HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-07-156 - Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program Progress ReportREPORT
Report To: Councillor Berry Vrbanovic, Chair, and Members of the
Finance and Corporate Services Committee
Date of Meeting: December 10, 2007
Submitted By: Rob Browning, General Manager of Development & Technical
Services
Pauline Houston, General Manager of Financial Services
Prepared By: K. Grant Murphy, P.Eng. Director of Engineering Services
Dan Chapman, Director of Financial Planning & Reporting
Wards}Involved: All
Date of Report: November 27, 2007
Report No.: DTS 07-156
Subject: ACCELERATED INFRASTRUCTURE RENEWAL PROGRAM
PROGRESS REPORT
RECOMMENDATION:
For discussion
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City of Kitchener owns right-of-way assets, including roads, sanitary and storm sewers and
watermains that are approximately valued at over $2.0B X2007 replacement dollars}. Given that
the typical lifespan for infrastructure elements such as watermain and sewer main is 70 to 100
years, and that the earliest infrastructure in Kitchener was being installed at approximately the
turn of the last century, it is estimated that a significant portion of the older areas within the City
will require its infrastructure to be replaced over the next 25 to 50 years.
In 2004, the City of Kitchener began to implement an Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal
Program to replace its aging watermains, sewers and roads. At that time, it was estimated that
the City would need to spend a minimum of approximately $1.5 billion over asixty-year period
(an average of $25 million per year) just to keep up with the job of replacing its current and
aging infrastructure. Additional money would be required to build new roads and other
infrastructure as the City continues to grow.
The Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program targeted the replacement of linear
infrastructure that is greater than 80 years old by 2032. This required an increase from the pre-
2004 replacement rate of 2.67km annually to an annual replacement rate of 8.67km and to
achieve this target significant rate increases were projected. A formula was developed to
apportion the total reconstruction cost between the water/sewer rate base and tax-base; with
the road, sewer and water components being generally split in the following manner -capital
out of current funding at 23%, sewer funding at 46% and water funding at 31 %.
Further, a staged approach was approved to phase in the rate adjustments required for full cost
recovery funding. In 2004 and 2005 larger rate increases occurred, and future rate increases
were to be inflationary. Assumptions used in the original full cost recovery accounting model
have changed significantly and review of the model is required. During the 2007 budget
process, staff committed to bring a review of the program forward to Council as part of the 2008
budget process. This was completed in November 2007 and focussed on three areas of
concern; achievement of targets, operational constraints and funding mechanisms.
Firstly, the annual replacement rate has not been achieved in part due to unforeseen
construction unit cost increases. The actual unit cost for the design, construction and
commissioning of road and utility reconstruction projects has increased from $1,800 to a peak of
$3,639 per metre (in 2006} or 102% more than the original cost estimate. Further, only 40% of
the annual target, or 3.45km, instead of 8.67 km, has been achieved. The cost of reconstruction
has risen dramatically and Kitchener is not isolated in this predicament, where estimating the
project future costs of construction has been very challenging. Coupled with these unforeseen
cost increases, project complexity has increased due to changes in environmental regulations
which highlight the necessity of more effective infrastructure asset program planning.
Secondly, about 2.66 kilometres of infrastructure was being replaced on an annual basis prior to
the implementation of the Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program and, as such,
Engineering Services resources, both internal and external were geared towards this program
scope. The Engineering Services Division is constrained to implement not only the current work
plan but any future expansion of it. In response, an engineering audit and a business process
review has been initiated within the Division. The focus is on effective planning, risk
mitigation, cost control and project management to not only meet Accelerated Infrastructure
Renewal Program goals and objectives but other engineering related activities.
Thirdly, when taking the above assumptions into consideration, the required combined rate
increase for 2008 to 2011 is 12.5% (Figure 6}, which approximates the expected Regional rate
increase during that time period. This translates to an increase of approximately $6.14 per
month for the average residential ratepayer in 2008. Beyond that, the rate increase is
contemplated to be between 3.8% and 5.5% for the remainder of the program. Based on
information received to date, it would appear that other comparable municipalities, including the
City of Waterloo, are projecting similar rate increases for 2008.
