000 1,083,600 1,235,600 1,438,500
18 Less: OMCI Existing Major Improvements (a) 13,666,000 12,613,000 12,321,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 3,875,000
19 Net Annual Balance (3,976,200) (2,826,200) (2,409,600) 4,158,400 4,526,300 7,070,300
20 Beginning of Year Balance 38,092,190 34,115,990 31,289,790 28,880,190 33,038,590 37,564,890
21 End of Year Balance 34,115,990 31,289,790 28,880,190 33,038,590 37,564,890 44,635,190
(a) Items are considered a component of the District's Capital Improvement and Replacement Program for 2007 and 2008.
A 4-7
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Line 8, operation and maintenance expense is a summary of the detailed amounts
presented on Table 2-8, Subsection 2.5, Line 19. Line 9 from Line 20 on Table 2-8, is the
amount for capital outlay primarily related to vehicle equipment needed to support
additional stormwater maintenance and repairs. Line 10 is the amount of cash
financing for basic services that relates to stormwater operations. The stormwater
capital outlay and basic services are projected to be financed entirely by cash as
generated by stormwater revenues. Line 11 represents the stormwater operating
reserve, as shown above. Line 12 is the total revenue requirements for operations
projected for the proposed stormwater system for 2007 through 2012 with a basic
service level provided. Line 13 equals the net annual cash flow generated by the
existing stormwater operating revenues. Line 14 equals the beginning of the year
stormwater cash balance, which is updated from the prior year’s ending balance on
Line 15.
The OMCI funding information is presented on Lines 16 through 21, with the OMCI
revenue on Line 16 taken from Table 4-3, Line 22. The interest revenue on Line 17 is
based on the stormwater OMCI cash flows and beginning fund balances. Line 18
equals OMCI Existing Major Improvements represents the use of existing OMCI
subdistrict revenues until fully depleted. Line 19 equals the net annual cash flow for
the OMCI program. Line 20 equals the beginning of the year OMCI cash flow,
updated from the prior year’s ending balance on Line 21.
4.4 Stormwater Credit Policy
Within the existing 370 municipalities across the country that have a user charge for
stormwater, less than 100 have established a firm credit policy. Previously, a
recommendation was discussed with the District’s citizens’ committees that involve
credits ranging from 19 to 29% for non-residential customers that had certain on-site
detention/retention facilities. When these items were discussed, the anticipated
District service was to assume maintenance for residential detention basins. Since
residential detention basins will not be serviced by District, there should be no credit
for detention ponds on non-residential properties.
These discussions also included two other methods of credits that should be eligible
to both residential and non-residential customers. The proposed credits are limited to
50% of the impervious charge based on previous calculations. First, any property that
drains to the Mississippi, Meramec, or Missouri Rivers without the benefit or use of a
tributary waterway or public sewer system would be eligible for this 50% credit.
Second, any property that pays for stormwater service to another entity (i.e., Levee
Districts) would be eligible for a maximum 50% credit based on a dollar for dollar
reduction in the District's charge. Both of these credits would be issued only upon
request and evidence supplied by the property owners.
The best approach for initiating the credit program would be to phase the application
review process over the initial year. Therefore, during the first year, any application
received would be reviewed, and if accepted, would be applied to all fees collected to-
A 4-8
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
date. Beginning in the second year, District would only refund fees to the date the
application was received.
4.5 Development of Impervious Rates
Proposed Stormwater Impervious Area
The District is recommending a new stormwater fee be implemented to provide
sufficient funding to support the projected basic stormwater program revenue
requirements. This new fee will be based upon charging individual customers an
established rate times the quantity of impervious area on their property. Billable
stormwater impervious area is the amount of square footage determined from aerial
photography for residential and non-residential customers. Impervious area was
initially determined from 1996 aerial photography and updated from 2000 aerial
photography. This was done by digitizing the areas by customer type, then recording
the information. Updates of these impervious areas will also be made on an as-needed
basis beginning with 2005 aerial photography. Table 4-5 presents a summary of
impervious area per
customer type for both
City and County
customers based upon
the 1996 and 2000
determinations, projected
through 2012 from City
and County land use
planning estimates.
Figure 4-1 presents a
summary of projected
billable stormwater
impervious area (in 100
square feet).
Figure 4-1
Estimated Impervious Area
Proposed Stormwater Impervious Area Rate Development
The stormwater service charge revenue is proposed to be based upon projected
impervious area with bills initiated December 1, 2007. The projected charges per
hundred square feet of impervious area are calculated and presented on Table 4-6.
Line 1, total revenue requirement, equals the amount from line 12 of Table 4-4. Lines 2
through 4 on Table 4-6 equal lines 1 through 4 of Table 4-2, based on the following
transition schedule:
Elimination of Flat Rate – December 1, 2007 (5 months of revenue for 2008).
Elimination of Stormwater and Administrative Ad Valorem Tax – July 1, 2008.
Lines 5 and 6 equal lines 4 and 5 in Table 4-4.
A 4-9
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Table 4-5
Projected Stormwater Impervious Billable Area (a)
Line
No. Customer Class 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________________________________
100 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft.
