Integrating Asset Management Principals to Watershed Management: A Risk-Based Approach to Managing Stormwater Assets

Integrating Asset Management Principals to Watershed Management: A Risk-Based Approach to Managing Stormwater Assets Presenters: Mark VanAuken, PE, CMS4S, ENV SP Stormwater/MS4 Discipline Leader Kevin Slaven Senior Asset Management Consultant

Agenda Historical Stormwater Asset Work Need for Stormwater Asset Management Move to a More Holistic Review Status of Risk-Based Linear Asset Work Stormwater Risk-Based Asset Management Case Studies Questions?

Historical Stormwater Asset Work MS4 Permitting Collection system/outfall Water quality focused Data/GIS Stormwater infrastructure O&M focused

MS4 Permitting Example NYS Thruway Regulated NPDES Stormwater Phase 2 Entity Outfall Inventory and Inspection

Data/GIS Example Ohio DOT Identify, inventory, and inspect 6,500 culverts on SRs throughout 7 counties Locate/enter data for 12- to 120-inch culverts Review plans and GIS data to identify potential culverts to be inventoried Use of Trimble GPS and ArcPad to inventory data

Need for Stormwater Asset Management Regulatory System Knowledge Fiscal Health & Safety

Flood Control Current Problem NOAA estimates an average of $8.2 Billion in damages from flooding each year in the U.S. In 2013, April floods caused an estimated $190 million in damages to Illinois residents and businesses in 35 counties. An estimated 65,000 residential homes were damaged or destroyed, with 90 percent of those occurring in the Chicago area.

Move to A More Holistic Review Water Quality Asset Inventory Holistic Focus

Status of Risk-Based Linear Asset Work Inventory Assets Fund the Program Assess Condition Determine CIP Assess Criticality Determine Maintenance Program Assign Risk Set Targets for Service Levels Determine Remaining Life and Replacement Cost Water and sewer line assessment well ahead of stormwater

Status of Risk-Based Linear Asset Work Inventory Assets Fund the Program Assess Condition Determine CIP Assess Criticality Determine Maintenance Program Assign Risk Set Targets for Service Levels Determine Remaining Life and Replacement Cost

Asset Attribute Data Categories Physical Attributes: Facility ID Asset ID Asset Name Asset Type Capacity/Size Etc. Financial Attributes: Install Date Install Cost Replace Cost Estimated Useful Life Location Attributes: Asset Location Community Watershed Asset Management Attributes: Physical Condition Performance Condition Consequence of Failure Risk

Probability of Failure: Evaluate By Condition Assessment (desktop, visual or testing) Condition Type Failure Mode Description Assessment Method Capacity Does not meet demand (flow, loading, storage volume, etc.) Test or Desktop Performance Level of Service Does not meet functional needs (regulatory permits, customer commitments) Desktop Efficiency Not lowest cost alternative (labor, maintenance, obsolescence) Desktop Physical Mortality Current state of repair and operation as influenced by age, historical maintenance and operating environment Test, Visual, Desktop, Modeling 13 13

Condition Assessment Methods: Desktop Assessment: Considers operating data, maintenance history, staff knowledge, current needs, future needs and industry standards. Site Assessment Visual Assessment: Uses a set of standard criteria specific to the type of asset. Results in a comparative ranking of assets on a standard scale (e.g. 1-best to 5- worst). Most effective when applied against a broad asset base with a large quantity of assets. Testing: Uses industry accepted methods. Examples include: capacity test and advanced condition testing. Performed on individual assets. Provides an absolute ranking for asset condition. Results can be expressed on a standard scale. Some tests are failure finding not condition assessment. 14 14