As noted earlier, 23% of the cost of each road reconstruction project is funded from the tax
base. As a result of increased construction costs, this requires an increase in capital out of
current funding of $88.4 million between 2009 and 2032. These amounts are not proposed to
be adjusted during the current budget cycle as the tax based component of the 10 year capital
budget is currently balanced. As a result, during 2008, all possible funding sources need to be
explored in order to continue the City's commitment to the program as of 2009.
In summary, aging infrastructure is a major concern for municipalities and public utilities across
Canada in that a community's health and well-being can be put at risk as infrastructure assets
deteriorate. Like many municipalities, Kitchener's underground infrastructure, watermain and
sewers, along with the roads that the community travels on, are aging. Inadequate funding and
program planning for infrastructure adversely affects the City of Kitchener's ability to provide
sufficient capacity for municipal intensification efforts, to protect the health of the community
through the safe provision of drinking water or the proper conveyance of sewage, and to
minimize risk related to increased property damage claims.
2
BACKGROUND:
Infrastructure fails in many ways and can adversely affect the quality of life of the community.
Sewer pipes crumble and eventually collapse causing sink holes such as on Plymouth Road in
2004. Watermains corrode both internally and externally causing service disruptions to
consumers ~i.e. Wellington & Dundas Streets in London}. Further, the effective conveyance and
treatment of stormwater is key to protecting the environment, where upgrades to the stormwater
drainage channels need to place more focus on improving the quality of the storm water run-off,
such as the Henry Sturm Greenway which enters Victoria Lake.
The City of Kitchener owns right-of-way assets, including roads, sanitary and storm sewers and
watermains that are approximately valued at over $2.0B X2007 replacement dollars}. Given that
the typical lifespan for infrastructure elements such as watermain and sewer main is 70 to 100
years, and that the earliest infrastructure in Kitchener was being installed at approximately the
turn of the last century, one can anticipate that a significant portion of the older areas of the City
will require replacement of infrastructure over the next 25 to 50 years.
As part of the response to the Walkerton Tragedy, the provincial legislature passed Bill 175, the
Sustainable Water and Sewer Act in December 2002. The legislation requires municipalities to
assess and collect fees to cover the full cost of their water and sewer systems, including
replacement costs.
In 2004, City staff implemented a program which would begin to address the regulatory
requirements of this legislation. The legislation requires that full cost recovery of water and
sewer costs be obtained through utility rates, and that the replacement of infrastructure be fully
funded over its expected life cycle. Further, an aggressive strategy was proposed to replace
the infrastructure that was nearing the end of its useful life. A 10 year financial model was
developed to project the implications of moving towards full cost recovery and a sustainable
infrastructure replacement rate.
In 2004, the model was presented to Council. A staged approach was approved to phase in the
rate adjustments required for full cost recovery funding. In 2004 and 2005 larger rate increases
occurred, and future rate increases were to be inflationary. Assumptions used in the original full
cost recovery accounting model have changed significantly and review of the model is required.
During the 2007 budget process, staff committed to bring a review of the program forward to
Council as part of the 2008 budget process.
REPORT:
In 2004, the Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program was initiated to ensure that the City of
Kitchener's right-of-way infrastructure was in a position of physical and financial sustainability.
The goal of the Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program is to ensure that there are
adequate resources available to replace the City's infrastructure in a proactive, well-planned
and timely manner. A critical element is to ensure that water and sewer rates are charged to
City residents that are at a level that is sufficient to fund the activities that will support the
required rate of renewal of the infrastructure.
The Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program attempts to achieve the replacement of linear
infrastructure that is greater than 80 years old by 2032. This requires an annual replacement
rate of 8.67km. It should be noted that over the past 32 years the effort to replace aged
infrastructure has resulted in an average annual replacement rate of 2.66km, 85km of linear
infrastructure (i.e. sewer pipes). At this replacement rate it would take well over 100 years to
3
replace the existing cohort of pipes, or not sooner than 2104. Compounding the problem is the
fact this cohort would continue to grow even larger as time goes on.
Beyond the age of the infrastructure there are other factors used to determine funding priorities
such as assessing the condition of the pipes or roadway, understanding the cause of
infrastructure deterioration and completing an engineering assessment of risk. Analysis of
infrastructure condition, both from a capacity and quality perspective, assessment of risk, and
the projection of associated life-cycle costs are key components to prioritizing existing
infrastructure needs, both now and in the future.
