1. City of Janesville Wastewater Facility Plan Amendment Public Hearing
December 18, 2008

2. Agenda Janesville wastewater treatment needs Alternative evaluations
Recommended improvements
Financial impacts

3. Wastewater Treatment Needs
Regulatory issues
Beneficial use of biosolids
Phosphorus
Ammonia
Growth / Capacity
Aged facilities
Some existing facilities 40 years old
Implement new technologies
Operational cost savings / energy efficiency
Security and safety

4. Biosolids Management Current program → Landfill biosolids
Using valuable landfill space
6,000 tons per year (Current)
Approximately 3% of annual landfill disposal
Potential $120,000 per year new revenue if biosolids are replaced with outside revenue
Landfill hours restrict dewatering operations
Valuable resource enters waste stream
Biosolids management is the program for safe disposal or end use of solids produced during wastewater treatment.

5. Biosolids Management Proposed program → Beneficial use
Biosolids have value when recycled
Fertilizer (N-P-K)
Organic Matter (humus)
Proven to increase corn yield
Recycling nutrients is environmentally friendly
“Carbon neutral”: Fertilizer production requires fossil fuel
Nutrients recycled to food chain, not the waste stream

6. Growth of Janesville Service Area

7. CPE Design Pop.
78,935

8. Current and Future Wastewater Flows and Pollutant Loadings
15 to 26 % Increase
Over 20 years

9. Utilization of Treatment Processes

10. Alternatives Evaluation
Formal method of selecting and evaluating alternatives
A total of 50 alternatives evaluated for 12 separate treatment processes and 6 support facilities
Identify and Evaluate Alternatives for Each Process
Assess Treatment Process Needs
Select Recommended Project

11. Recommended Improvements
Item
Project Cost
(MM$)
Septage Receiving
$0.2
Upgrade
Preliminary and Primary Treatment
$2.4
Biological Phosphorus Removal
$1.1
Activated Sludge
$10.4
Capacity
Aeration Blowers
Final Clarification
$1.4
Return Activated Sludge Pumping
$0.8
Cap./ Upgrade
Disinfection
Administration and Laboratory Facilities
$2.1
Site Facilities
$1.2
Electrical Distribution Upgrades
Electrical Equipment Upgrades
Standby Diesel Generator
$1.5
Digester Gas Generators
Anaerobic Digestion
$2.5
Centrifuge Dewatering
$1.3
Class B Biosolids
$0.6
Biosolids Cake Storage
Total Estimated Project Cost
$32.4

12. Historical WWTP Project Costs

13. Recommended Plan

14. Financial Impacts
Typical residential rate increase of $ from $ 62 to $ 80 per quarter in 2010
Based on Financing $ 27 Million at 2.4% Over 20 Years

15. RESIDENTIAL RATE COMPARISON (PEER CITY COMPARISON - 8/4/2008)
Financial Impacts
RESIDENTIAL RATE COMPARISON
(PEER CITY COMPARISON - 8/4/2008)
  CITY
DATE OF LAST WW
EXPANSION
TOTAL
WATER
/QTR
PUBLIC FIRE
PROTECTION
WASTEWATER
GRAND TOTAL
Water + PFP + WW
Fond du Lac
2008
$73.75
$9.50
$96.50
$179.75
Oshkosh
1992
$86.83
$3.82
$70.14
$160.79
Appleton
1990
$90.25
$11.25
$61.35
$162.85
Beloit
$47.82
$11.94
$92.65
$152.41
Waukesha
1993
$59.05
$11.79
$71.09
$141.93
Wausau
1995
$56.00
$8.70
$60.90
$125.60
Manitowoc
1998
$41.11
$8.40
$71.07
$120.58
Green Bay
1991
$58.25
$7.20
$54.30
$119.75
Racine
2000
$50.00 NC
$67.25
$117.25
Janesville - Future
$29.70
$4.90
$79.95*
Kenosha
1974
$50.75
$7.35
$49.15
$107.25
Eau Claire
1980
$44.62
$9.46
$51.00
$105.08
Janesville
1985
$35.10
$5.39
$61.60
$105.60
Sheboygan
1984
$26.10
$4.64
$53.56
$84.30
La Crosse
1979
$35.25
$38.00
$73.25
AVERAGE PEER CITY
$63.78
$11.19
$68.65
$141.90
Average residential customer with a 5/8" meter and 25 CCF quarterly usage.
Excludes other operating cost adjustments

16. Potential Future Wastewater Treatment Needs
New phosphorus standard
Current work identifying total maximum daily load (TMDL) for phosphorus and suspended solids to Rock River
New nitrogen standard
Current work in Mississippi River watershed to identify acceptable nitrogen levels
Others
Mercury
Chlorides

17. City of Janesville Wastewater Facility Plan Amendment Public Hearing
December 18, 2008

18. QUESTIONS

19. Rate Analysis of Staging Options