City
Single Family
1 General 1,235,600 1,250,500 1,264,000 1,277,100 1,289,900 1,302,300
2 Low Income 25,000 52,700 83,700 115,200 147,300 180,000
3 Low Income - Credit (12,500) (26,350) (41,850) (57,600) (73,650) (90,000)
Multi Family
4 General 754,500 753,600 752,700 751,700 750,800 749,800
5 Low Income 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
6 Low Income - Credit (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500)
7 Commercial 2,641,800 2,644,500 2,647,100 2,649,800 2,652,400 2,655,000
8 Industrial 771,300 771,300 771,300 771,300 771,300 771,300
9 Tax Exempt (b)56,500 56,500 56,500 56,500 56,500 56,500 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
10 Total 5,472,700 5,503,250 5,533,950 5,564,500 5,595,050 5,625,400
County
Single Family
11 General 8,563,500 8,601,800 8,630,800 8,658,400 8,684,500 8,709,100
12 Low Income 36,100 86,800 142,900 199,600 256,900 314,900
13 Low Income - Credit (18,100) (43,400) (71,500) (99,800) (128,500) (157,500)
Multi Family
14 General 1,209,800 1,217,100 1,224,300 1,231,400 1,238,400 1,245,300
15 Low Income 100 100 100 100 100 100
16 Low Income - Credit (50) (50) (50) (50) (50) (50)
17 Commercial 3,596,600 3,703,400 3,809,900 3,916,100 4,022,100 4,127,700
18 Industrial 1,530,100 1,539,800 1,549,500 1,559,300 1,569,000 1,578,700
19 Tax Exempt (b)3,613,100 3,636,900 3,660,600 3,684,300 3,707,900 3,731,400 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
20 Total 18,531,150 18,742,450 18,946,550 19,149,350 19,350,350 19,549,650
_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
22 Total Impervious Area 24,003,850 24,245,700 24,480,500 24,713,850 24,945,400 25,175,050
(a) The impervious area shown in this table is impervious area billed, not actual impervious area.
(b) The Tax Exempt customer class consists of churches, schools and government organizations that, under existing
stormwater funding structure, do not pay ad valorem based taxes.
A 4-10
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Table 4-6
Calculation and Projection of Stormwater Impervious Rates and Revenue
Line
No.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
$$$$$$
1 Total Revenue Requirements 33,383,200 43,705,800 49,476,800 52,737,900 54,589,800 56,026,900
2Less: Flat Rate Revenue (a)(1,237,600)(514,500)0000
3Less: Ad Valorem Administration Tax (b)(4,787,400)(4,914,900)0000
4Less: Ad Valorem Stormwater Tax (b)(7,568,100)(7,755,900)0000
5 Less: Other Revenue (756,200) (913,100) (1,185,800) (1,186,900) (1,188,100) (1,216,900)
6 Less: Interest Income - Reserve Funds 0 0 (15,600) (51,900) (92,500) (125,500)
7 Plus: Stormwater Policy Credit (c)779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000
8 Plus: Bad Debt Provisions (d)189,200 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
9 Net Cost to be met from Charges 19,223,100 31,165,400 50,815,400 54,209,100 56,115,200 57,562,500
10 Projected Impervious Area - 100 sq. ft.24,003,850 24,245,700 24,480,500 24,713,850 24,945,400 25,175,050
11 Projected annual stormwater service charge (e) - $/100 sq. ft.0.0000 1.4400 2.0758 2.1935 2.2495 2.2865
12 Stormwater Service Charge Revenue 0 20,366,400 50,816,600 54,209,800 56,114,700 57,562,800
13Indicated Wastewater Support Requirement 19,223,10010,799,0000000
(a) Flat Rate Charge anticipates 5 month of revenue and is intended to be phased out by December 2007.
(b) Ad Valorem Taxes are expected to be phased out by December 2007.
(c) Ad Valorem Taxes are expected to be phased out by December 2007.
(d) Based on 2.5% of annual Stormwater revenue.
(e) Impervious Area Charges anticipate 7 months of revenue and are intended to be in effect December 2007 and replace revenues now
derived from the flat rate user charges and ad valorem taxes.
A 4-11
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
In order to account for potential credits from the Adjustment & Credit Policy, a 2.5
percent credit was estimated utilizing the stormwater revenue to be generated from
the impervious area charge and is presented on Line 7 in Table 4-6. A stormwater bad
debt provision calculation was estimated to be 2.5 percent of the stormwater
impervious area charge revenue and is presented in Table 4-6 on Line 8.
The combination of a 2.5 percent Adjustment and Credit Policy and a 2.5 percent bad
debt provision is based on similar adjustments and conditions experienced by other
stormwater programs around the country.
Projected impervious area square footage was developed in-house from aerial photos
and is shown on Line 23 in Table 4-5. The annual cost per 100 square feet is calculated
by dividing line 9 by line 10. For 2008, the amount represents 7 months of revenue
billing to reflect the December 1, 2007 implementation of the impervious rate. The
stormwater service charge revenue is calculated by multiplying line 11 times line 10,
with the difference between line 9 and line 12 in 2009 through 2012 due to rounding.
The stormwater program in 2007 and 2008 will continue to be supported by a subsidy
from wastewater revenues until the full implementation of the impervious charge in
2009. This subsidy is shown on Line 13 in Table 4-6 equaling $19,223,100 and
$10,799,000 in 2007 and 2008, respectively.
4.6 OMCI Subdistrict Reconfiguration
Stormwater OMCI Funding
In addition to the recommendation for a stormwater impervious area charge, there are
also changes proposed for the OMCI revenues. OMCI projects are planned to
continue to be financed by OMCI taxes and have been separately identified from
those projects to be funded by impervious area charges. The District is proposing a
reconfiguration of the existing 23 OMCI subdistricts (Figure 4-2) into 5 watershed
based subdistricts as a means to provide enhanced stormwater services as determined
by a vote of each subdistrict’s customers. The proposed 5 subdistrict reconfiguration
would be delineated as follows:
Missouri River
Coldwater Creek
Bissell
River Des Peres
Lower Meramec
This proposed reconfiguration (Figure 4-3) will result in an expansion of the total area
covered by subdistricts and provide the opportunity for more District customers to
obtain enhanced stormwater services by resident vote. It is anticipated the
certification of the OMCI taxes would be completed by September 2008, based on
voter approval in a November 2007 election . The District will develop a priority
project list for each of the reconfigured OMCI subdistricts. Should voter approval not
A 4-12
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
1
Current Subdistricts
8
Figure 4-2
Existing OMCI Subdistricts
2
Proposed Subdistricts
15
Figure 4-3
Proposed OMCI Subdistricts
A 4-13
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
be received for a given subdistrict, the previous OMCI subdistrict boundaries shall be
retained and the priority list revised accordingly.