Condition Assessment by Asset Type: Define Condition Scoring Criteria for Physical and Performance Pipe/Culvert/Outfall Structural, Erosion, Trash, Sedimentation, Odor, Algae, Etc Pipes / Culverts / Outfalls 1 2 3 4 5 Structural (PACP) Erosion Trash None (no/minor defects, failure is unlikely) None (No erosion near barrel observed) None (No trash or debris present) Slight (minor defects, pipe is unlikely to fail for 20+ years) Slight (Slight erosion near barrel, no imminent concern on condition of barrel) Slight (Limited trash and/or debris present) Moderate (has moderate defects and will likely fail in the next 10-20 years) Moderate (noticeable erosion near barrel that could lead to future collapse or pipe failure) Moderate (Trash and/or debris present, but will not cause flooding or inhibit O&M or emergency operations) Severe (has severe defects and will likely fail in the next 5-10 years ) Severe (severe erosion/undercutting around barrel, collapse or failure could oocur) Severe (Trash and/or debris present that will likely cause flooding or inhibit O&M or emergency operations) Failure (has failed or will likely fail in the next few years) Moderate Severe (Sedimentation (Sedimentatoin present, but will not present that will likely cause flooding or cause flooding or None (No inhibit O&M or inhibit O&M or 15 sedimentation Slight (Limited emergency emergency Sedimentation present) sedimentation) operations) operations) Failure 15 Failure Failure

Physical Condition Examples Condition Score 1 Condition Score 5

Performance Examples Capacity Regulatory Obsolescence Availability

Consequence of Failure: Evaluate by Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis (desktop or GIS) Triple Bottom Line Economic Social Sustainability Environmental 19

Consequence of Failure (COF): Triple Bottom Line Categories Economic: additional capital and operating costs resulting from a failure. Example: asset replacement/maintenance cost. Environmental: cost of environmental degradation resulting from a failure. These costs may or may not be directly incurred by municipality. Example: regulatory fine. Social: cost of community impacts resulting from a failure. These costs are generally not directly incurred by GCWW. Example: loss of property use and safety. 20

Overview of Assessment Process Risk Is a Simple Equation: Probability * Consequence

Risk Supports Optimization of Capital Improvement Programs Probability of Failure x Consequence of Failure x Redundancy Factor = Risk Score Failure Mode Consequence Mortality Economic Level of Service Social / Safety Capacity Environmental Efficiency TBL:Triple Bottom Line Right projects at the right time

Remaining Life and Replacement Cost Remaining Life Cost (Replacement, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance)

Service Levels Build Transparency and Stakeholder Relationships SL Category Wastewater Reliability sewer blockages / collapses overflows backups Water Distribution 30 25 20 Breaks and Leaks Per 100 Miles Per Year 15 Quality odor, water, and trash complaints 10 5 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Customer Service Regulatory event response call center performance discharge permit compliance water quality compliance Current Performance Trends and Issues Stable performance driven by rehabilitation and renewal program of 100 miles per year. Continued focus on oldest cast iron pipe and worst served areas. 2007 performance impacted by spike of 75 third party damage incidents during downtown light rail construction.

Sample Service Level and Supporting Maintenance Performance Measures 1 2 Strategic Plan Elements Ensure system and asset reliability and minimize interruptions Provide high quality service and effective response LOS Category and Measures Stormwater Collection LOS X1 Collapses / Blockages Per 100 Miles LOS X2 Property Flooding LOS X3 Discharge Compliance LOS X4 Event Response Time Key Performance Indicators Operations and Maintenance Number of feet of sewer line cleaned Number of times assets were inspected Ratio of PM/CM work orders Work order completion ratio

Risk Assessment Balances Capital with Maintenance

Business Cases and TBL / Cost Benefit Analysis Support CIP Needs and Priority

Washington DC MS4 Outfall Inventory Program

MS4 Outfall Program Goals Develop and implement an Outfall Repair Schedule to ensure all outfalls are in good repair by 2022 Total MS4 Outfalls = 587

Field Data Collection

Condition Assessment Criteria

F-100 Outfall Ranking Example #1 Presenters TBD Stream Bank/Pool: 2 x 1 Some Erosion Structure: 0 Excellent/Like New Criticality: 0 Normal TOTAL SCORE: 2

Outfall Ranking Example #2 F-095 Stream Bank/Pool: 2 x 3 Severe Erosion Structure: 3 Very Poor Criticality: 0 Normal TOTAL SCORE: 9

Achieving Objectives Which Outfalls to Fix? Total Score No. of Outfalls Percent Repair Priority 0-3 511 87% None 4-8 67 12% Medium 9-11 9 1% High Total 587 100%

Schiphol Airport, Amsterdam Stormwater Asset Management Program

Schiphol vs. O Hare Schiphol (2011) O Hare (2011) 6 runways 7 runways (and 1 under construction) 50M passengers 67M passengers 420,000 Aircraft operations 878,000 Aircraft operations 103 Carriers 50 Carriers 15 feet below sea level 650 feet above sea level 6,800 acres 7,000 Acres 1 terminal 4 terminals

