Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-12-19 Council Packet - Work Session (2)Ike ct�yof V "'Villa ye weM a Past, C# with a Future 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 - 283 -7535 / Fax: 907 - 283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us Council Work Session with Area Legislators Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 4:OOP.M. - 5:00 P.M. Kenai City Council Chambers Senator Tom Wagoner Senator Cathy Giessel Speaker Mike Chenault Representative Kurt Olson Senator -Elect Peter Micciche Call to Order II. Introductions Mayor Pat Porter Vice -Mayor Ryan Marquis Councilor Bob Molloy Councilor Mike Boyle Councilor Brian Gabriel Councilor Terry Bookey Councilor Tim Navarre III. Opening Comments /Statements by Legislators /Councilors IV. Presentation /Discussion of City of Kenai Capital Priorities V. Discussion of Other Legislative Subjects VI. Closing Comments VII. Adjournment "V illy e with a Past, C# with a Future" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 - 283 -75351 Fax: 907 -283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us \ ti the -ily olr ll V November 5, 2012 The Honorable Sean Parnell State of Alaska Governor's Office P.O. Box 110001 Juneau, AK 99811 -001 Subject: SFY 2014, City of Kenai Capital Priority Requests Dear Governor Parnell: The purpose of this correspondence is to submit the City of Kenai's capital funding priorities for your consideration. The City's capital funding priorities continue to be focused on infrastructure improvements.. These capital projects will promote local hire, decrease operations & maintenance costs, enhance the delivery of essential services, and promote business growth. Priority Number One- Paving & Improvements to City Streets, $1,000,000 This project continues the upgrade of City streets from gravel standards to paved standards. Over 50 % of City roadways are not paved and their condition ranges from very poor to good. In some cases surface water run -off is a problem and piped storm drain systems need to be constructed. The City's road improvement program undertakes from $1 million to $2 million of projects annually, including residential subdivision projects through special improvement districts in which the property owners share the cost of the projects 50 -50 with the City. Priority Number Two - Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades Phase i, $1,870,790 This project will replace and repair major operating systems within the City of Kenai's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The WWTP was constructed in 1982 and has performed in an exemplary manner over the past 30 years. The major operating systems have been well maintained using the revenues generated by the wastewater utility but major changes are needed to incorporate technology which will result in a more efficient plant, both in terms of energy consumption and effluent quality. The WWTP will renew its Alaska Pollution Discharge Elimination System (APDES) permit in 2014. Based on the more restrictive effluent limitations placed on APDES permits over the past several years, it is likely the plant will not meet the more restrictive permit limitations. Priority Number Three - Construct a New One - Million - Gallon Water Storage Reservoir, $2,500,000 Page 2 of 3 November 5, 2012 SFY 2014, City of Kenai Capital Priority Requests The City's water storage needs are presently met by a three - million gallon water storage reservoir that was constructed in 1578. This project could have easily been the number one priority for the City. There is not a way to remove the three - million- gallon reservoir from service without another water storage reservoir to provide storage for the City's needs, and the three - million- gallon tank must be taken "off- line" to accomplish major maintenance. The increase in demand since 1978 also justifies the need for increased water storage. Following the construction of a one - million - gallon water storage reservoir the existing reservoir can be removed from service for four to six months so that repairs can be accomplished and a new coating system installed. Priority Number Four - Construct New City Light/Heavy Equipment Maintenance Shop & Equipment Storage, $2,000,000 This project will construct a new +/- 17,000 square foot shop to provide maintenance on equipment and vehicles for the Kenai Municipal Airport, Streets, Water & Sewer Utilities, Kenai Senior Center, Parks & Recreation, Fire Department, and Police Department. The City has designated $2 million from its general fund reserves for this project. The existing shop is a 30 year -old undersized (6,500 sf) facility which was never designed to support the volume and size of equipment which the City must maintain. The City has already spent $100,000 towards 35% design documents and is moving forward with assembling the final design. An additional equipment storage building will also be constructed under this project. Priority Number Five -Kenai Industrial Park Construction -Phase II Utilities, $500,000 The construction of water, sewer, electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications utilities will complete the Kenai Industrial Park. When complete the Industrial Park will include 20 -25 lots totaling approximately 37 acres. Buccaneer Alaska Operations has already leased 6.8 acres, or 18 %, of the Industrial Park to support, at this writing, three natural gas production wells estimated to produce over 10 mcf. The Industrial Park is in near proximity to the Kenai Municipal Airport and we are marketing the development to heavy - commercial and industrial clients using the airport as well as oil /natural gas service companies. Priority Number Six - Capital Improvements to Support State Personal Use Fishery, $150,000 Each year from July 10th through July 31St, as many as 15,000 personal use fishery participants daily congregate at the mouth of the Kenai River to harvest sockeye salmon. The volume of waste, both from fish and trash from the participants is overwhelming. Last year the City requested $300,000 and was fortunate to receive an appropriation in the amount of $150,000 to assist in the construction of fish cleaning stations. We are requesting the remaining $150,000 to complete the fish cleaning stations and transport system to remove fish waste from the City's beaches. The City collects fees for parking and camping during the fishery, these fees are roughly equal to the City's expenditures in providing temporary sanitary facilities, solid waste disposal, Police & Fire, trash clean -up, boat launch, and other support. Page 3of3 November 5, 2012 SFY 2014, City of Kenai Capital Priority Requests Again, thank you in advance for your review of our requests. If you or your staff have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, e E AI R. Koch City Manager ��. "Villa ye with a Past, C# w tai a Future --- = -_ 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907- 283 -7535 ext 221 1 FAX: 907 - 283 -3014 t�IEG�'fy of Www.ci.kenai.ak.us KENAI, ALASKA '11�// TABLE OF CONTENTS Item Description Page City of Kenai Council Resolution 2012 -56 1 Priority Number One - Paving & Improvements to City Streets 6 Priority Number Two - Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades -Phase 1 19 Priority Number Three - Construct a New One - Million - Gallon Water 38 Storage Reservoir Priority Number Four - Construct a New City Light/Heavy Equipment 65 Maintenance Shop & Equipment Storage Priority Number Five -Kenai Industrial Park Construction 82 Phase II- Utilities Priority Number Six - Capital Improvements to Support State 86 Personal Use Fishery KEMaKa Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -56 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, ADOPTING THE CITY OF KENAI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PRIORITY LISTS FOR STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING REQUESTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2014. WHEREAS, the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) is a guide for capital expenditures; and, WHEREAS, the City of Kenai CIP process has involved consideration of existing plans, programmatic needs and public input, and, WHEREAS, the CIP compliments the legislative priorities, City Budget and Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Kenai CIP Priorities for State and Federal. Funding for Fiscal Year 2014 are outlined in Attachment A; and, WHEREAS, the Kenai City Council held a public hearing on the Capital Improvements Program adoption on October 17, 2012; and, WHEREAS, if unforeseen circumstances occur, the City Council authorizes the City Manager to modify as necessary the City of Kenai's Capital Improvements Plan Priority Lists for State and Federal Funding Requests for the Fiscal Year 2014, and that any modification will be brought before Council for approval at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, adopts the attached City of Kenai Capital Improvements Plan Priority List for State and Federal Funding Requests for the Fiscal Year 2014. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 17th day of October, 2012. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTE7: ) ) Sandr4 digh', City C erk CITY OF KENAI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP) PRIORITES FOR STATE FUNDING REQUESTS FOR SFY 2014 PRIORITY PROJECT TITLE DESCRIPTION REQUESTED NOTESICOMMENTS NUMBER FUNDING Paving & Improvements to City Streets The City of Kenai maintains approximately 20 miles of gravel $ 1,000,000.00 Administration recommends that a project of this type be surfaced roadways within it's municipal boundaries. The cost perpetually included in capital project requests to the State of maintenance of gravel roadways is high, dust from gravel of Alaska. This ongoing infrastructure improvement project 1 roadways is a health issue for the elderly & young. The City has improved the safety and operational efficiency of the maintains an ongoing Local Improvement District (LID) City's roadways. The projects have been designed and program to pave local streets and roads with the City constructed by local consultants and contractors providing providing a 50% cost share for the improvements. further economic benefits to the area. Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades- This project is the initial phase of a four -phase project. Phase $ 1,670,790.00 A grant application for this project has been submitted Phase I I will address improvements to the treatment process to lower under the State of Alaska, Department of Environmental ammonia effluent discharge levels in advance of ammonia Conservation (ADEC) Municipal Matching Grant Program 2 limitations which will be included in the next APDES permit (MMG). We have received the scoring and this project and renewal. Phase I improvements will also include replacement not have scored well enough to be included in the of aging, failing, equipment and install additional equipment Governor's SFY 2014 capital budget. The City Council to providec redundancy in critical operating systems. passed Resolution No. 2012 -51 identifying this project as the number one ADEC MMG priority. Construct a New One - Million Gallon This project would construct a new water storage reservoir to $ 2,500,000.00 This is the first phase of a three phase project to construct Water Storage Reservoir allow for needed long -term maintenance of the City's lone 3 improvements to the WWTP and identified in the WWTP million gallon water storage reservoir. The existing reservoir's Master Plan prepared by CH2MHill in 2003. internal coating system is deteriorating and failing. The interior coating is the original coating system installed when the reservoir was constructed and is well past its useful life. 3 The cathodic protection system has protected underlying metals to date but as more of the internal coating syems fails the underlying metals will corrode, threatening the structural intergrity of the reservoir. Re- coating of the existing reservoir will remove the reservoir from service for 4 -8 months and requires an alternative storage reservoir. Construct New City Light/Heavy This project would construct a 20,000 sf maintenance shop $ 2,000,000.00 Shop facilities to support operations and maintenance Equipment Maintenance Shop & to replace the existing shop. The exsiting shop is a collection activities are always difficult projects to move forward. The Equipment Storage of buildings and conex's that lacks the room to perform present facility was never designed to facilitate the support maintenance on the City's equipment fleet, and also lacks manitenance activities which are being accomplished. 4 engineered ventilation systems as well as other There may be an opportunity for Federal participation, improvements found in designed facilities. This project also specifically FAA funding in an amount comensurate, with includes a new 20,000 s.f. equipment storage building Airport use of the facility. Total project cost estimate is approximately $6 million, of which the City has $4 million in hand. Page 1 of 4 Prepared by: R. Koch CITY OF KENAI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP) PRIORITES FOR STATE FUNDING REQUESTS FOR SFY 20'14 PRIORITY NUMBER PROJECT TITLE DESCRIPTION REQUESTED FUNDING NOTESICOMMENTS Kenai Industrial Park Construction This project would construct $ 500,000.00 This fully develops the Kenai Industrial Park. The Phase II water/ sewer/ electical ltelecommunicationslnatural gas utilities legislature may be seeking economic development projects to the second phase of the Kenai Industrial Park (up to 20 this year. 5 lots, +1- 25 acres) Capital Improvements to Support State This project would construct three Fish CleaningANaste $ 150,000.00 Last year the State provided a $150,000 appropriation in Personal Use Fishery Transfer & Enforce ment/Data Collection Stations. The three response to the City's request for $300,000. The $150,00 6 stations would be located at the North Beach, South Beach, requested in the SFY 2014 budget would provide funding t and City Boat Launch. support the waste disposal solutions. Page 2 of 4 Prepared by: R. Koch CITY OF KENAI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP) PRIORITES FOR STATE FUNDING REQUESTS FOR SFY 2014 PRIORITY PROJECT TITLE DESCRIPTION REQUESTED NOTESICOMMENTS NUMBER Construction FUNDING OTHER PROJECTS WHICH WERE CONSIDERED Page 3 of 4 Prepared by: R. Koch Mommsen Subdivision, First Street Re- This project would re- construct First Street from California $ 360,000.00 Administration believes thins project would best be funded Construction Avenue to Florida Avenue. This roadway exhibits differential from a State /Federal appropriation(s) such as priority #3, movement of the curb & gutter and asphalt. Further the above. asphalt has and is failing. New Fire Engine This new fire engine would replace an existing 26 year old $ 500,000.00 fire engine. Our 1982 fire engine is the oldest equipment presently in use at the Fire Department, and was one of the last years in which "open jump seat" fire engines were allowed by code. The old engine has reached the end of it's useful life and should be replaced. City of Kenai Indoor Turf Field Facility This project would construct a 100'x200' indoor turf field, $ 3,500,000.00 This project has been discussed by the parks & Recreation possibly as an addition to the existing Kenai Multi - Purpose Commission and it is my understanding they wish to Facility. The facility would be used by area schools, pre- continue discussion on the subject. This project is certainly schools, soccer and other organizations. worthy of discussion but significant work needs to be accomplished to determine its feasibility. Lower Kenai River Drift Boat Pull -Out Project would provide lower river access point for pull -out of Unknown ADNR is accomplishing a "Needs Assessment Study" drift boats only. scheduled to be finished in 2011. It's doubtful any funding would be available for this project in advance of the completion of the study, and that State /federal funding would be appropriated to a State Agency that would be responsible for the construction and operation of the facility. Kenai Spur Highway - Upgrade Five This project is proposed to provide safety improvements to $ 3,000,000.00 This project has ranked high on the 2010 -2013 STIP and Intersections Beaver Loop, Thompson Park, Strawberry Road, Silver funding isproposed in SFY 2011 for conceptual design, and Salmon, and TBD to include turn lanes and lighting. Traffic ROW acquisition. accidents at these intersections usually involve at least one vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed, and are of si nificant severity. Page 3 of 4 Prepared by: R. Koch CITY OF KENAI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP) PRIORITES FOR STATE FUNDING REQUESTS FOR SFY 20'14 PRIORITY PROJECT TITLE DESCRIPTION REQUESTED NOTESICOMMENTS NUMBER FUNDING Kenai Spur Highway - Upgrade to Five Conflicting traffic patterns (through traffic vs $ 30,000,000.00 This project has not ranked high on the 2010 -2013 STIP. Lane configuration Between Soldotna business /residential traffic) and increased traffic counts have A predecessor project, the improvement of five and Kenai increased the number and severity of accidents between intersections of this roadway has ranked well on the STIP Kenai & Soldotna. Planned commercial developments will and funding for conceptual study & ROW acuisition is significantly increase traffic in the near future proposed to begin in SFY 2011. The full five -lane project will not be considered for funding