It is assumed for purposes of this report that each of the 5 reconfigured subdistricts
will successfully approve a tax levy of $0.10 per $100 of assessed value. The revenue
associated with the proposed expansion in the District wide OMCI boundaries and
the change in the OMCI ad valorem tax rate to a uniform $0.10 is presented on Table
4-7.
4.7 Stormwater Proposed Rates and Taxes and Revenue
Requirements
The stormwater operating fund and the OMCI funds are combined on Table 4-8. The
stormwater operating revenue and expenses from Tables 4-4 and 4-6 were combined
to create Table 4-8. Lines 1 through 16 develop the annual stormwater operating fund
cash flow and Lines 16 through 18 reconcile the net cash flows with the projected
stormwater annual beginning and ending year cash balances.
The stormwater operating revenues are located per the following discussion. Lines 1,
3 and 4 reflect current operating revenues in Table 4-4, Lines 1 through 3. Line 2
equals the stormwater impervious area charge revenue in Table 4-6, Line 12. Line 5,
Other Operating Revenue is from Table 4-4, Line 4. Line 6, Interest Income is from
Table 4-4, Line 5. Line 7, Wastewater Support is from Table 4-4, Line 6. Line 8
summarizes the projected stormwater operating revenues.
Line 19, OMCI revenue, is on Line 27 in Table 4-7. Line 20, Interest Income, is
projected based on the formula as follows:
(Reconfigured OMCI subdistrict annual net revenue plus the beginning of year
cash balance times 2) times 3.5 percent.
The resulting amount from above is then divided by (2 – 3.5 percent).
Lines 23 through 25 develop the annual OMCI fund net cash flow and reconciliation
of the beginning and ending year cash balances.
A 4-14
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Table 4-7
Projected Stormwater OMCI Revenue
Under Projected Rates and Taxes
Line
No. Customer Class 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012____ ________________________________________________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
$$$$$$
Tax per Schedule Tax Rate $0.10 per $100 Assessed Value_____________________ ________________________________________
1 Coldwater Creek ($0.07/$100) 1,599,600 1,628,300
2 Wedgewood ($0.06/$100)33,600 34,700
3 Upper Paddock Creek ($0.06/$100)21,300 21,500
4 Paddock Creek ($0.06/$100)93,400 94,300
5 Fountain Creek ($0.10/$100)134,400 135,100________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
6 Coldwater Creek Watershed 1,882,300 1,913,900 2,064,200 2,118,400 2,174,000 2,231,000
7 Maline Creek ($0.07/$100)469,100 471,200
8 Black Jack-Dellwood ($0.06/$100)150,100 151,000
9 Watkins Creek ($0.06/$100)95,100 95,700________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
10 Bissell Point Watershed 714,300 717,900 4,006,800 4,112,000 4,219,900 4,330,700
11 Sugar Creek Reservoir ($0.063/$100)238,900 251,700________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
12 Lower Meramec Watershed (a)238,900 251,700 4,502,700 4,620,900 4,742,200 4,866,700
13 Deer Creek ($0.06/$100)2,232,200 2,304,200
14 Clayton Central ($0.06/$100)212,900 220,100
15 Creve Coeur/Frontenac ($0.05/$100)265,000 274,500
16 Black Creek ($0.06/$100)873,300 900,300
17 University City RDP ($0.07/$100)676,600 692,700
18 Gravois Creek ($0.06/$100)1,007,600 1,037,600
19 Loretta-Joplin ($0.06/$100)15,000 15,200
20 N. Affton Area ($0.06/$100)44,000 45,200
21 Wellston ($0.08/$100)36,700 35,600
22 Seminary Branch-RDP ($0.06/$100)185,700 190,800
23 Marlborough ($0.04/$100)24,600 25,000
24 Shrewsbury-RDP ($0.06/$100)17,100 17,500________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________
25 River Des Peres Watershed 5,590,700 5,758,700 8,928,300 9,162,600 9,403,100 9,650,000
26 Missouri River Watershed (b)5,610,800 5,758,000 5,909,200 6,064,200_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
27 Total 8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,600
(a) Includes the Meramec River Basin subdistrict in 2009 and subsequent years.
(b) Includes the Missouri River-Bonfils subdistrict in 2009 and subsequent years.
A 4-15
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 4
Stormwater User Charges
Table 4-8
Comparison of Projected Stormwater Revenue Under Proposed
Rates and Taxes Projected Revenue Requirements
Line
No.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012______________________________________________
$$$$$$
Stormwater Operations
Stormwater User Charge Revenue
1 Flat Rate (a)1,237,600 514,500000
2 Impervious Area Charges (a)0 20,366,400 50,816,600 54,209,800 56,114,700 57,562,800
Ad Valorem Taxes (b)
3 Administration 4,787,400 4,914,900000
4 Stormwater 7,568,100 7,755,900000
5 Other Revenue 756,200 913,100 1,185,800 1,186,900 1,188,100 1,216,900
6 Interest Income - Reserve Funds 0 0 15,600 51,900 92,500 125,500
7 Wastewater Support 19,223,100 10,799,000000
0
0
0
0_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
8 Total Stormwater Operating Revenue 33,572,400 45,263,800 52,018,000 55,448,600 57,395,300 58,905,200
9 Operation and Maintenance Expense 29,681,800 35,440,000 42,241,300 46,464,300 48,311,800 50,064,900
10 Capital Outlay 1,701,400 3,965,800 1,205,400 1,240,500 1,277,700 1,315,800
11 Cash Financing of Basic Services 2,000,000 4,300,000 5,250,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
12 Additions to Operating Reserve 0 0 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,200
13 Stormwater Policy Credit (c)0 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000
14 Bad Debt Provision (c)189,200 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________
15 Total Revenue Requirements - Basic Services 33,572,400 45,263,800 52,016,800 55,447,900 57,395,800 58,904,900
16 Net Stormwater Operations Annual Balance 0 0 1,200 700 (500) 300
17 Beginning of Year Balance 0 0 0 1,200 1,900 1,400
18 End of Year Balance 0 0 1,200 1,900 1,400 1,700
OMCI Fund
19 OMCI Revenue Under Proposed Rates 8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,600
20 Interest Income 1,263,600 1,144,600 915,000 672,700 558,100 501,600
21 Less: OMCI Existing Major Improvements (d)13,666,000 12,613,000 12,321,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 3,875,000
22 Less: OMCI Reconfigured Enhanced Service 0 0 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
23 Net OMCI Fund Annual Balance (3,976,200) (2,826,200) (10,293,200) (3,555,400) (2,993,500) (230,800)
24 Beginning of Year Balance 38,092,190 34,115,990 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,690
25 End of Year Balance 34,115,990 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,690 14,216,890
(a)
(b) Ad Valorem Taxes are expected to be phased out by July 2008.
