Walsack Phil MPUA Baseline Statistics Demographic Trends State of the State MECC Kansas City May 11-13 Overland Park

1. …Where Your #2… is Our #1…
Quote from:
Cam McKay;
Kingsbury GID;
Stateline,
Nevada;
10/30/14

2. State of the State

3. Missouri
 68,886 = Land area in square miles
 2,747 = Land area inside municipal limits in square miles
 4% = Land area inside municipalities
 96% = Land area outside of municipalities
 5,998,900 = Population (2010 U.S. Census Data)
 6,063,600 = Population (2014 U.S. Census QuickFact)
 3,959,616 = Population of Missouri municipalities
 65.3% = Municipal Population of Missouri
 34.7% = Non-Municipal Population of Missouri

4. Missouri
 974 = Number of communities with population >100 people.
 799 = Number of communities with population totals
between 100 and 3,500 people.
 4th = Missouri’s rank nationally of number of smaller
communities.
 (less than 1,000 people)
 658 = Number of cities.
 13 = Number of cities with populations >50,000 people.
 $47,764 = Median Household Income (2010-2014 U.S. Census QuickFact)

5. Population Trends of Missouri
 44 = Counties north of the Missouri River
 34 = Counties have lost population for the past 100 years
(1900 to 2000).
 6 = Counties have had periods of both gaining and losing
populations from the 1900 baseline.
 4 = Counties have had growing populations every decennial
over the past 100 years
 Audrain
 Boone
 Clay
 St. Charles

6. Population Trends of Missouri
 44 = Counties north of the Missouri River
 34 = Counties have lost population for the past 100 years
(1900 to 2000).
Counties with tough population hardships:
1900 2000
 Chariton 26,800 8,400
 Shelby 16,200 6,700
 Gentry 20,500 6,500
 Mercer 14,100 2,700

7. Population Trends of Missouri
 28 = Counties south of the Missouri River & north of
Interstate 44.
 18 = Counties have lost population for the past 100 years
(1900 to 2000), including:
Bates Barton Benton
Cedar Cooper Dade
Dallas Henry Hickory
Lafayette Lawrence Maries
Moniteau Osage Polk
St. Clair Saline Vernon

8. State of the Sewers

9. The 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
was scheduled to be released in July 2014.
The release was postponed until after the
mid-term elections in the Fall of 2014.

10. The 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
was scheduled to be released in July 2014.
Then, the release was postponed until after
the Christmas Holidays of 2014.

11. The 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
was scheduled to be released in July 2014.
Then, the release was postponed until after
the Office of Management & Budget made
its comments on the Survey during the first
quarter of 2015.

12. The 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
was scheduled to be released in July 2014.
Then, the release was postponed until after
the Office of Management & Budget made
its comments on the Survey during the first
quarter of 2015….then it languished!

13. Playing politics with our pipes is not
productive when we need to uncover the
facts about the state of our wastewater
infrastructure and tell the truth to our
rate-payers.

14. The 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
was released in January 2016.

15. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
2008 Survey (released in 2010)
 $298.1 Billion National Needs
 (from 2008 to 2028)
2012 Survey (released in 2016)
 $271.0 Billion National Needs
 (from 2012 to 2017)

16. Past Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
USEPA 2008 Needs Survey (released in 2010)
$298.1 Billion Nation-wide (from 2008 to 2028)
 $5.19B Missouri’s share.
 Missouri ranked 14th neediest overall.
 Missouri ranked worst in the nation (i.e.,
most needy) in inflow/infiltration correction,
at $1.25B in need.

17. Newest Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
USEPA 2012 Needs Survey (released in 2016)
$271.0 Billion Nation-wide (from 2012 to 2017)
 $9.59B Missouri’s share (Categories I-V).
 Missouri ranked 6th neediest overall.

18. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
 Category I: Secondary Wastewater Treatment:
 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) effluent levels
to attain 30 mg/L.
 $2.08B Missouri’s share.
 Missouri ranked 6th neediest.

19. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
 Category II: Advanced Wastewater Treatment:
 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) effluent levels
to attain 20 mg/L; stringent limits for
ammonia, nitrogen, phosphorus, metals,
and man-made synthetic organics.
 $297M Missouri’s share.
 Missouri ranked 30th neediest.

20. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
 Category III-B: Conveyance System Repair -
Sewer Replacement & Rehabilitation
 $347M Missouri’s share.
 Missouri ranked 29th in need.

21. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
 Category III-A: Conveyance System Repair -
I/I Correction
 $1.14B Missouri’s share.
 Missouri ranked 1st in need.

22. Crunching the Numbers
 Of the $1.493B addressed in the Clean
Watersheds Needs Survey for Missouri’s total
Category III-A and III-B Needs (Collections
Systems), five larger cities take up $1.206B of
the need.
 Jefferson City, Kansas City, St. Joseph, St. Louis,
and Springfield.
 That leaves just $287M for the rest of Missouri.

23. Digging Deep into the Numbers
 That $287M is claimed by only 71 communities.
 But Missouri has 747 communities eligible for
state funding (SRF).
 That means that just 9.7% of Missouri
communities claim, and can document
that, they have a I/I correction need.

24. Coloring by Number with Phil
 How many miles of collection piping are
there in Missouri?
 No one knows
…not even me.

25. Coloring by Number with Phil
 How many miles of collection piping are there
in Missouri?
 No one knows…not even me.
 But I am closing in on that long-ignored
number.
 As of yesterday, there are 24,581 collection
system pipe miles confirmed.

26. Phil’s “Guess-estimate” is 26,000 miles
Holes to fill in the dataset:
 98 satellite system are MIA.
 22 cities with populations >3,500 people are
unaccounted for.
 216 very small cities, towns, and villages do
not know how many miles of sewer piping
they have…they just don’t know.

27. Rehabilitating 26,000 pipe miles
If a cost of $172,000/mile (from the semi-urban
cities in their Bypass Elimination Plans) is used
as the high end of a range.
And a cost of $104,635 (from the urban cities
in the 2012 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey)
is used as a low end of a range.
Then…

28. Rehabilitating 26,000 pipe miles
An estimated rehabilitation cost
ranges between
$4.23B to $2.75B.
This estimate is much more realistic,
and higher, than the 2012 USEPA’s
Needs Survey value of $1.42B.

29. The Only Way…Grind it out!

32. Phil Walsack
Missouri Public Utility Alliance
1808 I-70 Drive SW
Columbia, MO 65203
573-445-3279
pwalsack@mpua.org

33. Quit Covering Your Assets with Asphalt!