until the intersection project is through design, or possibly during construction. New Soccer Fields Irrigation Project would design and install irrigation system for four $ 250,000.00 soccer fields Bridge Access Road, Pedestrian This project would construct a pedestrian pathway from the $ 2,000,000.00 1 am not aware of any sources of funding that are available Pathway Kenai Spur Highway to Kalifornsky Beach Road along Bridge for this project, and several regulatory agencies (EPA, Access Road. This area is heavily traveled by pedestrians, USDF &W) have expressed significant opposition to the sightseers, bicyclists, etc. This project is approximately 2 project. miles long and would complete the 24 mile Unity Trail that connects Kenai and Soldotna, along bath the Spur Highway and Kalifornsky Beach Road. Vehicle Storage Facility for Kenai Senior This project would construct a six -bay vehicle storage facility $ 600,000.00 Center Vehicles at the City maintenance yard. At present the vehicles are stored outside the center. During the winter this results in vehicles running to maintain heat for trips for the senior clients, and also results in increased mechanical difficulties. Page 4 of 4 Prepared by: R. Koch ""Villa ye with a Past, C# with a hiut"re" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 -283 -75351 Fax: 907 -283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us �firecityaf U Paving Improvements to City Streets (Requested Appropriation $1,000,000) The City of Kenai owns and maintains over 64 miles of municipal roadways. Over 15 miles of these roadways are constructed only to improved gravel standards. Over the past four years the City has undertaken projects to improve approximately five miles of gravel roadways to a paved standard affecting over 350 properties. These projects include pavement, drainage, safety, and signage improvements. Funding for these projects has been accomplished through local improvement districts (LID's), where the City, using City /State funding has funded 100% of the up -front costs of the improvements with assessments being levied upon properties in the LID for 50% of the project costs, resulting in shared 50150 projects. The City desires to continue this program of LID improvements. The benefits include but are not limited to: 1. Improving air quality 2. Improving the quality of storm water run -off 3. Decreasing maintenance costs 4. Improving safety 5. Increasing property values 6. Creation of local employment Based on historical data, and contingent upon the condition of specific existing gravel roadways, $1 million of funding will improve one mile to two miles of roadways to paved standards. r, City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 1 of 12 Z c e Z _ z 5E l 2 p N Z v C C U d C b C G Roadway �d d .6 W N 0i N : d E Designation Beginning Ending o t z c- ' �� E « w u a 0 } N ` RNU C HaZ UU N N U :5 $ N U U U U Surface aging,seal coat or AIRPORT WAY 1985 2,320 46 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD chipseal, Re -crack seal, Catch - basins maintained annually. ALASKA AVE Overland to South 1967 806 24 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD Y 1 GOOD N N GOOD N NIA Minor cracks. ALASKA AVE 2000 424 24 4 As halt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD Y 1 GOOD N N GOOD N N1A Minor cracks. ° 2000 LID Surface aging,scund structural ALDER AVE 1969 720 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N NIA Y GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annuall . with 65" radiuses, surface aging,sound structural ALDER CT 1978 80 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD conditier,needs chipseal or overlay Catch basins cleaned annually. ALEENE WY (Winter) 900 22 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA N/A No Drainage Y FAIR N NIA Needs buildup, lowspots, Dustcortrolled ALIAK DR McCollum Spur Hwy 1986 930 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y I N NIA NIA NIA N NIA Only Culverts Y I GOOD N NIA I bitches need cleaning ALIAK DR Spur Swires 1989 3,926 34 2 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Culverts & Storm Y GOOD N NIA Strip Drain paved. AMES RD (North) 1987 1,241 24 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Needs grading; has dust Control AMES RD South 1979 2,341 22 3 Asphalt 9 -EXCEL N N NIA NIA N N NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD Paved as LID 2009 Roadway has stress cracks ANGLER DR 1987 4,484 24 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA over swamp area.Areas outisde low areas is very good, LID 2007, crack sealed summer 2009. Surface aging,sourd structural ASH AVE 1969 1.,640 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,eatch basins cleaned annually. ASPEN ST < 1979 215 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drains e N N/A N NIA Req Maintenance required Surface aging, sound ATTLA WY Willow Cares 1978 440 29 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N NIA Y GOOD structural condition, chipseal needed or seal coat. Surface aging, sound ATTILA WY Willow Caviar 1981 300 29 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N NIA Y GOOD structural condition, chipseal needed or sea! coat. AUK ST East halt 1977 480 1 291 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 2 FAIR N NIA NIA Y Y FAIR N N!A Aging, rough surface, cracks AUK ST West half 1983 520 29 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 2 FAIR N N1A NIA Y Y FAIR N NIA Aging, rough surface, cracks With cracks,need 2nd pass of crack sealing or total sub chip BACKWOOD AVE 1986 720 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N Y BAD seahcatch basin BAD - high water table does not drain most of the lime BAKER ST Colonial Lawton < 1979 500 24 4 1 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA N/A Only Culverts Y FAIR N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, BAKER ST Kiana Kaknu 1989 1,600 22 4 Asphalt 5 -FAR Y N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD showing age,crauks,catch basins maintained annually. BALEEN AVE < 1979 2,462 1 34 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Bladed & Dust control BARABARA DR < 1979 1,733 24 3 Gravel 4-GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y GOOD N NIA Needs beading; has dust control BARNACLE WY Bidarke Willow 1981 680 22 3 Asphalt 4-FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD BARNACLE WY Main Willow 1983 920 22 3 Asphalt 4-FAIR Y Y 1 GOO' Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD BARON PARK 5 ur End 2007 450 30 4 Asphalt 10 -GOOD N Y 1 GOOD N NfA WA N N N/A N NIA New construction in 2007 BASIN VIEW WY 1987 480 22 4 Asphalt 9 -EXCEL N N NIA NIA N N I NIA I N Y I GOOD N NIA Paved as LID 2009 Page 1 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 2of12 z e z o m E V T = y > U � � c m m Roadway - v d 3 E o W E E m ° Designation Be mnin 9 Ending R 7 H u u a E jStreet� (Street) U N 0 U 0 0 V L) U) ) j o y N w L) L) U U Surface aging,sound structural BEECH AVE 1969 160 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD eordition,needs chipseal or oveday,catch basins cleaned annual! - Surface aging, needs some type BIDARKA ST 1981 1,240 36 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y t GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD of rehab,catch basins are maintained annually. catch basin cleaned annually, BIRCH ST 1983 2,880 34 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N NIA Y GOOD surface aging, seal coat er chi seal. BLARNEY CI 1985 150 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR WA N NIA NIA N N/A NIA No Draina e N I GOOD N NIA weed wacked; ditches 2009 BLUFF ST 1967 600 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N N/A NIA N N WA N NIA Long longitudinal cracks, atholes,ruttin BOAT LAUNCH RD _ c1979 2,640 30 4 Gravel 4-GOOD —3-FAIR N1A N WA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N N/A BOWPICKER LN c 1979 833 34 4 Gravel NIA N NIA WA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA BOWPICKER LN Old Carnery Rd. Sea Catch < 1979 2,640 34 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y GOOD N NIA BRANNIGAN Cl 1985 170 24 4 Gravel Pik Run 2 -POOR NIA N NIA N/A N NIA N/A No Drainage N GOOD N NIA Flat; no ditches BROAD ST 1967 1,080 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA N N GOOD N NIA Long longitudinal cracks, olholes,mtGn BUMBLEBEE AVE 1988 715 26 4 Gravel 2 -POOR. N/A N NIA N/A N NIA NlA. Onl Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Lowspots, needs build u needs crack sealed or chip CALIFORNIA AVE Wsldwood Second < 1979 960 29 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y FAIR FAIR Y N FAIR Y FAIR seated; Catch basins need cleaning Asphalt strip pavement, CANDLELIGHT DR 1989 3,200 27 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N WA NIA N WA N/A Y Y GOOD Y GOOD showing age, cracks, Catchbasin maintained. Showing signs of agirg,needs CAVIAR ST 1981 720 35 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 Y Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD chip sealed or sealccat. Catch basins maintained annually. Surface aging, sound structural CEDAR DR 1969 1,840. 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N N/A NIA Y N NONE Y GOOD condition, needs chipseal or oveday, catch basins cleaned annually. Road condition good with cracks,needs 2nd pass crack CHANNEL WY 1986 2,600 34 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N WA NIA Y N NONE Y BAD seal or total sub chip seal;catch basin high water table, does not drain most of the time. CHINOOK CT 1995 25 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Onl Culverts Y FAIR N NIA Needs crown, had dust control CHINOOK DR 2002 J425 25 3 Asphalt -VERY GOO Y N NIA NIA N NIA N/A N Y GOOD N WA 2002 LID, asphalt strip paved, few cracks, crack sealed summer 2009. CHISIK ST < 1979 22 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Draina e Y FAIR N NIA Bladed & Dust control CINDERELLA ST 1986 26 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD NO NIA weed wacked;ditches 2009 CINDY CI 1 1985 175 24 4 1 Gravel i 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N I NIA WA No Drainage N FAIR N NIA 32' Radius cul-de -sac. CLIPPER C1 1979 250 24 4 Grave! 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Oni Culverts Y GOOD N WA Needs grading, dust controlled COHOE AVE 1989 727 26 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N WA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD basin needs brushing annually COHOE CI — 1968 160 34 4 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Gravity Drain N GOOD N N/A needs re ular maintenance COLONIAL DR Linwood East. < 1979 1,088 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N NIA NIA N NIA N!A Culverts wI Sum Y GOO Y GOOD COLONIAL OR Linwood West 1984 416 24 3 Gravel 3 -FAIR N NIA NIA N N1A N1A Only Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD GOOK Peninsula Main 1967 1,082 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR AY N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Nc Drainage Y GOOD N NIA Fiat, law lying COOK AVE U land Main 1999 560 24 3 As hait 4 -FAIR Y 1 FAIR N NIA I NIA I Gravity Drair Y GOOD N N!A Page 2of12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 3of12 Z e z c Y m a E o^ c V z o r e r 1 La c m t v «. _ m mL Roadway Beginning Ending ° a z f E d E 3esignatipn (Street) (Street) J o o y g o o W y U U U U U U 0 N U ` 3 0 U needs crack sealed or chip COOK INLET VIEW DR 1986 1,200 40 3 Asphalt 4-FAR Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y NIA GOOD Y GOOD sealed;3 -FAIR along SW eurbline.Catchbasin cleaned seasonally. CORAL ST 1989 1,210 26 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N NIA Ni N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD basin needs brushing annually needs re Uar maintenance COTTAGE 01 Habitat 2001 183 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N NIA NIA N Ni NIA Only Culverts Y FAIR N N/A COTTONWOOD CI 1977 200 24 4 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA N N NONE N NIA has 60' culdesac,crackseal crchi seal CROW CT 1999 240 34 4 Paved 5 -GOOD N Y 1 GOOD N Ni NIA I Gravity Drain N NONE N NIA ILID about 2002 CUB CT 1983 286 24 4 Asphalt I 6 -GOOD Y N Ni NIA N NIA NIA N NIA GOOD Y GOOD Asphalt strip pavement, cracks. CUNNINGHAM CT 24 4 Asphalt I 7 -GOOD Y N N/A NIA N NIA N/A N Y GOOD N N/A Asphalt strip pavement, cracks. Surface aging,sound structural CYPRESS DR 1969 760 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA N/A Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annually. DAVIDSON S7 < 1979 721 21 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Ditch system. DEFPWOOD CT 1977 520 28 4 _...Asphalt 4-FAIR Y Y 2 FAIR N WA NIA N N NIA N NIA Cracks,a in ,loss of fines DEVRAY ST < 1979 1,28D 12 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y GOOD N NIA 2009 Now ditches. DOGWOOD RD 1994 - 584 24 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA WA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LID 2006 DOGWOOD RD - NORTH 1983 2,266 30 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N!A N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N Ni Bladed & Dust control DOLCHRK LN 1983 2,640 24 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD As halt strip pavement, cracks. DOLLY VARDEN ST < 1979 580 20 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Culverts wl Sump Y GOOD N NIA weed wacked; ditches 2009 DORENDA CT 1995 150 22 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y POOR N NIA EADIES WY 1993 640 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD Ditching needs brushing Asphalt strip pavement, sink EAGLE ROCK DR 1986 950 28 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N N/A NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA holes, cracks intersection of Sandpiper Lane EISENHOWER LN 1994 960 24 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LID 2008 Surface aging,sound structural ELM AVE 1969 320 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N N/A NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annually. Wtth cracks,need 2nd pass of crack sealing or total sub chip EQUINOX WY 1986 1,400 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N NONE Y BAD seal;catch basin BAD -high water table does not drain most of the time EVERGREEN ST 1993 2,400 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA N/A N Y GOOD Y GOOD Ditch system needs brushing Some major cracks,needs FATHOM DR 1969 1,560 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR. Y Y 1 GOOD N i NIA N N POOR Y POOR chipseal orsealcoat,catch basin sump only- groundwater affected. FBO RD NOT IN SERVICE 1985 160 4 Asphalt Gravity Drain NO LONGER IN SERVICE FERN ST 1994 1,000 24 4 Asphalt S -EXCEL N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New asphalt, 2008 LID Showing signs of aging,needs FIDALGO AVE 1981 440 33 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD chip sealed or sealcoat. Catchbasins maintained annually. FIFTH AVE at Birch 1979 442 20 4 Gravel 2 -Poor NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage N POOR N NIA On ROW Needs improvement No Drainage Curbs & gutters good on North FIFTH AVE at Woodland 1978 1,300 22 3 AsphaR 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA N Y FAIR Y GOOD side; Roadway has broken edges on south side, needs crack or chi seal Page 3of12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 4 of 12 Z c e Z z 'a 2 i o } °' .n E 9 w Il V A V M a L « co ` 1 - n y E m m Roadway g Ending s m a y E d `oA L sR = E a Designation (Street) (Stree K U GNE - W U U 7 r a8 0 U U 2a 2e � m m c o UU 0 U Surface aging,sound structural FAIR condition,needs chipseal or FIR DR 1969 680 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y Y on Y 0000 overlay. Storm drain system southside FAIR on the southside.catch basins cleaned annually. FIREWEED LN 1994 1.,518 24 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Culverts & Storm Y GOOD Y GOOD 2008 LID. Drain surface aging,seal coat or FIRST AVE E of Birch 1983 2,674 34 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD chipseal,Catch basins cleaned annually_ surface aging,seal coat or FIRST AVE W of Birch 1983 660 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD chipseal, Catch basins cleaned annuall ,sink hole SW side. Roadway has failed, has bad sub, asphalt has failed Curb & FIRST ST California Florida < 1979 2,320 24 3 Asphalt 1- FAILED Y Y 1 & 2 FAIL Y t FAIL Y N FAIR Y FAIR gutterfaihng, catchbasins need annual cleanin Road needs crack sealed or FIRST ST Florida Redoubt 1,225 24 3 Asphalt 2 -POOR Y Y 2 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD chip sealed, catch basins cleared annually FLOATPLANE RD 1989 1,349 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Onl y Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Paved late 1980's asphalt strip pave,lots of FLOATPLANE RD 1989 2,126 23 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N N/A N/A N N NIA N Y GOOD N NIA cracks, has been cracksealed,need5 crackseal or chipseatclitches need brushing. FLORIDAAVE <1979 880 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAfR Y Y 2 POOR N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD cleaned yearly Catch basins cleaned yearly; FOREST DR - NORTH 2001 5,200 36 2 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD Y GOOD Y Y GOOD Y GOOD road shows signs of wear, oper cracks need crack sealing; 2009 _ Crack sealed. Catch basins cleaned yearly; FOREST OR - SOUTH 1982 2,000 36 2 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD road shows signs of wear, open cracks need crack