(c) Based on 2.5% of annual Stormwater revenue.
(d) Represents the use of current subdistrict revenue until total depletion, at which time reconfigured subdistrict
revenues will replenish.
Impervious Area Charges anticipate 7 months of revenue and are intended to be in effect December 2007 and replace revenues now
derived from the flat rate user charges and ad valorem taxes.
A 4-16
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_4_Final.doc
A 5-1
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of
Service and Revenue Requirements
5.1 Introduction
The District must develop a program that satisfies the regulatory requirements for a
quality environment while maintaining an affordable charge to all customers.
Combining these two objectives has proven to be difficult. Since 1995, the District has
attempted to develop meaningful revenue requirements for both wastewater and
stormwater services throughout its service boundaries. In every attempt, these
difficult objectives were associated with managing the uncertainties from regulatory
agencies and maintaining reasonable rates for wastewater. As an improvement to the
current user charge system, the District is proposing to segregate wastewater and
stormwater services into separately funded programs for each respective user charge.
The present proposal assumes that wastewater revenue requirements will be satisfied
through an appropriate independent wastewater charges beginning in 2008. All
associated program needs were presented in Section 3 and applicable rates were
identified.
The stormwater program needs were identified in Section 4. In particular, Table 4-4
presenting additional revenue needs. The deficits within the stormwater utility are
currently being covered by the wastewater utility as seen below and first presented on
Line 6 in Table 4-4:
2007 2008
Stormwater Support from Wastewater $19,223,100 $10,799,000
The District has proposed a timeframe for the initiation of an impervious area charge
to replace current stormwater operating revenue generated by a flat fee and ad
valorem taxes to fund a basic level of service and reconfigured OMCI revenues to
provide for enhanced services as approved by subdistrict voters. The stormwater
revenue requirements developed in Section 4 provide for a fully funded level of basic
stormwater services including identified capital improvements. In addition, there
continues to be substantial funding needs for wastewater capital improvements. This
proposal therefore recommends that the transition to an impervious area charge be
implemented in a timely manner, which will relieve a portion of the funding burden
currently subsidized by wastewater revenues. This section identifies the timeframe for
the implementation of an impervious area charge and the respective dates for
eliminating existing stormwater fees.
Due to the wastewater capital improvement requirements, coupled with the increased
operation and maintenance requirements, there is also a need to adjust wastewater
user fees. The details of implementing a combined wastewater and stormwater
Final February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
A 5-2
program, with a transition to a stormwater impervious area charge and recommended
increases to the wastewater user fees are found in the following subsections.
5.2 Wastewater and Stormwater Revenues
The primary wastewater revenue source is wastewater rates. Other revenues such as
connection fees and interest earnings contribute, to a limited degree, to the overall
revenue structure for wastewater. The current stormwater revenue sources consist of
a $0.24 per bill monthly administrative charge, interest earning and a subsidy from
wastewater revenues. Additional stormwater revenue is in the form of ad valorem
taxes and subdistrict assessments (OMCI taxes). With the addition of a stormwater
impervious area charge, the existing stormwater and administrative ad valorem taxes
and $0.24 flat fee will be eliminated. The OMCI taxes will remain and will serve as
the foundation for a reconfigured watershed based OMCI program.
Projected Wastewater Revenue – Changes and Assumptions
Sections 2 and 3 outlined the wastewater revenue requirements from a historical and
projected basis. In addition to increased wastewater system costs and expenditures,
and the ongoing wastewater CIRP, there is also pressure to increase wastewater
service rates to compensate for a projected decrease in wastewater volume. When
these impacts are combined, the revenue requirements presented in Table 5-1
summarize projected needs. In order to satisfy these requirements, the wastewater
rates must be increased per year on the following schedule to satisfy wastewater
expenditures:
Fiscal Year
______________________________________________
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Percent Increase 13.0% 12.0% 11.0% 9.0% 5.0%
Projected Stormwater Revenue – Changes and Assumptions
Although there are currently several sources of stormwater revenue, the total is
insufficient to fund the present stormwater operation and maintenance program costs
or the additional cost to meet the recommended basic level of operation and
maintenance services for the stormwater system. As presented in Section 4, an
impervious area charge will replace other present fees. The anticipated transition will
be as follows:
Eliminate $0.24/month Stormwater Flat Rate Charge – December 1, 2007
Eliminate $0.02/$100 Stormwater Ad Valorem Administration Tax – July 1, 2008
Eliminate $0.05/$100 Stormwater Ad Valorem Stormwater Tax – July 1, 2008
Implement Stormwater Impervious Area Charge – December 1, 2007
Reconfiguration of OMCI program – July 1, 2008 (contingent on successful voter
approval)
The stormwater impervious area service charges are projected to be initiated on
December 1, 2007. The stormwater costs being covered by the stormwater impervious
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Fi
A
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\F
nal February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
5-3
eb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Table 5-1
Wastewater Revenue with Projected Rates
Line
No.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012____
charge will fund the District’s recommended basic level of operation and maintenance
services, rather than addressing specific subdistrict deficiencies. Table 5-2 presents
the stormwater revenue that reflects the phasing out of the existing stormwater taxes
and fees, adds revenues from the implementation of the stormwater impervious area
charge (Line 2, Table 5-2) and the revenue from the reconfigured OMCI program
(Line 5, Table 5-2).
harge will fund the District’s recommended basic level of operation and maintenance
services, rather than addressing specific subdistrict deficiencies. Table 5-2 presents
the stormwater revenue that reflects the phasing out of the existing stormwater taxes
and fees, adds revenues from the implementation of the stormwater impervious area
charge (Line 2, Table 5-2) and the revenue from the reconfigured OMCI program
(Line 5, Table 5-2).