Achievement of Taraets
In 2004, an average unit cost of $1,800 per metre was initially used to derive an annual cost
projection required to achieve the program target, by 2014. This unit cost was based on the
typical construction components such as materials, including pipe, granular materials, asphalt,
concrete, labour, including engineering design, and construction personnel and finally,
equipment such as trucks and other heavy equipment. A formula was developed to apportion
the total reconstruction cost in an equitable manner between the water/sewer rate base and tax-
base; with the road, sewer and water components being generally split in the following manner
-capital out of current funding at 23%, sewer funding at 46% and water funding at 31 %.
Since the initiation of the Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program approximately 13.9km of
have been replaced, including 2007 construction work. This is 60% lower than the projected
34.6km that was anticipated to have been completed Figure 2). Since the inception of the
program there have been some significant projects that have adversely affected the
accomplishment rate, due to excessive complexity and environmental risk issues ~e.g., Joseph
and Gaukel Street project).
In addition, the annual replacement rate has not been achieved due to unforeseen construction
unit cost increases. The actual unit cost for the design, construction and commissioning of road
and utility reconstruction projects has increased from $1,800 to a peak of $3,639 per metre (in
2006) or 102% more than the original cost estimate Figure 3).
Figures 4 and 5 provides information about the major items that comprise a road and
underground reconstruction project and this information represents typical reconstruction
projects spanning from 2003 to 2006. A significant driver of these unit cost increases has been
the increase in petroleum prices, which has risen by over 250%. Petroleum is a major
component of asphalt, plastic pipe, the processing of other raw materials such as concrete
aggregate, and fuel for construction equipment used on these projects.
There is no doubt that the cost of reconstruction has risen dramatically and Kitchener is not
isolated in this predicament, where estimating the project future costs of construction has been
very challenging. These unforeseen cost increases and project complexity highlight the
necessity of more effective infrastructure asset program planning and more sophisticated
construction project management.
Operational Constraints
As previously mentioned, about 2.66km of infrastructure was being replaced on annual basis
prior to the implementation of the accelerated program and, as such, Engineering Services
resources, both internal and external were geared towards this program scope. As also
4
mentioned an infrastructure condition data analysis and risk assessment is a key to more
effective program planning in order to optimize the funds that are being spent on the
Accelerated Infrastructure Program. At this point, it is evident that there are four (4) specific
areas of concern where improvement is necessary for the delivery of Accelerated Infrastructure
Program:
• Addressing immediate and on-going project management work load;
• Analyzing condition-based information for all infrastructure;
• Prioritization and rationalization for various infrastructure programs; and
• Effectively evaluating environmental risks and mitigating these risks during the planning
cycle for infrastructure projects.
There are inadequate Engineering resources to complete this abovementioned work and though
consultants are hired to conduct a variety of complex engineering studies, the oversight and
management of the infrastructure analysis should be completed internally. Infrastructure
systems analysts would focus on a variety of activities that support the ongoing assessment,
pre-design assessments, the development of decision-support models and program planning
activities. Staff will bring forward these items as additional requests during the review of the
operating budget on January 14, 2008.
Currently Engineering Services contracts externally for services related to engineering design
and on-site inspection and contract administration. Consideration has also been given to
contracting project management work to external consultants. Although this is feasible for
specific skills such as structural engineering or environmental engineering related to project
specific requirements, it is not recommended that the project management function be
contracted to external parties. The current gap in resources is approximately two (2) additional
Design and Construction Project Managers. Staff will bring forward these items as additional
requests during the review of the operating budget on January 14, 2008.
It cannot be emphasized enough, that the Engineering Services Division is constrained to
implement not only the current work plan but any future expansion of it. In response, an
engineering audit and a business process review has been initiated within the Division. The
focus of these activities is on risk mitigation, cost control and effective project management to
not only meet Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program goals and objectives but other
engineering related activities.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The financial projection has been updated to ensure that by the end of 2032, the City of
Kitchener will meet the target for kilometres of work completed over the span of the program.
City staff has completed a projection for the remainder of the program. It should be noted that
this projection relies on several assumptions that may change over time.
Assumptions that have remained consistent since the inception of the program:
• The overall purpose of the program has remained consistent, that by the year 2032,
no linear infrastructure will be over 80 years old.
