1. Facilities Plan Update July 2, 2009 Palmer Engineering Company / Hazen & Sawyer / CDP

2. What is a Facilities Plan?  Required by the Federal and State Government  401 KAR 5:006  The Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1313  The Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1288  Requirements  401 KAR 5:006

3. Facilities Plan Requirements  Facilities Plan Boundary  Existing Facilities  Population Projections (20 Yrs)  Flow Projections  Environmental Considerations  Alternatives Analysis  Schedule

4. Why Does WMU Need a Facilities Plan Update?  Required when: (401 KAR 5:006)  Major changes to the Facilities  20 Years since previous Facilities Plan  Current Facilities Plan: 1972 / 1973  Consent Decree

5. Facilities Plan Approval Process Draft Plan Clearinghouse Comments Resubmit Local Agency Approval Public Hearing Final Approval

6. Environmental Agency Involvement  U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife  Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife  Kentucky Heritage Council  Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission  Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection  State Clearinghouse

10. WMU Existing Facilities  Includes:  150 miles of gravity sanitary sewer  15 Miles of Force Main  17 Pump Stations  1 WWTP  7.2 MGD (Average)  24 MGD (Peak)  1 Class A Bio-solids facility

11. Existing Facilities Condition  Aging Infrastructure (I/I)  27 Recurring Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs)  Licking River Watershed – 14  Kentucky River Watershed – 13  Pump Station SSO Locations – 5  Manhole SSO Locations – 21  SC-WWTP SSO Locations – 1  Watersheds  2 River  14 Sub-watersheds  Licking River - 8  Kentucky River - 6

13. Population Projections  Census Data  University of Louisville Data Center  Comprehensive Plan  WMU Database

14. Flow Projections  Customer Data  Flow Monitoring  WWTP Flow Data

15. 20 Year Flow Projections Avg. DayPeak Day Licking River 7.2 MGD 24.0 MGD Kentucky River 2.0 MGD 10.0 MGD

16. Alternatives Considered Single Treatment Plant River Watershed Treatment Plants (2)

20. Alternatives Evaluated Capacity Requirements Environmental Considerations Constructability Implementability Cost Capital / O&M / Present Worth

21. Alternatives Evaluated Capacity Requirements Environmental Considerations Constructability Implementability Cost Capital / O&M / Present Worth Recommended Alternative

24. Schedule ProjectBasinYear 1.LHC ImprovementsKentucky2013 2.Maryland Avenue, Wabash, &Licking2013 Smith Manor PS 3. Bel-Air & Westside PSLicking2013 4. East Interceptor ImprovementsLicking2021 (Madison / Washington / Flanagan Ave.) 5. Hood Creek Int. / PS / FMLickingTBD 6.Hancock Creek Int. / PS / FMLickingTBD 7.West InterceptorLickingTBD

25. Schedule / Costs ProjectYearCosts 1.LHC Improvements2013$37,000,000 2.Maryland Avenue, Wabash, &2013$950,000 Smith Manor PS 3. Bel-Air & Westside PS2013$900,000 4. East Interceptor Improvements2021$1,950,000 (Madison / Washington / Flanagan Ave.) 5. Hood Creek Int. / PS / FMTBD$5,800,000 6.Hancock Creek Int. / PS / FMTBD$8,800,000 7.West InterceptorTBD$7,700,000

26. Summary Required Element Sets Direction Consent Decree Compliance Position for the Future