The OMCI taxes are projected to remain in place, with a proposed expansion of the
total subdistrict boundaries through the consolidation of the 23 current OMCI
subdistricts into 5 watershed based areas. Specific subdistrict deficiencies and capital
improvements will continue to be funded by OMCI taxes. Line 5 of Table 5-2 presents
the OMCI revenue, with the increased revenue reflecting the expanded boundaries
shown beginning in 2009. Collection of this revenue, however, is contingent on voter
approval by the residents of each subdistrict.
The OMCI taxes are projected to remain in place, with a proposed expansion of the
total subdistrict boundaries through the consolidation of the 23 current OMCI
subdistricts into 5 watershed based areas. Specific subdistrict deficiencies and capital
improvements will continue to be funded by OMCI taxes. Line 5 of Table 5-2 presents
the OMCI revenue, with the increased revenue reflecting the expanded boundaries
shown beginning in 2009. Collection of this revenue, however, is contingent on voter
approval by the residents of each subdistrict.
5.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Revenue Requirements 5.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Revenue Requirements
The components of the revenue requirements for wastewater and stormwater are
consistent, other than the inclusion of debt service for the wastewater system.
The components of the revenue requirements for wastewater and stormwater are
consistent, other than the inclusion of debt service for the wastewater system.
The decision has been made to provide for both wastewater and stormwater capital
projects on a Pay-As-You-Go basis. Therefore, the total proposed revenue
requirements consist of (1) total system operation and maintenance expenses; (2) total
system expenditures for capital improvements from revenues (routine annual
improvements and cash financing of major improvements); (3) wastewater debt
service; and (4) provision for an operating reserve for the total system.
Wastewater System Revenue Requirements
The costs of providing wastewater services were identified by each District
Department that provides a direct service. These costs were used to allocate costs to
wastewater, with the general service Departments and the indirect costs (Human
Resources) allocated pro-rata. These costs are regarded as wastewater system costs
and are presented on Table 5-3, with the costs developed previously on Table 3-9.
________________________________________________
$$$$$$
1 Service Charge Revenue 195,104,100 207,404,300 242,582,400 269,103,000 292,842,600 307,525,700
2 Other Operating Revenue 4,673,300 4,922,900 5,276,600 5,280,400 5,284,100 5,324,700
3 Connection Fee Revenue 4,739,000 4,786,000 4,834,000
4 Interest Income - Reserve Funds 2,836,000 2,841,800 2,841,400
5 Interest Income - Operations 72,500 71,500 70,400
6 Interest Income - Arnold 1,236,300 1,211,300 1,185,300
4,600,000 4,646,000 4,692,000
2,493,500 2,773,000 2,839,100
198,700 72,900 72,800
1,305,000 1,283,100 1,260,200__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
7 Total Revenue 283,267,200 307,037,300 321,781,500208,374,600 221,102,200 256,723,100
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements A 5-4 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc Table 5-2Stormwater Revenue with Projected Rates and TaxesLineNo.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________$$$$$$Stormwater User Charge Revenue1 Flat Rate1,237,600 514,50000002 Impervious Area Charges0 20,366,400 50,816,600 54,209,800 56,114,700 57,562,800Ad Valorem Taxes3 Administration4,787,400 4,914,90000004 Stormwater7,568,100 7,755,90000005 OMCI Taxes8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,6006 Other Revenue756,200 913,100 1,185,800 1,186,900 1,188,100 1,216,9007 Interest Income - Reserve Funds00 15,600 51,900 92,500 125,5008 Wastewater Support19,223,100 10,799,00000009 Interest Income - OMCI1,263,600 1,144,600 915,000 672,700 558,100 501,600_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 10 Total Stormwater Revenue43,262,200 55,050,600 78,045,800 81,893,200 84,401,800 86,549,400
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements A 5-5 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc Table 5-3Wastewater Projected Revenue RequirementsLineNo.2007 2008 2009201020112012______________________________________________$$$ $ $ $1 Operation and Maintenance Expense104,784,300 110,913,400 114,654,700 119,058,500 123,379,800 127,593,5002 Routine Annual Improvements6,148,800 6,394,600 6,536,500 2,619,600 2,698,200 2,779,1003 Debt Service22,946,300 26,842,70029,347,600 29,158,400 29,521,700 29,493,1004 Cash Financing of Major Improvements 60,100,000 64,846,000 106,192,000 132,439,000 151,486,000 161,934,0005 Addition to Operating Reserve2,366,700 1,302,50000006 Stormwater Support19,223,100 10,799,0000000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 7 Total Revenue Requirements215,569,200 221,098,200 256,730,800 283,275,500 307,085,700 321,799,700
F
A
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\F
inal February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
5-6
eb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
The allocated cost of service for wastewater customers for 2008 is compared with the
estimated revenue by customer class on Table 5-6. Included on the table is the
stormwater revenue by customer class as well. Differences between the allocated cost
of service by customer class and the corresponding revenue is due to the rounding of
Line 6 on Table 5-3, represents stormwater support and equals the annual amounts
needed by stormwater as first shown on Line 6 in Table 4-4 for 2007 and 2008.
The period from 2009 through 2012 shows additional revenue requirements due to an
increase in cash funded wastewater major improvements. However, the elimination
of $10,799,000 in wastewater revenue support for the stormwater program during
2008 is partially responsible for the ability to increase cash funded major
improvements and assists in mitigating future wastewater increases.