• Accumulated operating deficits must be eliminated in the near term, such that the
Sewer and Water utilities return to a surplus position between 2010 and 2011 as
contemplated in the original model.
5
Assumptions that have changed since the inception of the program:
• Cost per kilometre used in the revised projection has increased from approximately
$2.1 million to $3.1 million.
• Regional rate increases will remain at 14.9% and 9.9%, for sewer and water
respectively, until 2010 and 2013 respectively in accordance with the Region's 10-
year projection, and the Regional rate increase will then drop to rates of 9.9% and
6.9% for each of sewer and water. This is a significant increase over the original
assumptions in the first model X4.9% for sewer and water). Regional wholesale
charges account for approximately half of the City's total budget for water and sewer
services.
• The per-kilometre cost will remain consistent except fora 2% inflationary increase
per year) with the current cost of construction, excluding the costs related to the
disposal of salt-affected soils, which it is anticipated will no longer be a factor after
2008.
• Once the deficits in the sewer and water utilities have been recovered, the shortfall in
kilometres constructed will be spread out over the remaining years in the program,
such that from 2012 onwards, approximately ten X10} kilometres of linear
infrastructure will be completed per year.
When taking the above assumptions into consideration, the required combined rate increase for
2008 to 2011 is 12.5% (Figure 6), which approximates the expected Regional rate increase
during that time period. This translates to an increase of approximately $6.14 per month for the
average residential ratepayer in 2008. Beyond that, the rate increase is contemplated to be
between 3.8% and 5.5% for the remainder of the program. Based on information received to
date, it would appear that other comparable municipalities, including the City of Waterloo, are
projecting similar rate increases for 2008. Staff propose that these rates be advertised to
members of the public and that the public meeting on January 7, 2008 be a forum for ratepayers
to make representations with respect to the rates to Council. Following that, the rates and
budget projections will be considered as part of operating budget deliberations on January 14,
2008.
As noted earlier, 23% of the cost of each road reconstruction project is funded from the tax
base. As a result of increased construction costs, this requires an increase in capital out of
current funding of $88.4 million between 2009 and 2032. These amounts are not proposed to
be adjusted during the current budget cycle as the tax based component of the 10 year capital
budget is currently balanced. As a result, during 2008, all possible funding sources need to be
explored in order to continue the City's commitment to the program as of 2009. Possible
sources to be considered include:
• a readjustment of City funding priorities;
• a d i rect I evy i m pact;
• increased grant revenues ~e.g., Gas Tax,1 % of GST, other infrastructure programs}; or
• the reallocation of the EDIF levy upon the conclusion of the EDIF program in 2013.
Staff has reviewed the funding that was received in 2004 to 2006 from the Accelerated
Infrastructure Program, as well as all construction related expenses incurred during that time.
The results of this review provide an overall context for the level of investment and are as
follows:
6
Opening surplus $277,190
Fundin -infrastructure $45,239,000
Funding -other $18,719,316
Costs incurred 52 008 768
Surplus at end of 2006 $12,226,738
Projected Surplus at end of 2007 $ 3,205,532
The surplus balances are comprised of:
Project/Type 2006 Balance
Surplusl(Deficit} 2007 Projected
Balance
Surplusl(Deficit} Notes
Regional Roads 1,974,557 81,337 Large Regional invoice paid in `07
Construction 4,285,894 (1,051,273} Includes Gaukel and Victoria St
projects
Design 1,007,745 727,948 Projects are moving into the
Construction phase
Maintenance 1,682,617 508,459
Other 152,082 535,093
Uncommitted 3,123, 843 3, 420, 886
Total 12, 226, 738 3, 205, 532
COMMUNICATIONS:
Since 2004, Kitchener Utilities has conducted quantitative and qualitative customer research to
understand customers' current perceptions of their water service and rates. Research showed
that residents were accepting of rate increases as long as there was accountability for the
funding. Customers emphasized the importance of knowing where the dollars were being
spent. They wanted to know what their rates were being used for.
In response to customers' desires to be informed, the City's Engineering Services Division and
Kitchener Utilities hold public meetings, run ads and articles on rate changes, send letters to
large users, post construction project information to the City's website and annually sends
information about major infrastructure replacement projects and rate changes to ratepayers. In
recent years, the communications program has included graphs showing the percentages of
funding being spent in the water and sewer programs.
