Cover Page Company Logo

COVER PAGE COMPANY LOGO

SMALL COMPANYLOGO HERE / Project: Part 5 – Waste Water
Base Engineering Assessment Report – INTERIM / FINAL
(delete as applicable) / Reference: . ......
Prepared for: Base Planning, Estate Planning Branch – Defence Estate and Infrastructure Group
Revision: .....
Date: ......
Project No. | …………….., 2015 | Revision ......

Document Control Record

Document prepared by:

Company Name

ABN

Address:

Australia

T
F
E
W / ......
......
......
......

A person using [Company Name] documents or data accepts the risk of:

• Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original hard copy version.
• Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by Company Name].

DOCUMENT CONTROL
Report Title
Document ID / Project Number
Client / Client Contact
Rev / Date / Revision Details/Status / Prepared by / Author / Verifier / Approver
0
1
Current Revision / 0
Project …………. | File AF22558696.doc | Date:……………. | Revision
Part 5 Waste Water
Date
Reference
Revision
Company Name
ABN:
Address:
Australia
T
F
E
W
Project …… | ….2015 | Revision
Project …… | ….2015 | Revision

Contents

1Description of Service

1.1Overview

1.2Overall Assessment Outcomes

1.2.1Capacity

1.2.2Condition

1.2.3Compliance

1.3Proposed Redevelopment Scope

1.4Recommendations for Maintenance and Changes to Practice

2Sewerage Network

2.1Description

2.2Required Data

2.3Capacity Assessment

2.4Condition Assessment

2.5Compliance Assessment

3Sewage Pump Stations and Rising Mains

3.1Description

3.2Required Data

3.3Capacity Assessment

3.4Condition Assessment

3.5Compliance Assessment

4Trade Waste

4.1Description

4.2Required Data

4.3Capacity Assessment

4.4Condition Assessment

4.5Compliance Assessment

5Sewage Treatment Plant (if applicable)

5.1Description

5.2Required Data

5.3Capacity Assessment

5.4Condition Assessment

5.5Compliance Assessment

Index of Tables

Table 1 | Waste Water Network GRV

Table 2 | Waste Water Assessment Outcomes

Table 6 | Proposed Redevelopment Scope

Abbreviations

Abbreviation / Description
AC / Asbestos Cement
AS / Australian Standards
BEAP / Base Engineering Assessment Program
CCC / Capacity, Condition and Compliance
CICL / Cast Iron Concrete Lined
DICL / Ductile Iron Concrete Lined
DEMS / Defence Estate Management System
DN / Nominal Diameter
DSR / Data Source Register
EMOS / Estate Maintenance and Operation Services
EP / Equivalent Persons
ERAT / Estate Risk Assessment Tool
GFIS / Graphical Facilities Information System
HDPE / High Density Polyethylene
L/s / Litres per second
LIA / Living-In Accommodation
MUD / Multi-User Depot
PVC / Polyvinyl Chloride
PWWF / peak wet weather flow
SCADA / supervisory control and data acquisition
SPS / Sewage Pumping Station
SRM / Sewage Rising Main
VC / Vitrified Clay
WSA / Water Services Association (Australia)
WoL / Whole of Life
Project …… | …2014 | Revision

1Description of Service

1.1Overview

This Part 4 of the report addresses the assessment of the capacity, condition and compliance of the wastewater systems at <site>, incorporating <list sub-sites>. The assessments are based on a combination of existing information made available to the assessment team and site inspections and investigations to obtain any missing data necessary to complete the analysis.

1.1.1Summary of Waste Water Systems

Outline the extent of service, what comprises this service on this site, its breakup and how it works

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

1.1.2[AW1]Network Gross Replacement Value [AW2]

The estimated Gross Replacement Value (GRV) provides an indication of the cost liability for the existing waste water network at <site>, should the entire system be replaced in a ‘like for like’ arrangement and to current standards. The GRV is based on current infrastructure cost rates, with an efficiency factor applied to represent the likely reductions in cost that could be achieved by replacing the entire network at once, as opposed to repairing or upgrading localised areas of the network (as per the individual BEAP recommendations).