Stormwater System Revenue Requirements
As previously stated, prior to implementation of a stormwater impervious area
charge, the operational costs of providing such services were identified. Each of the
District Departments that provide a direct service for stormwater identified the
percent of their costs that benefited stormwater, as previously presented on Table 2-2.
These percentages were used to allocate costs to stormwater, with the general service
Departments and the indirect costs (Human Resources) allocated pro-rata to
stormwater. These costs, plus stormwater credit policy and operating reserve
requirements as well as the expenditures for routine capital and major capital
expenditures are presented on Table 5-4, with the costs developed previously on
Table 4-8, Subsection 4.7.
5.4 Summary of Combined Wastewater and Stormwater
Revenue Requirements
Combined Wastewater and Stormwater System Revenue and Revenue Requirements
For the combined revenue, the revenue shown on Tables 5-1 and 5-2 is presented on
Table 5-5. The wastewater revenue supporting stormwater was eliminated in this
combining process. Table 5-5 also combines the wastewater and stormwater
expenditures from Tables 5-3 and 5-4. Operation and maintenance expense, routine
capital expenditures, major capital improvements and additions to operating reserve
items were combined for the wastewater and stormwater systems. Surplus and
deficit revenues are shown on Line 20 of Table 5-5. These surpluses and deficits were
further identified on Lines 21 and 24 with either stormwater or wastewater,
respectively. The projected $7,194,600 deficit in 2007 reflects the year prior to the
implementation of the proposed rate increases and is covered by the use of fund
balances available excluding operating reserves as shown on Line 25.
5.5 Distribution of Costs/Revenues to Customer Classes
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements A 5-7 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc Table 5-4Stormwater Projected Revenue RequirementsLineNo.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012___________ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______$$$$$$1 Operation and Maintenance Expense29,681,800 35,440,000 42,241,300 46,464,300 48,311,800 50,064,9002 Routine Annual Improvements1,701,400 3,965,800 1,205,400 1,240,500 1,277,700 1,315,8003 Cash Financing of Basic Services2,000,000 4,300,000 5,250,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,0004 Additions to Operating Reserve00 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,2005 Stormwater Policy Credit0 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,0006 Bad Debt Provisions189,200 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,0007 OMCI Existing Major Improvements13,666,000 12,613,000 12,321,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 3,875,0008 OMCI Reconfigured Enhanced Services00 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000_________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 9 Total Revenue Requirements47,238,400 57,876,800 88,337,800 85,447,900 87,395,800 86,779,900
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements A 5-8 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc Table 5-5Wastewater and Stormwater Revenue with Projected Rates and Taxesand Revenue RequirementsLineNo.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012___________ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______$$$$$$Wastewater & Stormwater OperationsRevenue1 Wastewater Service Charge Revenue 195,104,100 207,404,300 242,582,400 269,103,000 292,842,600 307,525,7002 Wastewater Connection Fee Revenue 4,600,000 4,646,000 4,692,000 4,739,000 4,786,000 4,834,000Stormwater User Charge Revenue3 Flat Rate1,237,600 514,50000004 Impervious Area Charges0 20,366,400 50,816,600 54,209,800 56,114,700 57,562,800Ad Valorem Taxes5 Administration4,787,400 4,914,90000006 Stormwater7,568,100 7,755,90000007 Other Revenue5,429,500 5,836,000 6,462,400 6,467,300 6,472,200 6,541,6008 Interest Income - Reserve Funds2,493,500 2,773,000 2,854,700 2,887,900 2,934,300 2,966,9009 Interest Income - Operations198,700 72,900 72,800 72,500 71,500 70,40010 Interest Income - Arnold1,305,000 1,283,100 1,260,200 1,236,300 1,211,300 1,185,300__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 11 Total Revenue222,723,900 255,567,000 308,741,100 338,715,800 364,432,600 380,686,700Revenue Requirements12 Operation and Maintenance Expense 134,466,100 146,353,400 156,896,000 165,522,800 171,691,600 177,658,40013 Routine Annual Improvements7,850,200 10,360,400 7,741,900 3,860,100 3,975,900 4,094,90014 Debt Service22,946,300 26,842,700 29,347,600 29,158,400 29,521,700 29,493,10015 Cash Financing of Major Improvements 62,100,000 69,146,000 111,442,000 136,439,000 155,486,000 165,934,00016 Additions to Operating Reserve2,366,700 1,302,500 780,100 1,033,100 1,000,300 646,20017 Stormwater Policy Credit0 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,00018 Bad Debt Provisions189,200 779,000 1,270,000 1,355,000 1,403,000 1,439,000__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ 19 Total Revenue Requirements229,918,500 255,563,000 308,747,600 338,723,400 364,481,500 380,704,60020 Surplus (Deficit) Revenue(7,194,600) 4,000 (6,500) (7,600) (48,900) (17,900)21 Surplus (Deficit) Stormwater Revenue00 1,200 700 (500) 30022 Beginning of Year Balance000 1,200 1,900 1,40023 End of Year Balance00 1,200 1,900 1,400 1,70024 Surplus (Deficit) Wastewater Revenue (7,194,600) 4,000 (7,700) (8,300) (48,400) (18,200)25 Beginning of Year Balance9,274,400 2,079,800 2,083,800 2,076,100 2,067,800 2,019,40026 End of Year Balance2,079,800 2,083,800 2,076,100 2,067,800 2,019,400 2,001,200Stormwater OMCI Fund27 OMCI Taxes8,426,200 8,642,200 25,112,800 25,771,900 26,448,400 27,142,60028 Interest Income - OMCI1,263,600 1,144,600 915,000 672,700 558,100 501,60029 OMCI Existing Major Improvements13,666,000 12,613,000 12,321,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 3,875,00030 OMCI Reconfigured Enhanced Services00 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,00031 Surplus (Deficit) Stormwater OMCI Fund (3,976,200) (2,826,200) (10,293,200) (3,555,400) (2,993,500) (230,800)32 Beginning of Year Balance38,092,190 34,115,990 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,69033 End of Year Balance34,115,990 31,289,790 20,996,590 17,441,190 14,447,690 14,216,890
Final February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
A
Table 5-6
Distribution of Costs/Revenue per
Customer Class
Test Year 2008
Allocated Cost Revenue Under Revenue Under
Line of Service Proposed Rates Proposed Rates Revenue % of
No. Customer Class Wastewater Wastewater Stormwater Total Total________________________________________________________________
$$$$
1 Single Family 89,885,000 89,842,700 14,287,752 104,130,452 47.5%
2 Multifamily 21,675,400 21,742,500 1,085,904 22,828,404 10.4%
3 Non-Residential (a) 74,343,400 74,620,400 17,787,456 92,407,856 42.1%__________________________________________________
4 Total 185,903,800 186,205,600 33,161,112 219,366,712 100.0%
(a) Includes revenue and allocated cost of service associated with surcharge customers.