Currently, Engineering Services and Kitchener Utilities are working with the Communications
Division to review the communications tools that are being presented to ratepayers to ensure
that information is clear and consistent.
A budget public input session is scheduled for January 7, 2008. Staff propose to advertise this
meeting and make information available to members of the public with respect to the proposed
rate increase so that ratepayers may make informed representations to Council with respect to
the proposed increase.
7
CONCLUSION:
The City of Kitchener's Accelerated Infrastructure Renewal Program has represented a
progressive approach towards ensuring the long-term sustainability of the City's infrastructure.
Since the inception of the program, some of the key assumptions have changed dramatically,
including the cost of construction and Regional rate increases for sewer and water treatment.
As a result, it is prudent to revise the model and program implementation to ensure that the City
maintains a commitment to the replacement of older infrastructure in an optimized and effective
manner. This review also maintains the commitment to Kitchener ratepayers, who have
demonstrated a willingness to pay for infrastructure renewal provided that the City demonstrates
responsible accountability for the funds and the program.
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 -Infrastructure Installation Rates (since 1900) and Expected Infrastructure Life-cycle
Figure 2 -Actual versus Proposed Replacement Targets (using 2007 unit costs)
Figure 3 -Reconstruction Unit Prices -Accelerated Infrastructure Program
Figure 4 -Typical Reconstruction Items & Services, 2003-2006
Figure 5 -Contribution of The Major Components of Reconstruction to Overall Cost Increases,
2003-2006
Figure 6 -Water and Sewer Budget and Rate Projections
Rob Browning,
General Manager of Development &
Technical Services
K. Grant Murphy, P.Eng.
Director of Engineering Services
Pauline Houston, CA
General Manager of Financial Services
Dan Chapman, CA, MPA
Director of Financial Planning & Reporting
8
Figure 1 -Infrastructure Installation Rates (since 1900) and Expected Infrastructure Life-cycle
1aa
sa
sa
~a
sa
.~
i
5a
0
4a
i
as
Y
2a
1a
a
o° o° '.° ti° 3° ~° h° °° ~° ~° o° o° '.°
Period
8.67 km Annual
~ Replacement Rate
~~
ti° 3° ~° h° °° ~°
h~o h~o h~o h~o h~o
2°~ ti°~ 2°h 2°~ 2°~
Figure 2 -Actual versus Proposed Replacement Targets (using 2007 unit costs)
Actual vs. Proposed Replacement Targets
Infrastructure
replacement
shortfall of
20 km or $64M
9
New Infrastructure Construction And 80 Year Lifecycle Replacement Rates
~ New Watermain Installation Watermain 80-Year Lifecycle Replacement Needs
Figure 3 -Reconstruction Unit Prices -Accelerated Infrastructure Program
Average Unit Cost Of Reconstruction
$4,000
$3,500
$3,000
$2,500
m
L
++
C~
L
a $2,000
N
0
U
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
Figure 4 -Typical Reconstruction Items & Services, 2003-2006
Typical Reconstruction Items And Services: Price Changes 2003-2006
100
90
80
0 70
N
0
M 60
0
0
N
~; 50
0
U 40
d
~ 30
t
U 20
d
~ 10
~o
a
d
-10
7
~ -20
U
-30
-40
-50
0
O
Canadian Consumer Price
Index Inflation 2003-2006
.
LJ
,:
U n
U
U
~J
~J .,
LJ
LJ
U ,
U .