sealing FORGET -ME -NOT RD 1994 579 24 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LID 2008 strip paved,surface aging, FOURTH AVE (EAST) Forest to East 1983 2,480 34 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD chipseal & crack seal, ditches need brushing strip paved,surface aging, FOURTH AVE (WEST) ;evergreen Forest 1993 2,560 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD chipseal & crack seal, ditches need brushing FOX AVE 1986 1 590 24 4 Gravel 4-GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA. NIA Only Culverts N GOOD N NIA weed wacked; ditches 2009 C loss FRONTAGE RD Lake Street Main Street 1981 3,600 65 3 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD offines, overlay, chipseal needed, catch basins yearly maintained Bridge Surface aging,needs crack FRONTAGE RD Lake Street Access 1,700 36 3 Asphalt 5 -FAR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD sealing or chipsealing, RD catchbasins maintained yearly. Asphalt strip pavedsurfaee GILL ST - NORTH 1983 2,400 24 4 Asphalt 5-FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD aging,chi[pseal & crack seal, - Catch basins needs brushing GILL ST - SOUTH 1988 560 24 4 1 Asphalt I 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA N N GOOD N WA some major cracks,neods chipseal or sealcoat Page 4 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 5 of 12 Z c e Z F > fa c ac 3 v x o y `;, E Z c a `°° U C m c o r 3 iE 3 u `9 3 3, -0 U of ' '� i5 en ,a, rn E E c Roadway Beginning Ending a A +� m ro a n{j a z a °g' ;r, rn m H u ° c E Designation g {Streets (Streets m } m o m c� 0 3 sn f o 5 o 5 3 y, o a 4 > �, a o w U t? '� M o 'c cri y y U 00 U GRANITE POINT CT 1987 351: 241 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Storm Drain N NIA Y GOOD GRANITE POINT ST Trading Bay Can's 1992 500 30 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y FAIR N NIA Significant signs of aging,stnp aved asphalt Surface aging,IOSS of fines, GRANITE POINT ST Willow Granite Ct 1992 400 33 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD needs seal coat & chipseal, cleaned annually. GRANITE POINT ST Willow Trading Ba 1987 520 30 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y FAIR N NIA Significant signs of aging, strip paved asphalt some major cracks,needs HAIDA DR 1995 120 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR N Y 1&2 GOOD N NIA NIA N N NONE N Ni chipseal or sealanttwo thirds of Halda Dr. is newer than N section. Ditch Needs brushing, surface HALLER ST 1993 2,400 24 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD aging, chipseal &crackseal,sink hole SW corner of Haller & 4th. HARBOR AVE 1968 280 24 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR N N N/A NIA N NIA NIA N N NONE N NIA Needs rebuild With cracks,need 2nd pass of crack sealing or total sub chip HEDLEY DR 1986 400 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 N NIA NIA Y N FAIR Y BAD seal;catch basin BAD - high water table does not drain most of the time Surface aging,sound structural HEMLOCK AVE 1969 640 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 1 GOOD N NIA WA Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,reeds chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annually. Asphalt, strip paving,showing HIGHBUSH LN 1989 2,026 24 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD age, cracks,catch basins maintained annually. HIGHBUSH LN Winter Lawton to North 1 592 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR N/A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Draina e Y FAIR N NIA Not Maintained; plow in winter HIGHLAND AVE 1990 920 34 4 Asphalt 5-FAIR N Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR N Y GOOD N NIA Moderate cracking,needs chi seall ng oroverla ed HUTTO ST 1986 755 22 3 Gravel 3 -FAIR N!A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts N GOOD N NIA Weed wacked 2009 ILIAMNA RD NOT IN SERVICE < 1979 233 1 4 Gravel No Drainage PLATTED; NOT IN SERVICE Roadway hascracks;needs 2nd pass crackseai or total sub INLET WOODS DR 1986 840 34 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N FAIR Y BAD chipseal;catch basins- high water table, does not drain,most of the time. IOWA ST 1994 1,050 24 3 Asphalt 9 -EXCEL N Y NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD new conslrucUon,ditches need - brush inci in plaues. JAPONSKI DR 1986 309 22 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N N/A NIA N Y GOOD N NIA LID in 2007,weed wacked, ditches summer 2007. asphalt strip paved,surface JEFFERSON ST 1983 480 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N N NIA NIA N NIA Ni N Y GOOD Y GOOD aging,chipseal & crack seal,ditches needs brushing. Good ditches; driveways have no culverts; road needs cracksealed JULIE ANNA DR 1998 1,591 26 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y N WA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA again or chipsealed;has minor road damaged been repaired earlier date. JULIUSSEN ST 1987 621 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y FAIR N Nfq Low spots, needs grading, has dust control Page 5 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 6 of 12 O Y E F Z C L t� 7. Y s ro x E Y y Go r cr i IO o c U w m Cl E D E Beginning Be Ending 15 a a c a ' m m e E Desi nation (Street] (Street) o W U U 7 U } N V 7 N y y r j U j U With 32' culdesac. Surface aging, sound structural condition, needs JUNIPER CT 1978 160 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD chipseal or overlay. Catch basins cleaned annually.needs chip sealing, catch basins have highwater table. Asphalt strip paving,showing KAKNUWY 1989 2,800 21 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N N N/A NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD age,craeks,catchbasins maintained annually. KFNAI AVE 1999 2,880 24 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N N/A NIA No Drainage N GOOD N NIA Gravel & sand KENAITZE CT 1979 722 241 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Needs graded , dust controlled KETCH ST 1990 550 24 2 Asphalt 6 -GOOD N N NIA N/A N NIA NIA N Y FAIR Y GOOD asphalt strip pavement, signs ofa in Asphalt strip paving,showing KIANA LN Candlelight Baker 1989 600 22 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N N NIA NIA N N/A NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD age,cracks,catch basins maintained annually. KiANA LN Dolly Linwood 1983 530 231 4 Gravel 3 -FAER NIA N NIA N NIA NIA Onl Culverts Y GOOD N N Weed wacked 2009 KIM -N -ANG CT 1983 799 24 4 Asphalt 6 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, cracks. KING SALMON DR 1979 2,400 21 4 Asphalt 1- FAILED N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y FAIR N NIA Asphalrecop pave ent,falled, KITTIWAKE CT ¢ 1979 450 26 4 Gravel 4GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N N/A Ditched in 2009. KULGLA PL 11979 551 22 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA N/A Gravity Drain Y GOOD N N/A weed wacked; ditches 2009 Surface aging,need overlay LAKE ST 1985 680 341 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 1 FAIR N N/A NIA Y Y POOR Y POOR or chipseal,catch basin sump design poor with high ground water. LANTERN Cl 1985 210 22 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N I NIA 1weLd wacked; ditches 2009 Surface aging,sound structural LARCH AVE 1969 320 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N HAD y ,GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annual) . S urface aging, sound structural LAUREL DR 1969 440 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 1 GOOD N N/A N/A Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,needs chipseal or overlay,wtch basins cleaned ar ll . aging,rutssink holes (by KCHS),catch basins maintained LAWTON DR Walker Tinker 1982 5,280 30 2 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 2 POOR Y N GOOD Y GOOD annually. Candlelight - Glacier 1989 1,65OLF,Golf -end 2002 2,4851-F,Tinker- Candlelight 1989 3,640LF, Tinker -Golf Course 1894 540LF. LAWTON OR Tinker to East 5,175 28 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N N/A N/A N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD Surface aging, cracks, Catch basins maintained. Road has cracks,need 2nd LEEWARD DR 1986 560 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N NONE Y BAD pass of crack sealing or total sub chip seal ;catch basins BAD - high water tables, does not drain - most cf 1he time. LILAC LN Midway side of roadway has 1986 1,520 30 3 Asphalt 2 -POOR Y Y 2 �FN/A N/A Y N GOOD Y GOOD sinkhole. One side GOOD,other LINWOOD LN North 5 ur North 1986 567 30 4 GDO0 NIA N NIA IA N!A Onl Culverts N GOOD N N!A de FAIR. Page 6 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 7 of 12 Z Z > 'a 2 r e E Z -0 • c U c M c n C Roadway L) yp E E m m a m Beginning Ending a 7 E c E Designation (Street) (Street) H V) U m w U U U CC o l Asphalt strip pavement, LJNWOOD LN Spur Lawton 1989 2,560 27 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N WA NIA N NIA WA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD showing age, cracks, catch basins maintained annually. LORA DR 1990 400 24 4 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N I N/A Cracks, acirici sicins LUPINE DR 1994 1,200 24 3 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New asphalt with 2008 LID. .LUPINE DR- NORTH 1983 1,254 30 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA. N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA graded with dust control MAGIC AVE 1986 2,600 26 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD N/A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Orly Culverts Y GOOD N NIA weed wacked; ditches 2009 long longitudinal cracks, porholes,rutting, Curb & gutter have areas needing MAIN ST Old Towne 1967 1,360 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD replacement,Sidewalks have areas needing replacement, catch basins maintained SEE PHOTOS Needs patching,repair & MAIN STREET LOOP RD (East) Spur Hwy Wllow 1985 1,646 48 2 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 Y Y N GOOD Y GOOD complete rebuild,Catch basins maintained annually.SEE PHOTOS. Surface aging,seal coat & MAIN STREET LOOP RD (West) Willow Spur Hwy 1983 2,800 35 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD chipsead needed, catch basins maintained annual) . Surface aging,sourd structural MAPLE OR 1969 2,160 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,needschipsealor overlay. Catch basins cleaned annual) . 2008 New construction, 8 -VERY showing joint cracks, catch basin MARATHON RD 1986 2,700 31 2 Asphalt GOOD N Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y Y GOOD Y GOOD yearly maintained; cut made for W &S xing for Walmart in 2009. Catch basins yearly maintained. Long longitudinal cracks, MARINE AVE 1985 840 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD potholes,rutting,catch basins maintained. MCCOLLUM DR 1986 1,292 24 2 Asphalt 7 -GOOD N N NIA N/A N 1 NIA _ N Y GOOD N N/A LID in 2007;weed wacked, ditches summer 2009 surface aging,chipseal & MCKINLEY ST 1993 2,400 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA N/A N Y GOOD Y GOOD crackseal, Catch basins need brushing surface aging,chipseal & MEANDER LN 1986 720 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA N/A Y N NONE Y BAD crackseal, Catch basins need brushing MINK < 1979 266 22 4 Gravel 4-GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N I N/A NIA No Draina e Y FAIR N NIA li & Dust control MIRANDA CT 2000 322 30 4 Paved 6 -GOOD Y N N/A NIA N NIA NIA No —Drainage Y GOOD I N NIA Stop Paving MISSION AVE bluff closed Closed 240 4 Gravel MISSION AVE Overland Cook 1967 560 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD Long Longitudinal cracks, potholes. rutfing, catch basins maintained enruall . MISSION AVE Overland Petersen 1998 500 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD Long Longitudinal cracks, potholes, rutting, catch basins MOCKINGBIRD LN Winter 325 21 4 Gravel 2 -POOR NIA N NIA NIA N N1A N!A No Draina e N POOR N N!A maintained annually. Not Maintained; plow in winter MUIR AVE 1990 700 24 4 Asphalt &GOOD Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, cracks, aging signs MUSKRAT WY (Winter) 1,051 21 4 Gravel 2 -POOR NIA N N/A N/A N NIA NIA No Drainage Y POOR N NIA Sand, no ditches. bladed & - dust control Page 7 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 8 of 12 z c c z `o ° Q V 10 % u a. c p i° a rn Z >; c l7 ° ' x d c x° y E w Q E z N c :. ° c c Roadway r 3 w 3 u '� 3 u' otl rum -0 1° rn m' y rn E E m m Q E Beginning Ending Y CL u E Designation ° � n 0 j L Q9 F 0 L) 0 m w i � � d3 n U) En � � i o t NEVADA ST 1994 1,081 241 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA i N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LID 2008 NIGHTHAWK LN < 1979 1,245 24 4 Gravel 2 -POOR NIA N NIA NIA N i NIA No Drainage Y FAIR N NIA high & low spots,needs builduic,bladed,durt control NIGHTHAWK LN Chisik St. Muskrat W 24 4 Gravel Pit Run 4 -GOOD N/A. N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y FAIR N NIA. Bladed & Dust control NORMAN ST 1985 520 30 4 Asphalt 5-FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD cracks, aging, catch basins _ maintained annually. Surface aging,sound structural OAKAVF 1969 600 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,reeds chipseal or overlay,catch basins cleaned a O'BRIEN CT 1983 177 20 4 Gravel 2 -POOR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Sump Y Not Good Y GOOD No roam for ditching, lawn & high cut banks., catch basins no room maintained OLD CANNERY RD 1,340 30 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD N/A I N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N I NIA Ditches only. long longitudinal cracks, OVERLAND AVE 1967 1,640 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA MIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD potholes, rutting, catch basins are Maintained annul l[ . PAMELA CT 1968 240 28 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 FAIR N NIA NIA N N NONE N NIA acimu. cracks PARKSIDE DRIVE 14 4 Gravel 4-GOOD Y N NIA NIA N N/A N/A N Y GOOD N NIA PAULA ST 1968 560 28 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 2 FAIR N NIA NIA N N NONE N NIA Broken asphalt,pot hoes with alli ator cracks PENINSULA AVE 1967 840 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA N/A N N N/A N NIA Long Longitudinal crack, atholes,nuttin Peterson Way rebuilt - PETERSEN WY 2000 463 24 4 Asphalt 6-GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD Y 1 GOOD N N MIA N WA sidewalks, curbs,lighting, early 2000 or late 191 PHILLIPS DR 1983 3,016 30 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N I NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Bladed & Dust control PINE AVE North ate 1978 300 30 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Sums N POOR Y GOOD High water table; poor drainage. Surface aging,sound structural PINE AVE (Woodland) East 1969 1,160 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD condition,needschip seal or overlay, catch basins cleaned — annuall , PINE CI 1976 340 30 4 As halt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 POOR N N/A NIA Gravi Drain N POOR N NIA li island with light. PIRATE LN 1990 900 24 2 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y N N /A. N/A N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, aging, cracks Surface aging, needs chip PONDEROSA ST 1986 480 28 4 Asphalt 5 -1 Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA N Y NONE Y POOR sealing, catch basins have high - water table.. With 2 32' cu€desac, surface aging,sound structural POPLAR CI 1978 480 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD cordition,needs chip seal or overlay, catchbasins cleaned earl Strip pave, aging, ruts, PORTLOCK ST Tern Harbor 1968 450 24 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y N NIA N/A N N/A NIA N Y POOR Y FAIR potholes. Catch basins drain to low ditch area; Ditch system is limited - Strip pave, aging, nits, PORTLOCK ST Walker Tern 1983 1,100 24 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y N NIA N/A N N/A NIA N Y POOR Y FAIR potholes. Catch basins drain to low ditch area; Ditch system is limited. With cracks,need 2nd pass of crack sealing or total sub chip PORTSIDE DR 1986 560 34 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 NIA N WA NIA Y N NONE Y BAD seal;catch basin BAD - high water table does not drain most of the time Page 8 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August2009 Page 9 of 12 i c c z Z `'E ° '> o } B E c Z r « ; m o G Z c U Wey tp t C m Roadway cr $ v w a a x v8 U« a3 'a rm v o an °� y E E m y E E aY Beginning 9 9 Ending 9 `m m c a m rA o 2 w t £m' o m 'bt c o o v ;° sa 3 m (9 `r o m -.- v m a v o [4 `� r �' a € ,tz�3} 9 `m n Designation (Street) (Street) m J KU W ca e V 0 U O F rC a UU N F NU M O ❑N ?, NN Tv U o U PRIMROSE PL 1994 1,318 1241 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N N/A NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LTD 2008 PRINCESS ST 1986 1,450 24 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA WA N NIA N/A Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Weed wacked,ditches 2009 RANCE CT 1982 480 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA REDOUBT AVE (Forest-West) SPUR FOREST 2001 1,900 36 2 Asphalt 7 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA N/A Y N NONE Y GOOD First signs ofaging,needs 1st crack scaling; East First signs of aging,needs REDOUBT AVE (S pur-Forest) FOREST Woodland 2001 6,198 26 3 Asphalt 7 -GOOD N Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD 1 st crack sealing; catch basins _ Sub end are and cleared yearly. RICHFIELD DR 1985 1,768 128 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA gracled with dust control RIVERVIEW DR 1967 730 20 4 Gravel 2 -POOR WA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Gravity Drain Y FAIR N NIA Low areas. 