Schiphol Baseline Schiphol Strategy Primary process Schiphol Airport Exploitation of the airport Risk based maintenance management Other activities Water management Storm water Open water system environment Slide 41 13 November 2013 ARCADIS 2013

Schiphol Risk Analysis Risk without preventative measures = 403,000 per year

Schiphol Risk Analysis Cost of preventative measures (TV inspection) = 28,571 per year Risk with preventative measures = 134,333 per year Preventative Measures Reduce Risk Cost by 1/3

Chesterfield County, VA Watershed Management Program

Midlothian Drainage District Less than 2 square miles in area District contains 37 stormwater structures Risk-based SW asset assessment is beta test for rest of county

Stormwater Assets Stormwater Assets: Detention basins 6 Retention basins 4 Storm filters 3 Underground pipe 1 Filterra 23 Streams/Channels 2

Asset Condition Ratings Pipes / Culverts / Outfalls BMPs / GI Open Channels / Streams Condition Assessment Rating Object ID Location ID Asset ID Technology/ Type Structure Number Structural Problem Erosion/ Sedimentation Vegetation Clogging Trash Pretreatment Device Inspection Comments 1 278 1363 Detention - 3 2 4 4 Fenced but unlocked, 3' to top of trash rack, odorous 2 3278 1598 Detention WCVE 5 2 3 2 2 concrete outlet structures with slot drains at grade. No inlet into pond, berm around perimeter 3 3298 1614 Retention Home Depot 2 4 4 3 Fenced but unlocked, section of fence missing. Heavily silted, oil sheen on water 4 8162 1469 Detention - 1 4 Locked behind 6' fence. Property management said Chesterfield County has the key. Pond is overgrown and doesn't appear to have any inlet or outlet structures 5 8555 1221 Extended Detention # 1 2 3 4 2 1 Sedimentation issue: 1 inlet causing scour, 2 others are silted in 6 8559 1222 Extended Detention # 2 2 4 5 2 1 Concrete inlet pointed directly at outlet, PVC inlet silted 7 8561 899 Filterra F1 2 2 3 2 1 Curb inlet coming in 8 8566 1070 Storm Filter 17 2 1 1 4 1 Sedimentation issue 9 8568 1466 Detention - 4 5 5 5 1 Completely overgrown and silted in 10 8580 1173 Retention #1 2 2 2 2 Fenced in, could not gain access. Four roof drains appear to drain in to pond as well as whatever over land surface flow enters 11 8580 1630 Retention #2 2 2 3 3 Fenced in, could not gain access

WQ Improvement vs Risk-Based Need

Achieving Objectives Which Assets to Fix/Retrofit? Total Score No. of Assets Percent Repair Priority 1-6 None 7-9 Low 10-12 Medium 13-15 High Total 39 100%

Summary Switch from Reactive to Proactive Holistic, Data Driven Evaluation of Stormwater Assets Takes Bias Out of Capital Planning Positions You for Future Regulatory Compliance Using TBL Analysis

THANK YOU! Mark VanAuken, PE, CMS4S, ENV SP mvanauken@arcadis-us.com 330-515-5678 Kevin Slaven kslaven@arcadis-us.com 330-515-5687 51 29 September 2014 2013 ARCADIS

Integrating Asset Management Principals to Watershed Management: A Risk-Based Approach to Managing Stormwater Assets Presenters: Mark VanAuken, PE, CMS4S, ENV SP Stormwater/MS4 Discipline Leader Kevin Slaven Senior Asset Management Consultant 52 29 September 2014 2013 ARCADIS

What Are Service Levels? A commitment to deliver a specified level of service, and quality to customers and stakeholders A mechanism to communicate and report performance results, focus organizational efforts, and prioritize investments The linkage between your strategic objectives and operational or tactical objectives 53 29 September 2014 2013 ARCADIS

Service Levels & Performance Measures Service Levels Externally-driven Strategic level Contracts/agreements with customers/stakeholders Focused on highly visible areas (quality, response, etc.) Link the municipality and asset management charters Performance Measures Internally-driven Operational and field level Translate strategic goals into tactical plans Comprehensive tracking of cost, productivity, and performance Drive tactical plan implementation Both are Required for Successful Asset Management 54 29 September 2014 2013 ARCADIS