Table 1 summarises the estimated Gross Replacement Value for the Waste Water network by sub-service.

Table 1 | Waste Water Network GRV

Sub service / Description / Estimated GRV ($) 1
Sewerage network / $ xxxxxx
Sewage Pump Stations and rising mains / $ xxxxxx
Trade waste / $ xxxxxx
Sewage Treatment Plant / $ xxxxxx
Total / $ xxxxxx

Notes:

1. The Gross Replacement value is a capital investment cost current as of 2015, with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates exclude, preliminaries (design, project management, etc.), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for base support activities, periodic maintenance, latent conditions and site contamination.
2. The cost estimates exclude potential efficiencies that could be achieved by rationalising or extending the systems and are based on a ‘like for like’ replacement.

1.1.3Waste Water Assessment Outcomes

The table below outlines the assessment outcome for each of the services main components

Table 2 | Waste WaterAssessment Outcomes

Sub service / Assessment / Spare Capacity Indicator1 / Resultant No. of Issues / Remedial Work Cost Estimate2
Capacity / Condition / Compliance / % of GRV3
Sewerage Network / Refer table 2 below / Refer table 2 below / Refer table 2 below / Cost to remediate
Sewage Pump Stations & Rising Mains
Trade Waste
Sewage Treatment Plant
Overall Service

To complete table 2 above refer to table 5 for results and Input the cost and resultant number of issues from Appendix A.1 data for each waste water system component.

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

Notes for table 2

1. The spare capacity indicator represents the percentage of network assets which have a capacity rating of ‘within limits’.
2. Costs estimates are capital investment costs current as of 2015, with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates exclude, preliminaries (design, project management etc), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for base support activities, periodic maintenance, latent conditions and site contamination. These costs comprise WHS immediate works (P1), urgent repairs or upgrades works within 1 year (P2), short term repair or upgrade works due within the next 1-5 year period (P3), medium term repairs or upgrade works due before 10 years (P4), and long term replacement costs as assets reach the end of their useful life >10 year period (P5).
3. The percentage of GRV figure compares the value of the required remediation works with the replacement value of the entire subservice.

A full breakdown of issues, risk, priority, recommended remedial actions and cost is provided at Appendix A.1.

1.1.4Waste Water Assessment Outcomes by Risk

The table below summarises the level of risk for each sub service element resulting from the risk assessment of each issue using the ERAT method.

Table 3 | Risk assessment by sub service

Risk and Cost / Service / Grand Total
Sewerage Network / Sewage Pump Stations & Rising Mains / Trade Waste / Sewage Treatment Plant
Very High
No.
Est Cost
High
No.
Est Cost
Medium
No.
Est Cost
Low
No.
Est Cost
Total No.
Total Est Cost

Notes for table 3

1. Costs estimates are capital investment costs current as of 2015, with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates exclude, preliminaries (design, project management etc), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for base support activities, periodic maintenance, latent conditions and site contamination. These costs comprise WHS immediate works (P1), urgent repairs or upgrades works within 1 year (P2), short term repair or upgrade works due within the next 1-5 year period (P3), medium term repairs or upgrade works due before 10 years (P4), and long term replacement costs as assets reach the end of their useful life >10 year period (P5).

Discuss any Very High risks in the above table and their key issues, actions, remediation.

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

1.1.5Waste Water Assessment Outcomes by Priority

The table below summarises the number of issues in each priority category along with the estimated cost of completing the recommended remedial actions. The assessment has been carried out using the prioritised work request (WR) categorisation system These include WHS immediate works (P1), urgent repairs or upgrades works required within a year (P2), short term repairs or upgradeswithin the next 1-5 year period (P3), medium term repairs or upgrade works (P4) due before 10 years, and long term replacement costs as assets reach the end of their useful life (P5), >10 year period.