2 houses on road. ROBIN DR 1986 630 30 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA VerX Hard, Dust Controled RDGERS RD Lawton Spur Hwy 1982 480 30 3 Asphalt 4 -FAIR. Y Y 2 FAIR N NIA NIA N N FAIR Y FAIR Aging, , Ia a cracks, ruts cracks,some aging. newer part of ROGERS RD Lawton Susieana 1968 2,040 30 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA N N GOOD Y GOOD subdivision,cateh basins maintained annually. ROSS ST 1982 640 30 3 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA WA N NIA WA Onl Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Ditched in 2009. ROY WY 1984 457 24 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD N/A N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Gravity Drain Y GOOD N N Weed wacked,ditches 2009 SALMO Cl 1968 160 24 4 As halt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA Gravity Drain N NONE N NIA Island in middle of circle. SALMON CT < 1979 320 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA N/A N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y FAIR N NIA SALMON RUN DR < 1979 1,520 24 3 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N NIA N/A Only Culverts Y FAIR N NIA Needs grading, dust controlled Lowspots SAND DOLLAR DR < 1979 1,438 24 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA. N NIA NIA Culverts wI Sum Y NONE Y GOOD Bladed & Dust control SANDPIPER UN 1986 537 3D 4 Gravel 4-GOOD WA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Ontl Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Bladed & Dust control SCHOONER CI < 1979 178 24 4 Grave€ 4-GOOD WA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Culverts wI Surnp Y GOOD N NIA Bladed & Oust control SEA CATCH DR <1979 682 1301 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA WA Gravity Drain Y GOOD N WA Bladed & Dust control Asphalt strip paved,surface SECOND 1993 2,560 24 4 Asphalt --FAIR Y N WA WA N NIA WA N Y GOOD Y GOOD agirg,chipseal & crackseal, ditches needs brushing. SECOND AVE Float lane Spruce 1983 1,150 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N WA WA N WA WA OnI Culverts Y GOOD N N/A SECOND AVE Forest East 1983 403 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N WA NIA N WA NIA No ,mina e Y GOOD N NIA Road needs crack sealing or SECOND ST California Florida < 1979 2,320 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 2 FAIR N NIA N/A N Y GOOD Y GOOD chipsealed. Catch basins cleaned annually. Road needs crack sealing or SECOND ST Florida Redoubt 1,200 24 3 Asphaft 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR N Y GOOD Y GOOD chipsealed. Catch basins cleaned annually. SEINE CT < 1979 400 24 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD N/A N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y I GOOD N N/A 181aded & Dust control SEINE ST < 1979 1,200 24 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N/A N N/A NIA No Drainage Y GOOD N NIA Bladed & Dust control SENIORCT _ 1992 400 30 4 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N Y GOOD SETNET CT 1992 720 24 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y NONE N NIA asphalt strip pavemenl,cracks, p2ling signs. SETNET DR VIP Bowpicker 1992 3,200 24 3 Asphalt -VERY GOO N N NIA NIA N NIA WA N Y GOOD N WA Asphalt stdp pavement, LID in 2007 SETNET OR VIP Watergate -1979 1,214 24 3 Asphalt -VERY GOO N N NIA NIA N WA NIA Culverts Y GOOD N N/A LID 2007 SHAMROCK CI _ 1985 150 22 4 As halt 9 -EXCL N N NIA NIA N NIA N/A N Y GOOD N N/A 2008 LID, new asphalt SHANE CT 1982 480 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA WA N NIA NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA SHILLELAN CI 150 24 4 Gravel 4 -Good NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA NIA Y GOOD N NIA Weed wacked,ditches 2009 SHOTGUN DR < 1979 880 26 4 Gravel 4 -Good NIA N NFA NIA N NIA NIA Gravity Drain Y FAIR N NIA Bladed & Dust control SILVER PINES RD 1986 120 28 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD N N/A NIA Y N NONE Y POOR surface aging, needs chip seat, catch basins have high water table. Asphalt strip pavement,severe SILVER SALMON DR Spur Chisik < 1979 1,350 23 4 Asphalt -VERY POO Y N NIA NIA N WA WA N Y POOR N NIA deterioratien,needs reccnstructlon at 200' into roadway #rom KSH,Diich system oor at trailer a k. Page 9 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 10 of 12 Z _ } 'R ° 3- ? } m E ° v IL `. p G A N Z d a c y C ° E Z E 9 _ Lo p .� w N 0 -C Roadway Be Beginning Ending W a Y u U v • N N E resignation ( ( et) ° o = 2 r P ? a T g J W i Y L' 00 } NU �p N N M U U U SILVER SALMON DR Spur Chinook < 1979 1,350 21 4 Asphalt -VERY GO0 Y N NIA NIA N Asphalt strip pavement, few WA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA cracks, crack sealed summer 2009. SKYLAR 2000 190 29 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y LOCO N N 32' radius culdesac;Needs brushwork; needs routine cracksealin . SOCKEYE CI 2002 302 24 4 Asphalt -VERY GOO Y N NIA NIA N N NIA N Y GOOD N NIA 2002 LID, asphalt strip paved, few cracks, crack sealed summer 2009. SPRUCE ST - NORTH Spur to North 1983 1,855 30 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR WA N NIA GOOD N NIA NIA Culverts & Storm Y GOOD Y GOOD basin needs brushing annually Drain needs regular maintenance SPRUCE ST -SOUTH Spur to top of hill 1986 2,350 36 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA Y (into Ditch) N NIA. Y GOOD Roadway needs cracksealed or chipseal,catch basins cleared annual) SPRUCE ST -SOUTH to top of hill Beach 630 24 3 Asphalt 5 wheels ruts & wheel ruts & large Access -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y FAIR N NIA cracks,needa crack seal or choseal, ditches need brushing. SPRUGEWDOQ RD 1986 500 25 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD N N/A NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD surface aging, needs crack sealing, catch basins maintained annually. SPUR VIEW DR Frontage Senior 1992 680 26 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD N N NIA N GOOD Sign of aging, roods crack scaling or chip sealed. SPUR VIFW DR Spur Frontage 1981 280 26 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD N N NIA N NONE Sign of aging, needs crack STANDARD DR 1985 1,850 28 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA OnIv Culverts Y GOOD N N/A sealinq or chip sealed. raded with dust control STEELHEAD CT Winter 580 4 Gravel No Drainage Not Maintained; cow in wirier STELLAR DR 1968/85 1,880 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD NIA N/A NIA N N NONE N NIA some major cracks,needs - chi seal or sealcoat STERLING CT 1968 840 24 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y N Ni NA N NIA NIA Y N NONE Y FAIR Rutted,pot holes,broken asphalt, catch basin annually maintained STRAWBERRY RD 1986 425 36 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA WA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA Needs Bladin Dust controlled SUNSET BLVD Winter B22 18 4 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N NIA NIA No Drainage Y FAIR N NIA , SUSIEANA LN 1985 920 38 4 Asphalt 5 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD cracks,catch basins - maintained annually_ SWALLOW DR 1979 621 24 4 Gravei 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N WA NIA Gravity Drain Y POOR N NIA Poor drainage, Needs buildup & culverls, bladed & dust SWIRES RD EAST 500 30 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA NIA N NIA NIA NIA NIA Y GOOD N NIA controlled Weed wacked,dltches 2009 SWIRES RD 1986 1,901 33 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 1 FAIR N Y FAIR Y GOOD Cracks,Cracks,catch basins maintained annually. has (1) 32' CLldesac,Surface SYCAMORE Cl 1978 320 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y i GOOD N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y GOOD aging, sound structural condition,needs chip seal or overlay, catch basins cleaned SYCAMORE ST 1978 768 34 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR N N/A NIA Storm Drain Y GOOD Y GOOD earl TANAGAAVE 1968 920 24 4 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA NIA N N NONE N NIA some major cracks,needs TERN AVE 1968 520 24 3 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N N FAIR N NIA Chi seal or sealcoat Needs patches & repairs TERN AVE - WEST 1986 500 30 2 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD Asphalt strip paved,signs of a In TERN PL 1986 208 28 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Asphalt strip pavement,sink hole at intersection of Eagle Rock. Page 10 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 11 of 12 z t Z r Roadway L m = a v m # d 3 w v Ra v as v # v m `�+ 3 of ° c a = E E m m a E Y Beginning 9 g Ending 9 `m e v m2 m'tc � a � r0 a v ay a roc � Designation (Street) (Street) m -1 W A oA X rn M I m p U 0 0. t- � zo � in � 12 in 0 � o o rn 0 m U L) Uo U THIRD AVE Forest Drive to East 1983 446 24 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA N!A N NIA i Only Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD basin needs brushing annually needs regular maintenance Asphalt siilp paved,surface THIRD AVE Evergreen Forest 1993 2,560 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD aging,chipseal & cracksael, ditches needs brushing. THIRD AVE Floatplane Spruce 1983 1,153 30 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N N/A N/A N N/A N/A Only Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD basin needs brushing annually needs re ular maintenance THOMPSON PL 1985 722 27 4 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N MIA MIA N N/A MIA Only Culverts Y FAIR N NIA aging,cracks,loss of top fines, TINKER LN - NORTH 1982 1,600 30 2 Asphalt 4FAIR Y Y NIA N/A Y 1 FAIR Y N FAIR Y GOOD catch basins maintained 2nnuall . Asphalt strip paved,potholes, TINKER LIM - SOUTH 1977 1,280 39 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR. Y N WA NIA N WA NIA Y Y POOR N NIA broken edges,cracks,ditch system poor less than 6 " ditches. TOG €AK ST 1994 1,362 24 3 Asphalt I 8 -EXCL N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD 2008 LID, new asphalt TOYON WY 1968 628 34 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD N Y 2 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Gravity Drain N GOOD Y GOOD Very short sidewalk. w1Sum s Sidewalk: 100' around Lot #1519 Catch Basins sump only, groundwater affected. Roadway TOYON WY 1976 900 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 FAIR Y N GOOD Y POOR GOOD on middle section, 4 -5 -7 FAIR in places; some major cracks, needs chip seal or sealant. Showing signs of age,crack TRADING BAY RD 1992 1,720 41 3 Asphalt 6 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD Y 2 GOOD Y Y GOOD Y GOOD sealing or chipseal; Catch basins maintained annual[ TWILIGHT WY 1998 240 26 3 Asphalt 7-GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Needs Crack sealing or chip seal; driveways have no culverts. UPLAND ST 1990 880 34 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA N N NIA N Ni Moderate,minor cracks, chi seal VIP DR K -Beach Lora 1990 4,820 24 2 Asphalt S -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N N!A NIA N Y NIA N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, cracks, ruts, a in VIP DR Lora to North < 1979 501 24 2 Gravel 4 -GOOD N/A N i N/A N N/A NIA Onl Culverts Y GOOD Y GOOD Needs qradinq. dust controlled Needs repairs,rutting,cracks & WALKER LN 1982 2,400 30 2 Asphalt 4 -FAIR Y Y 1 FAIR Y 2 FAIR Y N GOOD Y GOOD alligator cracks,Sidewalk asphalt, catch basin maintained annually. Surface aging, sound structural WALNUT AVE Maple Redoubt 1969 2,080 34 3 Asphalt 5-FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N NIA N/A Y N NIA Y GOOD conditicn,needs chip seal or overlay,catch basins cleaned annually. Surface aging, sound structural WALNUT AVE Maple to East 1978 430 34 3 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD N N/A NIA Y N WA Y GOOD condition,needs chip seal or overlay, catch basins cleaned annually, WATERGATE WY Ketch to End < 1979 200 1241 3 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA NIA N N/A NIA Gravity Drain N NIA N NIA WATERGATE WY Ketch Lora 1990 5,450 24 2 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N WA WA N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N NIA Asphalt strip pavement, cracks, ruts, aging, sink hole. WATERGATE WY Lora to End I < 1979 380 1241 Gravel 4 -GOOD N!A N NIA NIA IN NIA NIA Gravity Drain Y GOOD N NIA Page 11 of 12 City of Kenai Roadway Condition Survey August 2009 Page 12 of 12 Z c e z } x o` ^ V c Y v E? c c c v v y y V) E Roadway Beginning Ending a a Z m i1 pE E D9 esi nation (Street) (Street) ° o _ y , o a m 0 0 J y l U U (j 0 H ,a U J 0 r A U 7 0 a W O N U U U U With cracks,need 2nd pass WEDGEWOOD DR 1986 440 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 of crack sealing or total sub chip GOOD N NIA NIA Y N NONE Y BAD seal;catch basin BAD - high water table does not drain most of the time Asphalt strip paved with 32' WES BET CT 1984 200 24 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y N NIA NIA N N/A NIA N Y GOOD Y GOOD cLldesac, surface aging, chip seal & erackseal, ditch system needs brushing, has 32' ROW culdesac, WESTWOOD Cl 1978 360 28 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR N Y 2 GOOF) N NIA NIA Y N GOOD Y POOR road surface aging,need chipseal,catchbasins poor- high water table WILDROSE AVE 1994 700 24 4 Asphalt 8 -GOOD N N NIA NIA N NIA NIA Y Y GOOD Y GOOD New Asphalt - LID 2008 WILDWOOD DR < 1979 2,320 22 2 Asphalt 1- FAILED N N N/A N N/A NIA N Y FAfR N NIA Open pavement,Alligator cracks, needs total rebuild WILLOW ST - NORTH 1,480 26 2 Gravel 4 -GOOD NIA N NIA N/A N NIA NIA N Y GOOD N N graded with dust control Strip paved,Severe WILLOW ST - NORTH Tower to End 1985 400 30 2 Asphalt -VERY GOO Y N NIA N/A N NIA NIA N N GOOD N NIA deterioration needs reconstruction WILLOW ST - SOUTH Spur Peninsula 1967 440 34 4 Asphalt 3 -POOR Y Y 1 FAIR N NIA NIA N N NONE N N/A Bad cracks, pot holes, loss of fines. Significant aging,rutting, WILLOW ST - SOUTH Spur Tower 1980 5,720 34 2 Asphalt 4-FAIR Y Y 1 GOOD Y 1 GOOD Y N GOOD Y GOOD loss of fines,would benefit with a structural c veday,catchbasins maintained annually. WINDJAMMER CI < 1979 470 124 4 Gravel I 4-GOOD N!A N NIA N!A N NIA MIA only Culverts Y GOOD N N/A Bladed & Dust control With cracks,need 2nd pass of crack sealing or total sub chip WINDWARD DR 1985 560 34 4 Asphalt 7 -GOOD Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA Y N BAD Y BAD seal;catch basin HAD - high water table does not drain most of the time WOLFE ST 1982 960 24 3 Gravel 3 -FAIR NIA N NIA NIA N Ni NIA Only Culverts Y GOOD N NIA New ditches in 2009. WOODED GLEN CT 1983 680 29 4 Asphalt 5 -FAIR Y Y 2 GOOD N NIA NIA N N FAIR N NIA a in , cracks With cracks,need 2nd pass WODDSIDEAVE 1986 280 34 4 Asphalt 7 -G00❑ Y Y 2 NIA N of crack sealing or total sub chip NIA MIA Y N BAD Y BAD seal;catch basin BAD -high water table does not drain most WORTHAM AVE _ 1982 1 2,250 $0 3 1 Gravel 3 -FAIR N!A N NIA NIA N NIA N!A Onl Culverts Y GOOD N N!R of the time New ditches in 2009 WYAT T WY Winter 6241 1 4 1 Gravel I No Dralna a - NO MAINTENANCE Page 12 of 12 "Klla e with a Past, C# with a Future 'r r 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 - 283 -75351 Fax: 907- 283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us the city a f W CITY OF KENAI NARRATIVE FOR ADEC SFY 2014 MUNICIPAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM (Requested Appropriation $ 1,700,000) The City of Kenai's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) was constructed in 1982. It was sized to accommodate a population of 11,650 people and an average wastewater flow of 1.3 million gallons per day (mgd). The present population of Kenai is approximately 8,000 and average wastewater flow is 0.90 mgd, or 70% of the plant design capacity. A Wastewater Facility Master Plan was completed in March 2004 by CH2MHill. The cost estimate for recommended improvements totaled $5,198,000 (in 2004 dollars) and were identified as being accomplished in four phases. Estimated costs have been increased by 32% to account for construction inflation. The four phases identified by CH2MHill are not consistent with the proposed phasing as a result of funding constraints and improvements that have already been accomplished. The issues to be addressed by this project are as follows: 1. The City's WWTP Alaska Pollution Discharge Elimination System (APDES) permit will be renewed in 2013. Presently, the City's permit does not specify a limit for ammonia in the wastewater plant discharge. Our research has shown that recent permit renewals have required relatively low ammonia levels for the effluent (i.e. Palmer). The ammonia levels in the City's WWTP discharge may fail to meet what appears to be the standard required by ADEC. 2. The existing sludge belt press is 25 years old, and while not functionally obsolete, it requires major maintenance /upgrades in the near future to maintain system reliability and compatibility with control systems. Because the WWTP has only a single sludge belt press the press, cannot be taken out of service to accomplish major maintenance tasks. 