>
> a ~,
~- c~ ~ a~
o _ _ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ o
N
Q= N
CC ~ ~ (~ ~ c~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~
~ Q m Q
c~ c~ ~ Q
~ ~
°~ ~ J
(n N
~
Q
~ ~
~
~ U ~~ ~~
o o
O In c c 2
~ ~
rR rR 2 ~
U ~
~
~
Q a
U N N
Reconstruction Items & Services Catagories
1~
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Construction Years
Figure 5 -Contribution of The Major Components of Reconstruction To Overall Cost Increases,
2003-2006
The Contribution Of Major Reconstruction Components
To Overall Project Cast Increases, 2003-2006
Road, 14.6%
Wat
Figure 6 -Water and Sewer Budget and Rate Projections
CITY OF KITCHENER
WATER UTILITY
PROJECTED REVENUE AND EXPENSES
REVENUE AND EXPENSES
Sale of Water
Water Supply
Gross Profit
GROSS PROFIT
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE
Other Revenue
EXPENSES
Operating
Interest Expense (Revenue)
Transfer to capital (Infrastructure)
Transfer to capital (Other)
Excess of revenue over expenses
ACCUMULATED NET REVENUE/(DEFICIT)
Balance beginning of the year
Add excess of revenue over expenses
Accumulated net revenue/(deficit)
Increase in Water Retail Rate
Increase in Region Wholesale Rate
Increase in Consumption
dace Removals, 35.4%
Projected
Budget Actual Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
2007 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
25,855 25,605 2$,184 30,974 34,041 37,411 39,871
14,162 13,953 15,451 16,981 1$,662 20,509 22,540
11,6.93 11,652 12,733 13,993 15,379 __16,901 17,331
45.2% 45.5% 45.2% 45.2% 45.2% 45.2% 43.5%
1,058 930 1,155 1,270 1,255 1,2$7 1,4$$
6, 315 6, 095 6, 642 6, 841 7, 046 7, 258 7, 476
46 46 41 43 19 (70) (125)
4,884 4,884 5,541 6,831 6,944 7,059 10,547
1,526 1,55$ 1,401 1,926 1,015 1,017 1,032
12,771 12,583 13,625 15,641 15,024 15,264 1$,929
(19) (1) 264 (378) 1,610 2,924 (110)
(1,165) (1,165) (1,166) (902) (1,280) 330 3,254
a.a
a~.19) .a.a. a.a.~1} .a .a. 264 a a.a ~3a7$) a .a.a 1 ~6a1a0 a.a. 2,924 a.a. ~1.1.a~)..
(1,184) (1,166) (902) (1,280) 330 3,254 3,144
6.51 % 9.90% 9.90% 9.90% 9.90% 6.00%
9.90% 9.90% 9.90% 9.90% 9.90% 9.90%
-1.99% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
11
Traffic Control, Layout,
Administration, Bonding
12.5%
Sanitary Sewer, 16.3%
CITY OF KITCHENER
SANITARY UTILITY
PROJECTED REVENUE AND EXPENSES
Projected
Budget Actual Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
2007 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
REVENUE AND EXPENSES
Sewer Surcharge 25,336 25,148 28,917 33,225 38,176 43,864 45,546
Cost of Sewage Process 10,349 10,877
~
~ 12,874
~
~~ 14,792
~~ 16,996 18,679
~
~ 20,528
~~
~
Gross Profit 14,987
nnn 14,27
1
nnn
. 1
6,043
nnnn 18,433
nnn 21,179
nnn
~ 25,18
5
nnn 25,018
nnn
.
~r
GROSS PROFIT % 59% 57
0° 55%° 55%° 5
5% 57% %
55
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE
Other Revenue 309 299 337 347 358 368 379
EXPENSES
Operating 3,794 3,626 3,966 4,085 4,208 4,334 4,464
Interest Expense (Revenue) 304 305 157 236 266 94 (107)
Sewage Rebates 329 329 375 431 495 569 580
Transfer to capital (Infrastructure) 7,248 5,217 8,222 10,136 10,304 10,475 15,651
Transfer to capital (Other) 2,881
ff 384 4,849
f 6,725 4,958 2,609 2,037
jj
1
4 556 9,860 1
7,569 21,613 20,231 18,081 22,625
Excess of revenue over expenses 741 4,710 (1,189) (2,833) 1,306 7,473 2,772
ACCUMULATED NET REVENUEI(DEFICIT)
Balance beginning of the year (8,116) (8,116) (3,406) (4,595) (7,428) (6,122) 1,351
Add excess of revenue over expenses 741 4,710 (1,189) (2,833) 1,306 7,473 2,772
Accumulated net revenue/(deficit) (7,375) (3,406) (4,595) (7,428) (6,122) 1,351 4,123
Increase in Retail Sewer Rate 10.15% 14.90% 14.90% 14.90% 14.90% 2.00%
Increase in Region Wholesale Rate 14.90% 14.90% 14.90% 14.90% 9.90% 9.90%
Increase in Consumption -1.99% -0.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
12