Table 4 | Priority assessment by sub service

Priority and Cost / Service / Grand Total
Sewerage Network / Sewerage Pump Stations & Rising Mains / Trade Waste / Sewage Treatment Plant
P1
No.
Est Cost
P2
No.
Est Cost
P3
No.
Est Cost
P4
No.
Est Cost
P5
No.
Est Cost
Total No.
Total Est Cost

Notes for table 4

1. Costs estimates are capital investment costs current as of 2015, with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates exclude, preliminaries (design, project management etc), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for base support activities, periodic maintenance, latent conditions and site contamination.

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

Table 3 | Service Assessment parameters

Criteria Used for Assessments
Capacity / Condition / Compliance
Exceeded / Unserviceable / Non-Compliant
100% of service capacity has been used.
Sewage flow depth has reached 100% of internal pipe diameter
Rising main velocity >2.5 m/s / Not capable of functioning as intended, obsolete equipment / components, unable to be maintained – requiring full replacement / upgrade. / Design does not comply with applicable design guidelines, Australian Standards and/or Defence Policy requirements.
(e.g. Sewerage overflows, insufficient grade or pipe size)
Grease traps /oil separators are not meeting current operational objectives or the minimum determined by the relevant local guidelines.
Marginal / Poor
75%<x<100% of service capacity has been used. Likely to be non-compliant with requirements for spare capacity. / Deterioration is severe and is limiting the serviceability of the asset. Maintenance cost would be high.
Sewage flow depth is between 75%<x<100% of internal pipe diameter / Fair
Rising main velocity 2.0 m/s<x2.5 m/s. / Deterioration is obvious and there is some serviceability loss.
Within Limits / Good / Compliant
<75% of service capacity has been used.
Sewage flows are less than 75% of internal pipe diameter / Signs of deterioration evident, serviceability would be impaired very slightly. / Design complies with applicable design guidelines, Australian Standards and/or Defence Policy requirements.
Rising main velocity 0.7m/sx2.0m/s / As New
Grease traps /oil separators are meeting current operational objectives or the minimum determined by the relevant local guidelines. / No visible sign of deterioration recently constructed / installed or recently rehabilitated back to new condition.

1.1.6Standards and Guidelines

The Relevant Standards, guidelines and legislative requirements used in this assessment include:

• AS/NZS 3500.2.2003 Plumbing and Drainage, Part 2: Sanitary Plumbing and Drainage;
• Water Services Association of Australia (WSA 02-2002Sewerage Code of Australia version 2.3);

• Water Services Association of Australia Sewage Pumping Station Code of Australia (WSA 04-2005);
• Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999);
• Commonwealth Measures (Implementation) Act (1998);
• Commonwealth Places (Application of Laws) Act 1970;

• MIEE: The MIEE is a Defence policy document that determines electrical engineering requirements for Defence facilities and infrastructure. Its provisions are mandatory;
• AS3000-2007: Electrical installations (known as the Australian/New Zealand Wiring Rules); and
• AS/NZS 3439.1:2002: Low-voltage switchgear and control gear assemblies - Type-tested and partially type-tested assemblies.
• Relevant state and local water authority guidelines;

1.2Overall Assessment Outcomes

(as per results of the particular services assessment) This section will be included in the overview.

1.2.1Capacity

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

1.2.2Condition

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

1.2.3Compliance

PHASE 1 Guidance: If parts of this table cannot be completed, or this section is partially incomplete, discuss the incomplete issues and explain why here:

This is a high level summary of the findings on capacity, condition and compliance from this report noting Table 25 above. Discuss the above results by exception,and details such as Very High and High risk issues, extremes and high risks, cost recommendations for each sub service.

List the resultant (by exception only) key issues / service components, ie only P1 and P2 (noting the total Cost and Issues” figures) and their associated risks, and issues with Very High and High risk ratings and their associated remedial actions (noting total cost.

1.3Proposed Redevelopment Scope

Table 6 | Proposed Redevelopment Scope[AW3]

Sub Service / Proposed Scope / Cost Estimate1,2

Notes for Table 6:

1. Costs estimates are capital investment costs current as of 2015, with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates therefore exclude preliminaries (design, project management etc), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for base support activities, periodic maintenance, latent conditions and site contamination.
2. Value for money would be achieved where works are delivered as one project and brought forward in the program which would remove the need for the scheduled urgent repairs or upgrades works.