3. Two of the aeration basins exhibit a structural failure of the concrete wall which separates the basins. There is a breach between the two and as such the two basins must be operated as a single unit. 4. The existing rotary screen has been removed from operation, resulting in excess solids being introduced into the treatment process. The screen has been a removed from the process because it often clogged resulting in raw waste flowing onto the floor in the headworks facility. 5. The present system does not provide an efficient method to control aeration. Blowers provide three to four times the necessary oxygen to the aeration basins. 6. Existing course bubble diffusers are not efficient. 7. Existing system does not effectively manage sludge. The following is a description of improvements proposed under phase I of this project: Sludge Belt Press The installation of a second sludge belt press will provide system redundancy and allow for the existing sludge belt press to be taken out of service for an extended period (4 -6 months) while major maintenance upgrades can be accomplished. A new belt press and conveyer system will address the ADEG observation during the 2009 inspection that the transfer of solids to trucks resulted in solids falling onto the floor in the headworks facility. Solids Removal System The installation of a solids removal system to work in conjunction with the existing grinder will result in solid s removal meeting the EPA paint test and decrease demands on the treatment plant/system. Activated Sludge System Improvements Upgrade Fine Bubble Aeration Upgrade Aerobic Digester Blower System The blowers currently provide three to four times the necessary oxygen concentration to the aeration basins and there is no way to efficiently control this with the existing equipment. The installation of one small blower with a variable speed motor, the installation of variable speed motors on the existing blowers, the installation of a new control system, and replacing the coarse bubble diffusers with fine bubble diffusers will result in improved treatment and a significant drop in power consumption. 2. Upgrade Waste Activated Sludge (WAS) System Upgrade Return Activated Sludge (RAS) System The activated sludge treatment process works best when a steady low flow of sludge is returned to the aeration basin (RAS). The pumps currently in use return too much sludge in too short a time to the aeration basin resulting in system failures, increased maintenance and increased energy consumption. The WAS pumps currently in service are a progressive cavity type that require frequent service. Replacement with a simple centrifugal pump system would lower maintenance costs and improve treatment efficiency by allowing a steady flow of sludge to the aerobic digestion tank rather than large intermittent flows. The upgrades to the RAS & WAS Systems, and the upgrades to the aeration system will significantly improve the performance of the WWTP in terms of decreasing the costs of aeration, improving the settleability of the sludge, and minimizing /eliminating permit non- compliance incidents. WWTP Control Building Expansion ( +I- 1,000 s.f.) The addition of a second sludge belt press will require the re- location of the WWTP laboratory. There is not sufficient space anywhere within the existing building to accommodate laboratory operations. The construction of a 1,000 s.f. addition to the WWTP Control Building will provide the room necessary for a fully functioning laboratory sufficient to support the operations of the WWTP. Operations and maintenance costs will be reduced as a result of improvements constructed under this project. 91 J J Belt Filter Press CITY OF KENAI COST ESTIMATE FOR ADEC SFY 2014 MUNICIPAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES - PHASE I Item Description 1.2 meter Klampress Skid Water Pump, Sludge Pump & Polymer System Electric Touch Control Panel for Press /Pumps & Polymer System Labor /Training /Per Diem & Travel Freight Solids Removal System Item Description Screenings Washer Monster Installation Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total EA 1 $ 180,000.00 $ 180,000.00 EA 1 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 EA 1 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 EA 1 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 LS 1 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Sub -Total $ 300,000.00 Design @ 10% $ 30,000.00 Construction Management @ 12% $ 36,000.00 Contingency @ 10% $ 36,600.00 Total Belt Press Filter $ 402,600.00 Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total EA 1 $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 LS 1 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Sub -Total $ 85,000.00 Design @ 10% $ 8,500.00 Construction Management @ 12% $ 10,200.00 Contingency @ 10% $ 10,370.00 Total Solids Removal System $ 114,070.00 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF KENAI COST ESTIMATE FOR ADEC SFY 2014 MUNICIPAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES - PHASE I Activated Sludge System Improvements Item Description Upgrade Fine Bubble Aeration Upgrade Aerobic Digester Blower System Upgrade Waste Activated Sludge System Upgrade Return Activated Sludge System Control Building Expansion ( +/- 1,000 s.f.) Item Description 1,000 S.F. Addition to WWTP Control Building Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total LS 1 $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 LS 1 $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 LS 1 $ 180,000.00 $ 180,000.00 LS 1 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Sub- Total $ 710,000.00 Design @ 10% $ 71,000.00 Construction Management @ 12% $ 85,200.00 Contingency @ 10% $ 86,620.00 Total Activated Sludge System Improvements $ 952,820.00 Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total SF 1000 $ 150.00 $ 150,000.00 Su b -Tota 1 $ 150,000.00 Design @ 10% $ 15,000.00 Construction Management @ 12% $ 18,000.00 Contingency @ 10% $ 18,300.00 Total Control Building Expansion $ 201,300.00 Page 2 of 3 CITY OF KENAI COST ESTIMATE FOR ADEC SFY 2014 MUNICIPAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES - PHASE I Cost Estimate Summary Belt Filter Press Solids Removal System Activated Sludge System Improvements Control Building Expansion Cost Estimate $ 402,600.00 $ 114,070.00 $ 952,820.00 $ 201,300.00 Total $ 1,670,790.00 Page 3 of 3 Final City of Kenai Wastewater Facility Master Plan ANUM SODOVM45o00e 25 Prepared for City of Kenai Public works Department 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, Alaska 99611 March 2004 CH2MHILL 301 West Northern Lights. Boulevard, Suite 601 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 -2662 (907) 278 -2551 i/ a, �, f {h { p X4,1 ��,•.� This report has been prepared wilder the supervision of a registered Professional Engineer. 167125.A1.FP 26 Content Section Page Abbreviations............... ......................................................................................... .............................lx Executive Summary ........................................................................................... ...........................ES -1 ZIntroduction .........................„.,.......................,.......,................,............... ...................,........1 -1 1.1 Authorization ................................................................. ............................... ............1 -1 1.2 Purpose ........................................................................... ............................... .1 -1 . ............... 1.3 Planning Area ...................................... ............................... ...1 -1 ........ ............................... 1.4 Scope .............................................................. ............................... ..... ....1 -2 2 Planning Environment .......................................................................... ............................2 -1 2.1 Location ............................................................................. ............................... .2 -1 2.2 Historical Background .............. ............................... . ................... .................. .. ... .............2 -1 2.3 Organization ........................................................... .......................... ................... ........ .2 -1 2.4 Land Use ........... ............................... 2.5 The Economy ............................. ............................... ...................... ............................2 -2 2.6 Communications ...................... ............................... ...................................... 2 -5 2.7 DemograpWcs .............. .. ................................................................ .... 2.8 Utilities, Services, and Housing .................................................... ............................2 -5 2.9 General Description of Sanitation Facilities ....................... ............................... .2 8 2.9.1 Public Water Supply ........................................................ ........................... 2 -8 2.9.2 Individual Septic Systems ...................................... .............................. .2 -8 2.9.3 Sewage Collection System ................................... ............................... .2 -11 2.9.4 Existing Wastewater Treatment Facility 2.9.5 Solid Waste Facilities .................'..,, .......................,...2 -11 ...................... ........................... ...........................2 -11 3 Sewage Planning ............................................................................ ............................... -{ 3.1 Population Growth and Design Capacity ....................... ............................... ..3 -1 3.2 Waste Loads ...................................................................................... ............................3 -1 3.2.1 Existing Data ............................................... ............................... .3 -1 3.2.2 Projected Waste Loadings .............................. ............................... .......... 3 -2 3.3 Iztilow and Infiltration ............................................... ............................... .............3 -6 4 Sewage Collection System Evaluation ......................................................... .... .............. 4 -1 4.1 Sununary of Sewage Collection System Evaluation ................................................ 4 -1 4.1.1 Sewer Main .................................................. ..... ......... .................................... 4 -1 4.1.2 Lift Stations ........... ............................................................. ............................4 -1 4.13 Inflow and h filtration ....................................... ............................... .4 -1 4.1.4 Operation and Maintenance ....................... ............................... .... 4-1 4.2 Existing Sewage Services .................................. ............................... ........... A=DP158.0W 013450008 27 CONTENTS 4.3 Sewer Pipe ...................................................................................... ............................... 4-2 4.4 Basin Flows .................................................................................... ............................... 4-7 4.5 Inflow and Infiltration ............... ... ............................... .................... ..........................4 -11. !1.5.1 Background and Methodology ................................. ............................... 4-11 4.5.2 inflow and Infiltration Study App roach .................. ............................... 411 4.5.3 Average Base Flows ........................................................ ...........................4 -12 43.4 Rainfall- Derived Inflow and infiltration ................. ............................... 4-22 4.5.5 Groundwater Infiltration ........................................... ............................... 4-15 4.5.6 Meltwater Inflow ......................................................... ............................... 4-15 4.6 Present Capacity and Future Growth ...................................... ............................... 4-15 4.7 Operations and Maintenance .................................................... ............................... 4-17 4.7.1 Routine Sewer and Lift Station Maintenance .......... ...............................4 -17 4.7.2 Grease and Solids Buildup ....................................... ............................... 4-17 5 Wastewater Treatment Improvements ................................... ............................... . 5_1 • ....... 5.1 Overview ............................................... 5 -1 ......................................... ............................... 5.2 Pretreatment Process Operation Improvements ...................... ............................... 5 -1 5.2.1 Summary of Pretreatment Process Operations ......... ............................... 5 -1 5.2.2 Influent Manhole Improvements ................................ ............................... 5 -2 5.2.3 Influent Screening Area Improvements ..................... ............................... 5 -6 5.2.4 Grit Handling Improvements ...................................... ............................... 5 -7 5.3 Aeration System Modifications .................................................. ............................... 5 -7 5.3.1 Summary of Aeration System ..................................... ............................... 5 -7 5.3.2 Existing Equipment ..................................................... ............................... 5 -7 5.3.3 Aeration Flow Control Improvements .................... ............................... 5 -11 5.3.4 Aeration Basin Retrofit .................................... ............................... 5.3.5 Digester Aeration Improvements ............................................................ 5 -14 5.4 Return Activated Sludge /Waste Activated Sludge Modifications ..................... 5 -16 5.4.1 Summary of Return Activated Sludge /Waste Activated SludgeProcess ............................................................. ............................... 5 -16 5.4.2 Return Activated Sludge Pumping improvements ............................... 5 -16 5.4.3 WAS Pumping Improvements ............................ ............................... . 5 -16 5.5 Solids Handling and Digestion .................................................. ...........................5 -19 5.5.1 Background........ — ...................................................................................... 5 -19 5.5.2 Belt Filter Press hnprovements ................................. ............................... 5-19 5.5.3 Aerobic Digester Improvements ............................... ............................... 5 -21 5.6 Summary of Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements and Costs ............ 5 -22 5.6.1 Pretreatment Process Improvements and Costs ..... ............................... 5 -22 5.6.2 Aeration System hnprovements and Cost ............... ............................... 5 -22 5.6.3 Filament Control Improvements and Cost .............. ............................... 5 -23 5.6.4 Return Activated Sludge/ Waste Activated Sludge Process Improvements and Costs ....................................... ............................... 5 -24 5.6.5 Aerobic Digester and Solids Handling System Improvements andCosts ................................................ .. ................................................... 5 -25 6 Recommended Plan ............................................................................... ............................6 -1 6.1 Overview ............................. .. . IV 28 ANUDP IMDOC/ 01345m CONT Wfs 6.2 Projects to improve Wastewater Treatment Facility Operations ...........................6 -1 6.2.1 Approach to Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements ................. 6-1 6.2.2 Activated Sludge System Improvements ........................ 6.2.3 Aerobic Digester Solids Handling .............................................................. 6.2.4 Pretreatment Process Improvements .... ............................... .........6 -3 6.3 General Operations and Maintenance Improvements ............................................ 6-4 6.3.1 Equipment and Maintenance Improvements .............. ...... 6.3.2 Fats, Oils, and Grease Program .................................. ......................6 -4 6.3.3 Pretreatment at Wildwood Prison ............................ .....6 -4 6.3.4 Work Order System ..................... ............................... .....6 -5 ........:.................... 6.3.5 Inflow Protectors ................................... ............................... 7 Funding Strategies .................................................. ............................... 7.1 Funding ............. ............................... ............................ ............................... 7.1.1 Grants ............................... ............................... 7.1.2 Loans ................ ............................... 7.1.3 Training and Technical Assistance .................. ............ ............................7�3 ................. .........7 - -4 Appendix A Technical Memorandum -1 /X Study Approach B Wastewater Treatment Facility - Monthly Hydrographs C Sewage Lift Stations -June to August 2002 Flow Response to Rainfall D Sewage Lift Station Data E Technical Memorandum-Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Visit Report F Sample Ordinance for Industrial Discharge, Fats, (ails, and Grease G Inflow and Infiltration Analysis H City Council Resolution and Wastewater Management - Financial Plan I Upgrades to KenaiView GIS Incidental to This Project (CD) Table ES -1 Capital Improvements Summary for City of Kenai Wastewater Treatment and Collection ............................. 