5-9
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
the wastewater charges as well as the impact of low income credits on residential
customer revenue.
5.6 Rate Schedules
Table 5-7 presents the existing and proposed wastewater rate schedule.
The existing and proposed rates and taxes for stormwater service for 2008, including
the projected stormwater impervious area charge, are presented on Table 5-8.
5.7 Customer Bill Examples
Combined Wastewater and Stormwater System Bills
Residential Examples
Table 5-9 presents several examples of residential bills, both in regards to the existing
monthly bill and for the projected wastewater and stormwater components of a bill for
2008.
Non-Residential Examples
Table 5-10 presents several examples of non-residential bills, both in regards to the
existing monthly bill and for the projected wastewater and stormwater components of
a bill for 2008.
Projected Residential and Non-Residential Examples
Table 5-11 presents several examples of both residential and non-residential bills for
the period of 2008 through 2011.
A 5-10
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
A 5-11
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Table 5-7
Existing and Proposed Wastewater Rates
(Effective July 1, 2005)(Effective December 1, 2007)
Metered Metered__________________________________________
Line
No.Type of Monthly Charge
Unmetered
Residential Residential
Non-
Residential
Unmetered
Residential Residential
Non-
Residential____________________________________________________________________________________
$$$
1 Billing and Collection Charge 0.85 0.85 0.85 2.30 2.30 2.30
2 System Availability Charge 7.05 7.05 7.05 8.40 8.40 8.40
3 Compliance Charge 12.55 27.40
Volume Charge
4 per Ccf 1.81 1.81 1.88 1.88
5 per room 1.18 1.23
6 per water closet 4.42 4.59
7 per bath 3.69 3.83
8 per separate shower 3.69 3.83
Extra Strength Surcharge - $/ton
9 Suspended Solids over 300 mg/l 218.90 218.90
10 BOD over 300 mg/l 461.44 529.90
11 COD over 600 mg/l 230.72 264.95
Ccf - hundred cubic feet
mg/l - milligrams per liter
Note: Rates for qualified low income residential users are 50 percent of the regular rates above.
Final February 2007 Section 5
Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater
Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements
A 5-12
C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Table 5-8
Existing and Projected Stormwater Rates and Taxes (a)
2007 and 2008
Type of Monthly Charge City
Original Co.
Boundary
County
Annexed_
_________________________________________________
$$$
Flat Charge per Monthly Bill 0.24 0.24 0.24
Administrative Tax per $100 Assessed Value (b) 0.0186 0.0186 0.0186
Stormwater Tax per $100 Assessed Value 0.05 0.05 0.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012__________________________________________
$
Projecte 2.2865
per 100 s
(annualized
Implem
Projected
100 sq 0.1905
Acre of 81.68 82.98
(a)
(b) T . Revenues have
b
T Revenue derived
from e are expected to be
c
$$$$$
d stormwater service charge 0.0000 1.4400 2.0758 2.1935 2.2495
quare feet impervious area
rate - billable monthly)
ented December 1, 2007
monthly charge per:
uare feet of impervious area 0.0000 0.1200 0.1730 0.1828 0.1875
impervious area 0.0000 52.27 75.36 79.63
he Administrative Tax has fluctuated between $0.019 per $100 assessed value and $0.02 per $100 assessed value
een projected based on $0.0186 per $100 assessed value.
he Flat Rate Charge, Administrative Tax and Stormwater Tax are projected to be phased out by December 2007.
the flat rate charge is based on five months of collection. All administrative and stormwater tax revenues du
ollected in fiscal year 2008.