Very High and High risk items which can be appropriatelyaddressed through the Maintenance program, are excluded from the redevelopment scope detailed in Table 3. These include….<insert details>

The following Medium and Low risk items wereincluded in the redevelopment scope because of .... <for ACs to populate depending on the reason why mediums and lows were included e.g. pipe replacement (Med) has been included in the proposed scope due to the significant efficiencies in time, cost and reduced disruption to the base in undertaking these works in parallel with the valve replacements (High).

Some commentary should be provided with regards to the expected timeframes of the above recommendations. If the majority falls in 15 years but a significant element (e.g. Water Supply replacement) is required in a much shorter timeframe (e.g. works may need to be split) highlight this to assist the reader’s interpretation of the above.

1.4Recommendations for Maintenance and Changes to Practice

A number of changes to current maintenance and operational practices are required to ensure the capacity, condition and compliance of <site name> waste water network can be maintained. These maintenance and operational practices are also required to inform the timing for the some of the remedial actions included in the issues register, which may in turn impact the timing of the base redevelopment works. The recommended changes to <site name> maintenance and operational practices (including cost estimates) are noted in Table 4. These practices are also included in the issues register in Appendix A1.

Table 7 | Recommended maintenance and changes to practice

Category / Noted issue from assessment / Recommendations for maintenance or changes to practice / Cost estimate ($) 1 / Frequency

Notesfor table 7:

1. Costs estimates are estimated maintenance costs current as of 2015 with a frequency as noted and with a level of confidence of P50. The cost estimates therefore exclude preliminaries (design, project management etc), contingency, escalation, inflation for future CPI increases, as well as provision for latent conditions and site contamination. Where cost estimates are not provided, the maintenance and changes to practice are understood to be captured by existing contract arrangements with no net increase in cost expected

2.1Description

Outline the extent of this service component and what it comprises of on this site, its breakup and how it works

2.2Required Data

The data used in the sewerage network capacity, condition and compliance(CCC) assessmentsis detailed in the table below.

The ‘Required Data’ column identifies the data types necessary to make full capacity, condition and complianceassessments for this service. The second column “documents and data sources assessed’ details the actual data used in theassessment, Ifall of the required data types were not available, the alternative data sources used to inform this assessment are provided.

Table X | Required sewerage network assessment data

Required Data / Assessment documents and data sources / DSR No. / Capacity / Condition / Compliance
Base Development History
History of base development, including changes since commissioning / XXXX / DSR xxx[AW4] /  /  / 
Spatial
GIS, CAD design plans, site survey, as-constructed drawings and equipment databases
Survey data including horizontal and vertical alignment, surface levels, depths, invert levels and location
Gravity Pipelines - Pipe size, material, class and age
Demand Data
Flow data or water consumption
Fixture counts by building or derivation of typical EP/ET by building/zone
Analysis data
Network Design Capacity
Hydraulic Model: Data Input (GIS) including network details, elevations and demand nodes, and Modelling Outputs (ADWF, PDWF and PWWF)
Network condition reports including CCTV and maintenance hole inspections
Records of pipe failures
Records of blockages and overflows
Operations and Maintenance
Operations and maintenance data / maintenance records
Previous operational issues with the sewerage system
Safety and Access
Safety and access review - maintenance holes

Notesfor table x:

1.

If there were any issues in obtaining the required assessment data these issues must be discussed here. Where ‘alternative’ data sources have been used, they should be discussed here to confirm their relevance and how they have been used to substitute for the ‘ideal’ data source[AW5].

Discussion should also include any Phase 1 recommendations that were agreed, including:

• the risks associated with any gaps in the available information
• subjective assessment at completion of Phase 1 based on the known information

2.3Capacity Assessment

2.3.1Analysis

A general description of how the analysis was carried out is to be provided.