2 -1 Communications Services in the Kenai Area ........... I .............. .............................. ........ ............................2 -5 2 -2 City of Kenai Population in 2000 .......... . ....................................................... ............................2 -5 2 -3 Housing Data for Kenai ............. .. ................ ............................2 -7 2 -4 Breakdown of Energy Sources for Home Heating .............................. ............................2 -7 2-5 Electric Utility Information .......................................................... _ 2 -6 City of Kenai Monthly Water Use and Wastewater Flows, 2001 ........... . ..................2_g 3 -1 City of Kenai WWTF Average Monthly influent Wastewater blow Data, 1993 to 2001 .. ............................... .... 3 -2 City of Kenai WWTF Average Annual Loadings and Flows ....... ........................ . .....3 2 3 -3 City of Kenai WWTF Present and Future Waste Loads... ... ............................3 -2 3 -4 Monthly Climate Summary Based on Kenai Airport Observations ......... .. .. 3.5 9/3/1949 to 12/ 31/ 2000 ......... ............................... ANQ0P166_U0CI01345= 29 CONTENTS 4 -1 City of Kenai Water and Sewer Classes .......................... ............................... . 4-2 4-2 Customer Types and Distribution ................................................... ............................... 4-3 4 -3 City of Kenai Collection Basin Characteristics ................................. ............................... 4-4 4 -4 City of Kenai Current Basin Flows, Pumping Costs, and 1/1 Category ...................... 4-8 4-5 City of Kenai Current Capacity and Projected Flows ................... ............................... 413 4 -6 City of Kenai Summary of Inflow and Infiltration Evaluation ................................... 4-14 4-7 City of Kenai Lift Station Maintenance-Grease and Solids Problems ....................... 4-19 5 -1 City of Kenai WWTF Existing Rotary Screen Design Criteria ..................... 5 -1 5 -2 City of Kenai WWTF Existing Aeration Equipment Summary ............................... 5-10 5 -3 City of Kenai WWTF Existing Aeration Basin Design Criteria ... ............................... 5.11 5-4 City of Kenai WWTF Existing Di g ester Aeration Desi gn Criteria ............................. 5 -5 City of Kenai WWTF Cost Summary for Pretreatment Upgrades ............................. 5-22 5 -6 City of Kenai WWTF Order -of- Magnitude Cost Comparison of Existing Versus Upgraded Aeration System ................................................. 5 -24 5 -7 ............................... City of Kenai WWTF Orden -of- Magnitude Cost Comparison of Constructing a Third Secondary Clarifier Versus Modifying the Aeration Basins ......................... 5 -24 5 -8 City of Kenai WWTF Order-of-Magnitude Costs for RAS and WAS Upgrades ..... 5 -25 5 -9 City of Kenai WWTF Summary of Order-of-Magnitude Present -Worth Costs....... 5 -26 6 -1 Capital Improvements Summary for City of Kenai Wastewater Treatment andCollection ............... ............................... Figure 1 -1 City of Kenai Planning Area ....... ....................................................................................... 1 -3 2 -1 City of Kenai Government Structure ....................................... ............................... ........ . 2 -2 .............. 2 -2 Wetlands and Flood Plains .............................................. ............................... 2-3 2-3 City of Kenai Population History ............................................... ................. 2 -6 2 -4 City of Kenai Main Water and Sewer System Features ................................................. 2-9 2 -5 City of Kenai Wastewater Treatment Facility ................................ ............................... 213 3 -1 Projected Population Growth, City of Kenai ................... ............................... . 3-3 3 -2 City of Kenai WWTF Historical Average Wastewater Flow Rate and Historical Average Waste Loading .................................................... ............................... 3 -5 4-1 Sewage Collection System and Developable Land ........................................................ 4.5 4-2 Schematic Diagram, City of Kenai Wastewater Collection System ............................. 4-9 4-3 Daily WWTF Hydrograph and Meltwater Events ......................... ............................416 5 -1 Existing Process Schematic and Recommended Areas for Improvement .................. 5 -3 5 -2 Schematic of Grease Collection and Transfer from Influent Manhole to Aerobic Digester..........................................................>.... ............................... 5 -3 Aeration Basin Blower Performance Curve ....................... . VI 30 AN=PJ68DDC101346M CONTENTS 5 -4 Schematic of Aeration System to Aeration Basin .......................................... . ................ 5 -13 5 -5 Schematic of Waste Activated Sludge to Aerobic Digester ........... ..................... ......... 5 -19 ANGDMO DW O134SM8 Vlf 31 Abbreviations ABF average base flow AC asbestos- cement ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation AFD adjustable frequency drive BFP belt filter press BOD biochemical oxygen demand cfM cubic feet per minute DO dissolved oxygen EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency GBT gravity belt thickener GIs geographic information system gpd gallons per day I/I inflow and infiltration mg /L milligrams per liter mgd million gallons per day MLVSS mixed liquor volatile suspended solids O&M operations and maintenance PLC programmable logic controller RAS return activated sludge RSD return sludge digester SCADA System Control and Data Acquisition scfm standard cubic feet per minute SVI sludge volume index TSS total suspended solids USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture WAS waste activated sludge WWTF Wastewater Treatment Facility ANCIAPIMDOrd 013450008 33 IX Executive Su mm The City of Kenai (City) last prepared a Wastewater Facility Plan in 1978, during a time of rapid growth. Nearly 25 years has passed since the last update, and Kenai's rapid growth has stabilized. It is appropriate to prepare a new Wastewater Facility Master Plan to assist the City to plan for the next 20 years. The City's present Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) and sewage collection system were sized upon growth predictions from over 20 years ago, which did, not entirely materialize. As a result, the City's wastewater collection and treatment systems have not yet reached their design capacities. There is, however, a need for planning to provide continued operations and maintenance (O &M) and expansion for the modest growth expected over the next 20 years. One of the main recommendations of this study is that the City's WWTF can be upgraded to meet the modest growth predicted over the next 20 years without expanding its existing footprint. Instead of adding new structures, the WWTF capacity can be increased by improving the efficiency of the existing treatment system. In addition, certain capital improvements to the WWTF could result in substantial O &M savings with a payback period as short as 7 years, Table ES-1 provides a recommended capital improvements summary. Sewage Collection System Evaluation The collection system currently includes approximately 46 miles of sewer main and 16 sewage lift stations. The available data indicates that 42 percent of the sewer main is asbestos - cement (AC) pipe while 44 percent is ductile iron. The material type for 14 percent of the existing sewer main is unknown or not included within the available geographic information system (GIS) data set. Although the soil types within the City provide generally good bedding for AC pipe, maintenance crews find that AC pipe does break and requires occasional repairs. This is not sufficient reason for replacing all the AC pipe. Instead, it will be worthwhile to develop a tracking system to document when, where, and how a particular pipe has broken and what steps were necessary to repair it. An evaluation of this information collected over a period of time may determine trends, areas, soil types, and other valuable data for making collective system improvements. The sewage lift stations have sufficient capacity for the current peak flows. Future growth within the City's developable land will add sewage flow. The two lift stations most impacted by growth will be the Lawton Street and Broad Street lift stations. The peak flow capacity of these lift stations can be increased by replacing the pumps with larger units. If the interior of the wet well begins to deteriorate to an unacceptable degree, the interior can be relined with grout or proprietary plastic coatings, ANUDP158.DO Oi34WD3 34 E5•i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE E$ -1 Capital Improvements Summary for City of Kenai Wastewater Treatment and Collection Phase Description of Improvement Capital Investment Annual O&M Cost Additional and /or Reduced O&M Present -Worth Costs for 20- Year Period° 1 Activated Sludge System Improvements 4 Aeroblc Digester Solids Handling Upgraded Fine Bubble Aeration $300,040 $37,000 $528,000 $900,000 Upgraded Aerobic Digester Blower System $200,000 $39,000 $2,100 $800,000 Subtotal $500,000 N/A $350,000 Total Aerobic Digestion Solids Handling Filament Control Improvements $9,588,000 $40th Total for All Recommended improvements $1,800,000 Subtotal $1,600,000 - $75,600 RAS/WAS Process Improvements Upgraded'Waste Activated Sludge $142,000 $4,700 $208,000 Upgraded Return Activated Sludge $22,000 $4,700 $89,000 Subtotal $164,000 $9,4004 - $13,600 $297,000 Total Activated Sj!jgge Improvements §2,300.000 R5,800 -$89.20 $3.800.000 2 Suction /0etter (Vactor) Truck $400,000 $3,500 0 $430,000° 3 Pretreatment Process Improvements New Pump House $329,000 -$3.030 $395,000 Influent Manhole Modifications $47,000 $840 $59,000 Grit Removal Cyclone $89,000 $840 $101,000 Bar Screens $633,000 $1,680 $657,000 Total Pretreatment Process .09%000 M390 ±L6 390 $11112.00 0 imn�oyements 4 Aeroblc Digester Solids Handling Mechanical Upgrades for Aerobic Digester $528,000 $3,400 $576,000 Upgraded Solids Handling System $510,000 $2,100 $539,000 Recoating of Aerobic Digester $350,000 N/A $350,000 Total Aerobic Digestion Solids Handling $1,400,000 A-59-01 01 0 $1,465,000 Total for All Recommended improvements $511,98, 000 82,81 6 907 000 " Present value of Capital and O &M costs over a 20 -year period at 4 percent interest. a Approximately the same as present O &M costs in labor. The energy cost for operating the blowers are considered in Phase 3. `This represents an annual O &M cost savings of approximately $76,000 over the present O &M costs for the aeration system or a 5 -year payback period for the capital costs. d This Is an annual O &M cost savings of approximately $14,000 from the current WAS /RAS pumping system or a 12 -year payback period for the capital costs. e A 10 -year period was used for the Present Value of the Vactor truck. `Same as present O &M costs for conveying waste sludge to the aerobic digester. O &M = operations and maintenance ES-2 35 ANC1Dp158.0oC/ 013454008 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Inflow and Infiltration Evaluation Rainfall- derived collection system inflow and infiltration (I /n is not significant through most of the system's 46-mile length. The most significantly impacted areas are served by the Golf Course, Mission Street, and Mile 14 (North Road) lift stations. In these areas, the problem appears to come from surface inflow to the manholes. This problem may be addressed by installing inflow protectors under the manhole covers for some of the lowest - lying manholes. Inflow protectors are plastic disks that sit between the manhole cover and the frame. They can reduce the amount of surface inflow through the manhole cover. Sewage Treatment Evaluation Changes can be made to allow the WWTF operate with lower operation and maintenance costs and greater waste loading capacity without adding new tanks or expanding the existing footprint. This can be accomplished by process improvement in the following areas: 0 Aeration system and return activated sludge /waste activated sludge process improvements O Pretreatment process improvements 6 Improvements for the control of floating sludge blanket problems • Aerobic digester and solids handling system improvements These improvements should provide sufficient wastewater loading capacity for the next 20 years. A more detailed outline of the proposed improvements is provided in Section 5 of this report. Sewage Rate Study CH2M HILL prepared a Wastewater Management Financial Plan in March 2003, which recommended an across- the -board sewage rate increase of 35 percent for fiscal year 2003/2004 followed by three annual increases of 4 percent over the next 3 years. A, separate report was prepared for the City's drinking water system, which is not part of this Wastewater Facilities Master Plan (CH2M HILL, March 2003, City of Kenai Water Rate Study and Financial Plan). This separate report recommended a 30 percent increase in all water -rate classes with a subsequent increase of 4 percent over the next 3 years. These rate increases were proposed in order to cover O &M expenses, increase the operating fund reserve balance, and fund the capital improvements recommended in this wastewater facilities master plan. A conservative assumption was made that grants would no longer be available for capital construction projects so that all capital construction would be funded through loans or municipal bond sales. By Resolution No. 2003 -16, the Kenai City Council opted to increase the water rates by 10 percent and the sewer rates by 12 percent, effective June 15, 2003. While these increases are less than ideal, they will be adequate, assuming grants become available for most of the proposed capital improvements. ANUDPISU0 01 41 3450008 36 ES•3 EXECOVE $UMMARv Improvements to the City's Geographic Information System Some improvements to the City's GIS are incidental to this study. GIS can be a valuable tool in planning for sewage systems and infrastructure in general. Currently, the City can access an inventory of 1,305 construction drawing sheets through the GIS system. This information can have practical day - today use in helping City staff quickly locate sewer main and other features in a particular area. GIS can also be an effective planning and management tool. The problems have been that GIS access to the record drawings has been awkward and the quality of some of the scanned images (TIF files) is poor. CH2M HILL staff sorted through all 1,305 scanned construction drawings and identified them by file name, plan set name, sheet title, page number, engineer of record, and other pertinent variables. A summary spreadsheet in MS Excel was compiled with these data, and scanned images were reviewed for their image quality. This spreadsheet can serve as a basis for upgrading the file access process since the record drawings can now be identified by fields other than the file name. Thirty -two images of poor quality were rescanned from originals found in the City's plan room. Es-4 37 ANUM 58. M 013460008 "V illy e with a Past C# with a Future 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 -283 -75351 Fax: 907 -283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us Construct a New One- Minion Gallon Water Storage Reservoir (Requested Appropriation $2,500,000) The City of Kenai's present Water Storage requirements are met through the use of a three million - gallon storage reservoir. The average daily demand on the City's water utility ranges from 800,000 to 1.2 million gallons per day, the existing storage is equivalent to three days average demand. While the existing three million gallon water storage reservoir is adequate to meet present demands, having a single water storage facility does not allow for the water storage reservoir to be taken "off -line" to perform maintenance and repair activities. The existing three million gallon reservoir was constructed in 1978, and has been in continuous service for 34 years. The reservoir has performed in an exemplary manner in providing adequate storage to meet domestic, industrial, and fire protection needs for the community. In 2011, the City hired a consultant to perform a condition survey of the existing reservoir (attached). Not surprisingly, given the age of the coating system, the engineering consultant found: "The interior coating system shows signs of extensive coating failure after its years of service. The roof coating has failed over 30% of the surface and shell coating has blisters on 85% of the shell surfaces. The wall blisters are beginning to crack and cause large scale underfilm corrosion and delamination. There is no serious metal loss at this time but the tank will probably need to be repainted in 1 -3 years." Re- coating the City's water storage reservoir is a highly - technical process which will require a four to six period during which the three - million - gallon reservoir will be out of service. The process includes but is not limited to: 1. Draining the reservoir. 2. Removal of all silt and other debris inside the reservoir. 3. Installing interior scaffolding 4. Removal (sand blasting) of the existing coating system. 