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements Table 5-9Typical Monthly Bill Comparison - ResidentialProposed Charges to beEffective December 1, 2007_________________________________No. Customer ClassVolumeArea Charge (a) Value Bill Fee & Taxes Total Wastewater Stormwater Total___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Ccf100 sq. ft. $/100 sq. ft. $$$$$$$Single Family1 Small5 City Avg.15.00 0.1200 50,000 16.95 3.16 20.11 20.10 1.80 21.90 8.9%County Avg. 25.00 0.1200 100,000 16.95 6.07 23.02 20.10 3.00 23.10 0.3%2 Medium8 City Avg.15.00 0.1200 100,000 22.38 6.07 28.45 25.74 1.80 27.54 -3.2%County Avg. 25.00 0.1200 150,000 22.38 8.99 31.37 25.74 3.00 28.74 -8.4%3 Medium - 50 Largest Cities 10 City Avg.15.00 0.1200 150,000 26.00 8.99 34.99 29.50 1.80 31.30 -10.5%County Avg. 25.00 0.1200 200,000 26.00 11.91 37.91 29.50 3.00 32.50 -14.3%4 Large20 City Avg.15.00 0.1200 200,000 44.10 11.91 56.01 48.30 1.80 50.10 -10.5%County Avg. 25.00 0.1200 250,000 44.10 14.82 58.92 48.30 3.00 51.30 -12.9%Multifamily5 Small2013.00 0.1200 200,000 44.10 11.91 56.01 48.30 1.56 49.86 -11.0%6 Medium4027.00 0.1200 400,000 80.30 23.57 103.87 85.90 3.24 89.14 -14.2%7 Large6033.00 0.1200 600,000 116.50 35.24 151.74 123.50 3.96 127.46 -16.0%(a) Stormwater Monthly Charge is equal to $52.27 per acre.LineBilled WastewaterImpervious ExistingStormwater MonthlyAverage AssessedExisting WastewaterExisting StormwaterA 5-13 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements Table 5-10Typical Monthly Bill Comparison - Non-ResidentialProposed Charges to beEffective December 1, 2007_________________________________No. Customer Class VolumeArea Charge (a) Value Bill Fee & Taxes Total Wastewater Stormwater Total__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Ccf100 sq. ft. $/100 sq. ft. $$$$$$$Non-Residential - Normal Strength8 Small70 Tax Exempt City 113 0.1200147.15 0.24 147.39 169.70 13.56 183.26 24.3%9 Medium100 Tax Exempt Co. 2300.1200201.45 0.24 201.69 226.10 27.60 253.70 25.8%10 Large160 City Avg.268 0.1200 1,000,000 310.05 58.57 368.62 338.90 32.16 371.06 0.7%County Avg.437 0.1200 2,000,000 310.05116.91 426.96 338.90 52.44 391.34 -8.3%Non-Residential - Excess Strength (b)11 Small70 Tax Exempt City 113 0.1200169.44 0.24 169.68 194.23 13.56 207.79 22.5%12 Average100 Tax Exempt Co. 230 0.1200233.29 0.24 233.53 261.14 27.60 288.74 23.6%13 Large160 City Avg.268 0.1200 1,000,000 360.99 58.57 419.56 394.97 32.16 427.13 1.8%County Avg.437 0.1200 2,000,000 360.99116.91 477.90 394.97 52.44 447.41 -6.4%(a) Stormwater Monthly Charge is equal to $52.27 per acre.(b) Assumes suspended solids excess strength of 150 mg/l and biochemical oxygen demand excess strength of 150 mg/l.ExistingImpervious LineAverage AssessedBilled WastewaterExisting WastewaterExisting StormwaterStormwater Monthly A 5-14 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc
Final February 2007 Section 5 Summary of Wastewater and Stormwater Cost of Service and Revenue Requirements Table 5-11Typical Monthly Bill ComparisonProposed Charges to beProposed Charges to beProposed Charges to beProposed Charges to beEffective July 1, 2008Effective July 1, 2009Effective July 1, 2010Effective July 1, 2011_________________________________ _________________________________ _________________________________ _________________________________No. Customer ClassVolumeArea Wastewater Stormwater Total Wastewater Stormwater Total Wastewater Stormwater Total Wastewater Stormwater Total____ _____________________ __________________ _________ __________________ _________ __________________ _________ __________________ _________ __________________Ccf100 sq. ft. $$$$$$$$$$$$Single Family1 Small5 City Avg.15.00 22.50 2.60 25.10 24.95 2.74 27.69 27.20 2.81 30.01 28.60 2.86 31.46County Avg.25.00 22.50 4.33 26.83 24.95 4.57 29.52 27.20 4.69 31.89 28.60 4.76 33.362 Medium8 City Avg.15.00 28.89 2.60 31.49 32.06 2.74 34.80 34.97 2.81 37.78 36.79 2.86 39.65County Avg.25.00 28.89 4.33 33.22 32.06 4.57 36.63 34.97 4.69 39.66 36.79 4.76 41.553 Medium - 50 Largest Cities 10 City Avg.15.00 33.15 2.60 35.75 36.80 2.74 39.54 40.15 2.81 42.96 42.25 2.86 45.11County Avg.25.00 33.15 4.33 37.48 36.80 4.57 41.37 40.15 4.69 44.84 42.25 4.76 47.014 Large20 City Avg.15.00 54.45 2.60 57.05 60.50 2.74 63.24 66.05 2.81 68.86 69.55 2.86 72.41County Avg.25.00 54.45 4.33 58.78 60.50 4.57 65.07 66.05 4.69 70.74 69.55 4.76 74.31Multifamily5 Small2013.00 54.45 2.25 56.70 60.50 2.38 62.88 66.05 2.44 68.49 69.55 2.48 72.036 Medium4027.00 97.05 4.67 101.72 107.90 4.94 112.84 117.85 5.06 122.91 124.15 5.14 129.297 Large6033.00 139.65 5.71 145.36 155.30 6.03 161.33 169.65 6.19 175.84 178.75 6.29 185.04Non-Residential - Normal Strength8 Small70 Tax Exempt City 113 189.35 19.55 208.90 208.65 20.66 229.31 226.45 21.19 247.64 238.15 21.53 259.689 Medium100 Tax Exempt Co.230 253.25 39.79 293.04 279.75 42.04 321.79 304.15 43.13 347.28 320.05 43.82 363.8710 Large160 City Avg.268 381.05 46.36 427.41 421.95 48.99 470.94 459.55 50.25 509.80 483.85 51.05 534.90County Avg.437 381.05 75.60 456.65 421.95 79.88501.83 459.55 81.94 541.49 483.85 83.25 567.10Non-Residential - Excess Strength (b)11 Small70 Tax Exempt City 113 216.26 19.55 235.81 238.11 20.66 258.77 258.64 21.19 279.83 271.69 21.53 293.2112 Average100 Tax Exempt Co.230 291.70 39.79 331.49 321.83 42.04 363.88 350.1343.13 393.26 367.96 43.82 411.7713 Large160 City Avg.268 442.57 46.36 488.93 489.29 48.99 538.28 533.12 50.25 583.37 560.50 51.05 611.56County Avg.437 442.57 75.60 518.17 489.29 79.88569.17 533.12 81.94 615.06 560.50 83.25 643.75(a) Stormwater Monthly Charge is equal to $52.27 per acre.(b) Assumes suspended solids excess strength of 150 mg/l and biochemical oxygen demand excess strength of 150 mg/l.LineBilled WastewaterImpervious A 5-15 C:\St. Louis\Storm_Rate\Feb 07 Final\Section_5_Final.doc