5. Non - destructive testing of the reservoir roof, floor, and walls to verify structural integrity. 6. Repair of any damaged surfaces and/or structural members. 7. Installing updated level control system. 8. De- humidification of reservoir interior to facilitate re- coating, 9. Preparation of interior surfaces 10. Re- coating (multiple coating layers.) qR Without the construction of either a temporary or permanent alternate water storage reservoir it is impossible to remove the existing three million gallon water storage reservoir from service. We have explored temporary water storage and found that to meet the minimum requirement of at least one day's water demand ( +1- 1,000,000 gallons) and found that temporary water storage is not feasible given that the water must be potable, and the volume of temporary storage results in significant costs, approaching costs of permanent storage. Additionally, the City water utility experiences a 3 % -5% increase in water consumption annually. In order to maintain three day water storage capacity a new one million gallon reservoir will be required within the next 10 years. In evaluating the priority of the City's capital needs it is oftentimes difficult to accurately gauge the specific need. This project was determined to be the City's number three capital priority for 2012. In the event there was a failure of the existing three - million- gallon water reservoir this project would instantaneously become the City's number one priority. za CITY OF KENAI COST ESTIMATE FOR ADEC SFY 2014 MUNICIPAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION OF A 1 MILLION GALLON WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Cost Item Description Amount Site Preparation $ 100,000.00 Piping Systems $ 75,000.00 Controls $ 125,000.00 Foundation $ 250,000.00 Reservoir $ 800,000.00 Reservoir Coating $ 500,000.00 Reservoir Insulation $ 100,000.00 Sub -Total $ 1,950,000.00 Design @ 10% $ 195,000.00 Const. Admin. /Insp. @ 12% $ 234,000.00 Contingency @ 5% $ 118,950.00 Total $ 2,497,950.00 an Water Tank Inspection Report For City of Kenai, AK Of the 3.OMG Reservoir August 15, 2011 ACUREN 455 Main Street Bldg 1 Suite A -B Deep River, CT 06417 Tel: (860) 526 -2610 Fax: (860) 526 -5018) vt ww. extechllc, coo Al TABLE OF CONTENTS 3MG Reservoir Kenai, Alaska Introduction Pages 1 Executive Summary Z Observations 600K Reservoir 3.5 endations 6 Glossary of Terms Appendix A - Photographs d7 INTRODUCTION On August 15, 2011 Acuren representatives, Corby Robertson and Alton Drones performed corrosion analysis and structural assessment of the exterior and interior of a potable water storage tank for the City of Kenai, Alaska The inspection was conducted to establish the current condition of the tank's coatings and steel substrate. The tank inspected included: 3.0 Million Gallon Ground Reservoir The tank was inspected in accordance with the latest version of AWWA D101 -53 ($6R) standard for water tank inspections and the M42 AWWA Tank Guidance Manual. The interior of the reservoir was inspected with the TankRover remotely operated vehicle, while full. The TankRover is the only piece of equipment of its kind in the United States and was developed by Extech, a division of Acuren. By using the TankRover the interior of the tank was inspected with no special preparation, no additional disinfection and no downtime. The TankRover is equipped with a surface- cleaning tool used to remove loose rust or debris in order to view the potential metal loss under the coating. The unit has high - powered thrusters, which are used to maneuver throughout the tank as well as washing away bottom sediment for observations. The TankRover was prepared for the inspection by disinfecting in accordance with AWWA 0652. The exterior portions of the tanks were inspected by walking the roof and shell portions that were accessible from the ground. The objectives of the assessment were to: 1. Perform field inspections and tests to assess the structural and coating integrity of the tank. 2. Review the safety compliance of tank ladders and access. 3. Review sanitary conditions and protection. 4. Provide recommendations for rehabilitation. dq EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The conditions and recommendations for the tank are briefly summarized in this section. For more detailed information regarding tank conditions and the specific recommendations please refer to the designated section for each tank. The interior coating system shows signs of extensive coating failure after its years of service. The roof coating has failed over 30% of the surfaces and the shell coating has blisters on 85% of the shell surfaces. The wall blisters are beginning to crack and cause large scale underfilm corrosion and delamination. There is no serious metal loss at this time but the tank will probably need to be repainted in 1 -3 years. The cathodic protection system is protecting the submerged surfaces from metal loss. The floor of the tank had very thin layer of sediment ranging from 118 to 114 inches deep. The sediment was a light, fluffy material with a brownish color to it. There was some blistering along the tank floor. Sediment was removed as part of the inspection procedure. N dd OBSERVATIONS Photographs provided in the report were created from a digital camera and interior pictures were captured in digital format from the interior videotape. The interior images are as clear as our printed technology will allow. The copies in the report provide a reference for our comments. Keep in mind that for underwater video snaps, the videotape provides the greatest detail and should be viewed as part of the report. 3.0 Million Gallon Ground Reservoir The reservoir is a welded steel structure, 150 feet in diameter and 25 feet high. The tank was built in 1978. The tank roof is a low cone with a cured knuckle perimeter. The roof is supported by radial "C" channel rafters, two rows of tubular columns and "I" beams. The exterior of the tank is insulated with spray on foam insulation. The tank has one 36 -inch square roof hatch that can be seen in DP 417 and two 36 -inch round bolted ground level hatches, they're pictured in DP #6 and DP #8. The roof hatch is equipped with the required sanitary curb which has been subject to edge corrosion, DP #17. The following paint systems are present: Interior- Epoxy Exterior- Primer only under insulation INTERIOR The interior of the tank was accessed through the existing 36 -inch square perimeter hatch, which was not locked at the time of the inspection. The hatch's insulation is deteriorating which can be seen in DP #18. The water level during the inspection was consistently one foot below the overflow. Roof (ceiling) The roof is a flat cone structure with a central support column and radial "C" section rafters. The tank also contained numerous support beams surrounding the central support column. The roof has widespread coating failure with active surface, pinpoint, and edge corrosion, These conditions can be viewed in DP #20 -27 and V5 #1 -4. The roof plates have widespread edge and surface corrosion developing. There is 55 -60% coating failure on the surface of the plates. These conditions can be viewed in the above mentioned digital pictures and video snaps. dF Ladders There was no interior ladder present in the tank, Shell The shell has extensive blistering that is leading to surface cracks coating, exposing the underlying steel. These issues can be seen in V5 #7 -11, Coating blistering was noted on 85% of shell surfaces. The exposed steel is not rusting due to the protection offered by the impressed current cathodic protection system. Floor The floor of the tank is in good condition and covered by a thin film of sediment shown in VS 421 and VS #22. We did not see the same blistering in the coating on the floor. The floor was viewed before and after the removal of the sediment, Inlet/ Outlet The reservoir uses a combination inlet /outlet pipe with a combination diffuser and vortex breaker, is The diffuser is broken, as seen in VS #14. EXTERIOR Road' The roof had a layer of insulation so we were not able to view the condition of the coating. The condition of the insulation is fair with numerous areas of bird damage, see DP #18. The condition of roof insulation can be viewed in DP #13 -16, where bird damage is seen but no widespread delamination. Vent The tank is equipped with one, 20 -inch diameter vent, DP# 10. There appeared to be visible damage to the vent steel shown in DP #11 and DP# 12. The vent screens were in poor condition and will need to be replaced. The roof vent opening is very close to the roof and possibly susceptible to blockage by snow. Reduced air flow could create a vacuum or over pressure situation. Ladders and Railings The shell has a vertical ladder that is OSHA compliant, with a safety cage. The ladder is equipped with an anti climb device seen in DP #3. The bottom ladder rung is located one foot above the ground. There are handrails around the hatch on the top of the tanks this railing system can be viewed in DP#9. 0 dR Shell The tank shell had an insulation wrapping the outer shell, which appeared to be in fair condition, seen in DP #5. Areas that have been subject to rock and bird damage can be seen in DP-#4 Some slight deterioration of the shell insulation can be seen in DP #7 Overflow The overflow pipe was a cone top with a top termination shown in DP #I9. The overflow has a splash pad that discharges into an adjacent ditch. There was no screen present at the bottom of the overflow shown, however it is covered with a trash bag. DP #2. Foundation The reservoir's foundation consists of a concrete ring wall. DP #28. There are no anchor assemblies for this tank. An overall view of the tank can be seen in DP #1. 5 A7 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.0 Million Gallon Ground Reservoir The tank is currently in good structural condition with no serious metal loss or deformation. The interior coating is failing above and below the water line. The overflow pipe will require having a screen put on the end of it immediately for sanitary reasons. The ladder cage should be fitted with a locking gate to prevent unauthorized access. It may also be necessary to install a sheet metal cover over the ladder cage to prevent climbing, Consideration should be given to scheduling interior repainting in 1 -3 years. The interior will need to be completely blasted and painted, Although the tank shell and floor corrosion could be controlled with a cathodic protection system the roof is failing quickly and that area cannot be protected with cathodic protection. The roof vent should be replaced with a vacuum/frost free design and a fine mesh insect screen Estimated Cost $5,000 Estimated Interior Painting Cost $ 750,000. NACE Certified Coating Inspector #1381 dR R GLOSSARY OF TERMS Cathodic Protection - The use of a sacrificial metal or energized substance to polarize the structures surfaces and prevents corrosion. Chalking - The degradation of a paint system when exposed to ultra- violet light which creates a loose residue on the surface. Corrosion Cell - A concentrated localized site of accelerated corrosion that creates pitting. Dry Film Thickness - Total thickness of a paint film when complete cured. Finial Vent - The central roof vent on top of a water tank. Holiday - A hole in a protective coating that may be invisible to the unaided eye that extends to the substrate. Lead Abatement - The removal and a lead bearing paint system.. Lead Encapsulation - The covering over of a lead based paint by applying a compatible topcoat. Osmotic Blister- Raised coating area created by build up of fluid under the coating. Fluid moves through coating in response to water /solvent concentrations between coating and tank water. ROV- Remotely operated vehicle, underwater inspection device "TankRover" Silt - Material that accumulates in the bottom of a water tank originating from treatment by products and distribution system debris. Tubercle- Domed shaped build up of corrosion products over an active corrosion site. Promotes metal loss through pitting due to differential oxygen concentrations. Ultrasonic Measurement - The use of high frequency sound waves passed through a material to measure the time required to return. The time required to pass through the material is correlated to the speed of sound in the substrate to yield an actual thickness at a specific location. 7 Qa APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHS rn Kenai 3MG Reservoir 1;1 P.-I �PM ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP #1 DP#2 Y� Overall view of tank DP #3 a r M Trash bag on overflow discharge m t J Exterior shell ladder with safety cage rl ly upper sneti inswatron wth rock damage ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP#5 Upper shell insulation in good condition DP #7 r- Concrete foundation with minor spalling DP#8 3b -inch shell manway FR Uppershell insulation has slight deterioration ,i w p7m,11- 1 040% 11 t it PRUM ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP#9 Second shell manway 364nch diameter DP #1 T DP #12 Center roof gent cap RA Coarse and fine mesh screen on roof kent. P,:�Pr-M ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP #13 DP #14 .0 Hole in coarse screen DP #15 Insulation deterioration on exterior roof DP #16 Insulation deterioration on exterior roof plates r, r, insulation aetenoration on exterior roof plates I/ ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP #17 36 -inch square roof hatch with edge corrosion on sanitary curb DP #18 DP #18 I ki. { T y � 1 � 1 Insulation deterioration on roof hatch lip DP#2Q Owrflow pipe with cone top FF �i ACUREN DP#21 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP#22 DP#23 DP #24 +".7 Pvsl'� ACUREN 3.OMG GST Kenai, AK DP#25 DP#26 RR lv�M ACUREN City of Kenai VS #1 VS#2 (Time 1:08) VS#3 (Time 2:63) VS#4 image corrosion on root support beams (Time 3:39) go 5:07) ACUREN City of Kenai VS#5 VS#6 (Time 6:41) VS #7 (Time 9:00) - - - VS#8 (Time 16:52) A () (Time 12.42) - - P-:1MA ACUREN City of Kenai VS#9 VS #10 (Time 15:12) VS #11 (time 17:33) VS#12 Area of blistering on lower shell plate coating (Time 22:36) F1 Minor dusting of sediment on floor (Time 24:59) PRUM ACUREN City of Kenai VS #13 VS #14 (Time 24:59) VS #15 (lime 26:31) VS #16 (Time 27:29) A9 ugrn szanng on Tioor plates (Time 36:01) PRUA ACUREN City of Kenai VS #17 VS #18 (Time 37:54) f►IPUR"] (Time 42:27) VS#20 Staining and corrosion on painters ring (Time 46:13) r, Iz Large area of coating failure and surface corrosion on upper shell plate (Time 47:47) W,5�a ACUREN City of Kenai VS #21 VS#22 (time Ch. 2 00:10) R4 (Time Ch.2 1:25) "'Villa e with a Past, IGi with a Future" 9 �' r: 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907- 283 -75351 Fax: 907 - 283 -3014 ` www.ci.kenai.ak.us Construct New City Light /Heavy Equipment Maintenance Shop (Requested Appropriation $1,750,000) The City of Kenai's Equipment Maintenance Shop provides services to the Public Works, Streets, Parks & Recreation, Fire, Police, Airport, and Senior Center Departments. It maintains over 400 pieces of City equipment. The existing shop is over 30 years old, undersized, and not conducive to an efficient maintenance program. The size of the existing shop does not allow for the storage of equipment which is being worked on and waiting for parts, resulting in the equipment needing to be towed outside to make room for other maintenance work. Several pieces of equipment are too large for the existing shop. When large equipment requires maintenance, the words must be conducted outside. There is not a comprehensive ventilation system, nor is there separation between the welding area and the remainder of the shop. We use an adequate system of individual ventilators, but it is not an effective system. The parts room is a conex which has been connected to the shop. Bathroom /wash facilities are minimal, and the shop does not have a shower, other than in an emergency station. The City has already conducted a needs analysis and hired a design consultant to complete the design documents, the 35% design documents are included. The cost estimate for a new shop is as follows: Sitework $ 100,000 Building Construction 150'x100'= 15,000 s.f. 2,750,000 Fixtures & Equipment 500,000 Design, Administration & Contingency 650,000 Total $ 4,000,000 The City of Kenai has planned for the construction of this new facility and has dedicated $2,000,000 from General Fund reserves and other revenue sources. The City's request is for a matching $2,000,000 appropriation from the State. as Wolf ARCHITECTURE Gary S.Woif November 2, 2012 City of Kenai Department of Public Works Ph. 907.746.6670 210 Fidalgo Avenue f„www�ia,:h1ware.Wm Kenai, AK 99611 P.O.11=3602 PAner.AK99645 Ph: 907.2817535 Attn: Sean Wedemeyer, Public Works Director Project: City of Kenai Maintenance Facility Subject:Cost Estimate Dear Mr.Wedemeyer, Following up on our review of schematic design for the proposed Kenai Maintenance Facility, we have made modifications to the design and estimate. Based on the review of the estimate, significant changes have been proposed for the building design. These changes include: • Reduction in building size (from 101'x191= 19,290sf to 91'x185'= 16,842sf) • Reduction in building height (allows minimum clearance of 20' at hoist beam) • Reduction and simplification of mechanical systems o Simplified vehicle bay exhaust, eliminated ductwork o Deleted air handling at Offices (provided by operable windows) o Deleted Direct Digital Controls (DDC) • Minor reductions in electrical costs • Removal of equipment from the direct construction budget Revised Estimate Summar HMS 35% Estimated Project Construction Cost: $3,700,564 (Anticipated median bid result) Probable low Bid result: $3,231,663 (less 16 % +1 -) The project also includes a significant amount of equipment. As discussed at our meeting, equipment provided under the general contract will have a 10 -20% mark -up by the general contractor. Providing equipment under a separate contract can be cost - effective for the building owner and for overall budgets. We have pulled the majority of equipment out of the construction budget estimate. In addition, the budget needs to include the engineering fees, which typically run 7 -10% of cost. Owner Equipment: $213,256 Revised Total Cost Estimate: $3,444,919 Engineering Fees: $194,533 Revised Total Cost Estimate wl Fees: $3,639,452 We feel that this number places your building in your budget. The attached revised drawings show the value engineering items but mechanical and electrical systems still need to be engineered. It also removes most of the equipment from the project construction budget. Thank you. Jason Collins, AIA LEED AP CEA Wolf Architecture, Inc. 518 E. Fireweed Palmer, AK 99645 Ph: 746 -6670 0-a n J CITY OF KENAI VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI- ALAWA `- ^< «� 1S'OLF ARCHITECTURE, INC. C14'1LENGINEER RECDN LLC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER r wA 518 EAST FIREWEED O 30' �t •� EIC ENGINEERS, INC. R W 'WAND PALMER, AK 99645 wkT"MAQ WASTEOII 3a� wgSFi BAY OR WFR REpAAA?OR PH: 907,694.0507 PH: 907.745.8325 ` NRE99JRFsW�WER t J � : • E'+UM JST FAN vENERATfJR. -- �"► ' .MOIST _ � f N-* WUDIK. E�HAIrS*' 5x hl v {r ` 17�i 41NC 80.Y r Tg61L u,DOM � •,. iYOHE45 t� 4FAVY PAYS:• JANITOR - - 3? MEhS - MEAVY BAY -1 Cfwll EYEWASFI BMFAR ROOM AUM BAT OFF,a 13'"t `- ^< «� 1S'OLF ARCHITECTURE, INC. C14'1LENGINEER RECDN LLC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER OIL7V ASSOCIATES INC. 518 EAST FIREWEED 491 W. ARTIC AVENUE 16922 HANSOM DRIVE SPURLOCK & ASSOCIATES INC. 1860 N, FINGER COVE EIC ENGINEERS, INC. PALMER. AK 99645 PH: 907.746.6670 PALMER, AK 99645 EAGLE RIVER, AK 99577 PALMER. AK 99645 6927 OLD SEWARD HIGHWAY ANCHORAGE, AK 99538 PH: 907,746.3630 PH: 907,694.0507 PH: 907.745.8325 PH: 907.349.9712 H� a UW W w� UZ W W� z� i— I W � U� V C/] W AWz� U F� d U 1 l 5 3 5� 1116 1 rrau S 1 I 1 �n I f j�i f //I I�.� � MRigENJaCE 1 6_ Ip REFERENCE SITE PLAN Lv-- _j v Q LL Y U b7 Z 4 0 L z z l u UJ J U tr�n b Z .WC I1.1"012 W L5 1204 i mmam Ot FLOOR? 1E z ATEW Y W VLTEi�4q il! a o U AT 2 N 1s■ i I i1 FL! $ I H .x•P 'Am9 �F i✓LW'v cvusSS V.B4 •ems .�,.r J � r r • . ° r s. -� - U�.p•� '' � _.1i4 °i . - °______�- - - -° _ ____ __ °'� 1 ++ 6E 111 � y e C�FIx i�.�illf 10.1 140;5 1 � I 11 - + -J -- •••,�_ - - -_ �'V7 J ti TOOL c??u EQ] {jljp '- ELEC WE:H 2"S SF PAY �s"m li I WE ' I 17S,f 1t0•f .iarax srM. I 11 v tar hw I Fy iaQ I " I 116 K[ wumgGH L -L --- �RZSfn __- 'r:F&1E ARC II F I wbKir,ea - I F, sCE .. xnnm, ! I I I ct m[ au pl 1 I wk a a!¢SS wF111[tl �. I r ev I_.. 1 e; FZ,` -R L 1 I yam: I J Q u Y rz 1 sw Gx i rT l.,.ti j ! [... Y II q rr.m woree, r:+r utwmY xksr �rt F� t W Q G ut j 6`_- titlLT11 i p - 57OR '4 a 11 iy ~� I ... MY I Q NO ! �S if J g Q z tu mss. vs.v r I I v w ��eawx acn a wa r -i Y _�-- - -rV � Z 4 anti: W 7 IiGL'•.: :. - .. �::..�.. Smut. IMI[R wsltt u,e ems r- l Ipzj M� lff.1P [+.P L_...`J ,)k.ss. op Je ,xWax PR sL ...J o lYeixk ba I I -qty I �� ° eL_..tiJ , uY.nk rnn fl,_J nT,irei 1 1 L--_j ,� as .e n,[4 IY � 1ti 1h PC 11.1.2012 aom I LLI w rr,W 1204 ep MAIN LEVEL FLoM PLAN z wr+.11 0 AIE'2'�.iJY$ omcn.wo nrw ud, - ^ao +r i �a - . o<v�x,s F1.Oi!fet5,w W KTFAWMj uxWr. +wcrx., Ktaca IK�ir,� vW: J W W 0 lann F,wl U � a Al 2 � 4F q 1 +tii �S ^II 111 J U LL W U 2 4 2 W Z 4 1u U T W 7 d 11,1 2012 Y�I +zoo w 2I | � - mUNG PLAN m o _ -_ -- . . El Z \ / I 0 & } Lu « �z} \}§ § .l \� 7 Pte:_ uj } § § 2A 3� c, .7,- F1L Oi �111ff Y4 ♦aq� Rlf"It.t 1 u a LL W U z w z z w u z w } PC 11.120 :2 WW � fYtf�Y 2 0 ELE:.aiF(1pp W W 7 J Q } W O ! !m4 Q A2 0 N `J, or. r-W - i�ifS�1 TRANSVERSE SECIIDN AT GRID C �n.�e ac�ovrr AI WGU h n*a.ti R`- Oi �! {!!!! 4�Qi §I� N J cr Q w Q LU w F- z W J U S w 7 � JPC ILLZAF2 OSW I 12N z IIlCRK3 tY-G'IKWS Z w W 7 J Q 5 y_ W O Mflr* � U d f A3 0 N Kenai Maintenance Facility Cost Estimate Equipment # Equipment Items I JlEclui7p—m—e—n—t--� Compressor Air $ 20,856 Low Pressure Oil Fluid $ 17,310 Welding Bay Exhaust $ 2,650 Mechanical Overhead $ 8,163 93 Telecomm Rack $ 2,320 Telecomm Equip allowance $ 8,000 Electrical Overhead $ 2,064 101 Steel shelves $ 4,440 Reel Banks $ 52,220 Welding Benches $ 3,570 Compressor $ 16,835 Welding Exhaust Arm $ 6,000 Pressure Washer $ 13,400 Compressed Air $ 19,885 Subtotal Equipment Cost $ 177,713 Contractor Overhead and Profit 20% $ 35,542.64 Total Equipment Cost $ 213,256 Revised Estimate Estimate (based on HMS Report) $ 3,847,218 Revisions with actual cost multiplier 84% $ 3,231,+663 Equipment $ 213,256 $ 3,444,919 Engineering and Design Fees $ 194,533 $ 3,639,452 Alternates Alt. 1- Snowmelt System $ 95,040 Alt.2 Mezzanine $ 95,875 Alt. 3 - Clerestory Glazing $ 14,300 Alt. 4 - Sitework $ 171,888 Alternate Subtotals $ 377,103 Revised Estimate w/ Alternates $ 3,822,022 Revised Estimate w/ Alternates (and Fee) $ 4,016,555 7a 11.1.2012 Notes By Owner By Owner By Owner By Owner HMS showed $3.7m but had lower SF Includes 5% Contingency ( 7% Design Cost = $259,000) Snowmelt in Concrete pad Partial Mezzanine shown on plan South Elevation only Asphalt Paving and Pad for Genset HMS Protect No.: 12117 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE Revisions) CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA PREPARED FOR: Wolf Architecture, Inc. 518 E. Fireweed Lane Palmer, Alaska 99645 October 25, 2012 H • S 4103 Minnesota Drive • Anchorage, Alaska 99503 p: 907.561.1653 • f: 907.562.0420 • e: mail@a hmsalaska,com CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) HMS Project No.: 12117 DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS Level of Documents: 35% design drawings and narratives as modified by value engineering effort Date: October 24, 2012 Provided By: Wolf Architecture, Inc. of Palmer, Alaska and their subconsultants of Anchorage, Alaska RATES Pricing is based on current material, equipment and freight costs. Labor Rates. A.S. Title 36 (working 50 hours per week, 10.00 % premium time) BIDDING ASSUMPTIONS Contract: Standard construction contract without restrictive bidding clauses Bidding Situation: Competitive bids assumed Bid Date: May 2013 Start of Construction: July 2013 Months to Complete: Within (10) months completion for base bid EXCLUDED COSTS 1. AIE design fees 2. Administrative and management costs 3. Furniture, furnishings and equipment (except those specifically included) 4. Remediation of contaminated soils, if found during construction PAGE 2 DATE: 1.0126/2012 CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY PAGE 3 KENAI, ALASKA 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) DATE: 10/26/2012 HMS Project No.: 12117 GENERAL When included in HMS Inc.'s scope of services, opinions or estimates of probable construction costs are prepared on the basis of HMS Inc.'s experience and qualifications and represent HMS Inc.'s judgment as a professional generally familiar with the industry. However, since HMS Inc. has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, over contractor's methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, HMS Inc. cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual construction cost will not vary from HMS Inc.'s opinions or estimates of probable construction cost. This estimate assumes normal escalation based on the current economic climate. While the recent global economic downturn appears to be moderating, it remains unclear how its effects and subsequent economic recovery will affect construction costs. HMS Inc. will continue to monitor this, as well as other international, domestic and local events, and the resulting construction climate, and will adjust costs and contingencies as deemed appropriate. This revised estimate incorporates reduced area and scope items as discussed for value engineering. GROSS FLOOR AREA BASE BID: First Floor 16,200 SF J b CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA 35 % SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) HMS Project No.: 12117 GENERAL COST SUMMARY PAGE 4 DATE: 10/2612012 CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) HMS Project No.: 12117 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST SUMMARY PAGE 5 DATE: 10/26/2012 01 - SITE WORK Material $ 95,622 Labor $ 147,252 . . $ 242,874 02-SUBSTRUCTURE 145,557 124,419 269,976 03- SUPERSTRUCTURE 0 0 0 04 - EXTERIOR CLOSURE 74,538 29,074 103,612 05 - ROOF SYSTEMS 42,152 51,095 93,247 06 - INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION 46,959 80,701 127,660 07 - CONVEYING SYSTEMS 08 - MECHANICAL 71,160 213,412 8,910 198,773 80,070 _ 412,185 09 - ELECTRICAL 10 - EQUIPMENT 166,374 4,939 137,605 1,331 303,979 6,270 11 -SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 573,518 386,498 960,016 SUBTOTAL: 12 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS $ 1,434,231 $ 9,965,658 $ 2,599,889 863,842 SUBTOTAL: 13 - CONTINGENCIES $3,463,731 236,833 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST_ COST PER SQUARE FOOT. GROSS FLOOR AREA: $ 3,700,564 $ 228.43 /SF 96,200 SF CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) HMS Project No.: 12117 ELEMENTAL SUMMARY PAGE 6 DATE: 10/26/2012 Total Element Material Labor Materialkabor Total Cost Cost per SF 01 - SITE WORK $242,874 $ 14.99 011 - Hazmat Abatement $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0.00 012 - Site Preparation 28,719 84,145 112,864 6,97 013 - Site Improvements 38,490 36,787 75,277 4.65 014 - Site Mechanical 22,969 20,843 43,812 2.70 015 - Site Electrical 5,444 5,477 10,921 0.67 02 - SUBSTRUCTURE $ 269,976 $ 16.67 021 - Standard Foundations $ 37,697 $ 47,764 $ 85,461 5.28 022 - Slab on Grade 107,860 76,655 184,515 11.39 023 - Basement 0 0 0 0.00 024 - Special Foundations 0 0 0 0.00 03 - SUPERSTRUCTURE $ 0 $0.00 031 - Floor Construction $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0.00 032 - Roof Construction 0 0 0 0.00 033 - Stair Construction 0 0 0 0.00 04 - EXTERIOR CLOSURE $ 103,612 $ 6.40 041 - Exterior Walls $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0.00 042 - Exterior Doors and Windows 74,538 29,074 103,612 6.40 05 - ROOF SYSTEMS $ 93,247 $ 5.76 051 - Roofing $ 42,152 $ 51,095 $ 93,247 5.76 052 - Skylights 0 0 0 0.00 06 - INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION $127,660 $ 7.88 061 - Partitions and Doors $ 28,054 $ 33,123 $ 61,177 3.7$ 062 - Interior Finishes 13,805 45,836 59,641 3.68 063 - Specialties 5,100 1,742 6,842 0.42 CITY OF KENAI MAINTENANCE FACILITY KENAI, ALASKA 35% SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE (VE REVISIONS) HMS Project No.: 12117 ELEMENTAL SUMMARY PAGE 7 DATE: 10/26/2012 Total Element Material Labor MateriallLabor Total Cost Cost per SF 07 - CONVEYING SYSTEMS $ 79,160 $ 8,990 $80,070 $ 4.94 08 - MECHANICAL $412,185 $ 25.44 081 - Plumbing $ 61,838 $ 64,381 $ 126,219 7.79 082 - HVAC 151,574 134,392 285,966 17.65 083 - Fire Protection 0 0 0 0.00 084 - Special Mechanical Systems 0 0 0 0.00 09 - ELECTRICAL $ 303,979 $ 18.76 091 - Service and Distribution $ 90,858 $ 48,029 $ 138,887 8.57 092 - Lighting and Power 72,875 83,070 155,948 9.63 093 - Special Electrical Systems 2,638 6,506 9,144 0.56 10 - EQUIPMENT $ 6,270 $ 0.39 101 - Fixed and Movable Equipment $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0.00 102 - Furnishings 4,939 1,331 6,270 0.39 11 - SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $573,518 $ 386, 498 $960,016 $ 59.26 SUBTOTAL DIRECT WORK: $ 9,434,239 $ 4,965,658 $ 2,599,889 12 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS $ 863,842 $ 53.32 121 - Mobilization $ 30,600 1.89 122 - Operation Costs 567,236 35.01 123 - Profit 266,006 16.42 13 - CONTINGENCIES $236,833 $ 14.62 131 - Estimator's Contingency 132 - Escalation Contingency 5.00% 1.75% $ 173,187 63,646 10.69 3.93 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST: $ 3,700,564 $228.43 /SF GROSS FLOOR AREA: 16,200 SF "tVilla e with a Past, C# with a Future" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 -283 -75351 Fax: 907 -283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us \\ t6►e city uf' V Kenai Industrial Park Construction — Phase II Utilities (Requested Appropriation $500,000) The Construction of the initial phase of the Kenai Industrial Park was funded through a Legislative Appropriation in SFY 2012. Phase I of the Kenai Industrial Park Project is on schedule for platting to be complete in late 2012, with construction to begin in early 2013. To incentivize the development of the industrial park, the City of Kenai will recognize a leaseholder's site development costs as a 100% credit against future lease payments. These credits will include, but not be limited to, costs associated with clearing & grubbing, unclassified excavation, and classified fill and backfill. In some cases, leaseholders may not be burdened with lease payments for as many as five years. These improvements will always be to the future benefit of the City of Kenai and will provide businesses, especially start -up businesses, substantial cash -flow benefits. The Industrial Park is comprised of 20 -25 lots totaling over 1,600,000 square feet, or 37 acres in area. To date, 6.8 acres or 18% of the area, of the Industrial Park has already been leased to Buccaneer Alaska Operations, Inc. The City is presently in negotiations with several interested companies for substantial area within the industrial park. The majority of interested companies are associated with the revitalized oil & gas industry on the Kenai Peninsula. The location of the Kenai Industrial Park, on well maintained roadways, served by public utilizes, and adjacent to the Kenai Municipal Airport has proved attractive to established and new companies. This project phase will extend the utilities constructed in Phase I, to serve an additional +l- 18 acres of the industrial park. R7 KENAI INDUSTRIAL PARK 11/6/2012 COST ESTIMATE Phase II, Utilities (highlighted) Design Property Development Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unt Price Quantity Sub -Total Design /Business Development Plan LS 1 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Survey /Subdivision LS 1 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Property Acquisition /Value Acre 60 $ 25,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 Sub -Total $ $ 1,650,000.00 Access Road Construction Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unt Price Sub -Total Clearing & Grubbing Acre 5 $ 8,500.00 $ 42,500.00 Unclassified Excavation CY 7800 $ 8.00 $ 62,400.00 Classified Fill & Backfill Ton 10,300 $ 10.00 $ 103,000.00 Crushed Aggregate Base Course Ton 2000 $ 22.00 $ 44,000.00 Signage LS 1 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 SWPPP LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 24" CMP W /Flared End Sections LF 1250 $ 65.00 $ 81,250.00 Survey LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Sub -Total $ 350,650.00 Utilities Construction - Phase Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unt Price Sub -Total Water Distribution Main 10" HDPE LF 600 $ 100.00 $ 60,000.00 Wastewater Collection Main LF 600 $ 100.00 $ 60,000.00 Electrical Main Extension LF 400 $ 200.00 $ 80,000.00 Electrical Services /Transformers EA 5 $ 5,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Natural Gas LF 600 $ 30.00 $ 18,000.00 Telephone /Telecomminucation LF 600 $ 30.00 $ 18,000.00 Sub -Total $ 261,000.00 Utilities Construction - Phase Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unt Price Sub -Total Water Distribution Main 10" HDPE LF 1400 $ 100.00 $ 140,000.00 Wastewater Collection Main LF 1400 $ 100-00 $ 140,000.00 Electrical Main Extension LF 400 $ 200.00 $ 80,000.00 Electrical Services /Transformers EA 6 $ 5,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Natural Gas LF 1400 $ 30.00 $ 42,000.00 Telephone /Telecomminucation LF 1400 $ 30.00 $ 42,000.00 Sub -Total $ 474,000.00 011 KENAI INDUSTRIAL PARK COST ESTIMATE Phase II, Utilities (highlighted) Utilities Construction - Phase III Cost Item Description Water Distribution Main 10" HDPE Wastewater Collection Main Electrical Main Extension Electrical Services /Transformers Natural Gas Telephone /Telecomminucation Sub -Total Cost Estimate Summary Project Component(s) Property Acquisition, Design, Roadway & Phase I Utility Construction Phase II Utility Construction Phase III Utility Construction Total Unit Quantity Unt Price LF 800 $ 100.00 LF 800 $ 100.00 LF 800 $ 200.00 EA 8 $ 5,000.00 LF 1400 $ 30.00 LF 1400 $ 30.00 Estimated Cost $ 2,261,650.00 $ 474,000.00 $ 444,000.00 $ 3,179,650.00 Ad 11/6/2012 Sub -Total $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 160,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 42,000.00 $ 42,000.00 $ 444,000.00 b 37 p= sEC 3; BASIS OF BEARING GLO DATUM_ ms'� w 1� SEC 33l� T 0 5� I WASTEWATER DLSP04AL Q a Plans Ior wat the ere Lm,ne Thal meet requl¢lary regvirexsentQ an pre ¢I the DQOorlment of Enrfronmeneal C¢.rneryytiM yr BARON PARK SUED � 2 1 2W7REPLAT7RAC7 gi BARON PARK SUBD, f I r 21707 REPLA7 TRAff Al L 0 8 9 tl'a r REhrIUNDER NJ! 114 5EG j 35 L`fiNG vOM OF » MCINITY IAAP MARATHON ROAD sde 1' - r trey 1 i7.9SAC. NIL . �Qrmnlarn ..e..r,wbrrr.r•�ar�brfe]ucn.,e aucrw {�Qplp!Lwe NEArR/`ryr Tasa.�4ti,�, WrnwwQbnafr,xeh ty,bq'ua Nrbxw•mr TWIN IGyume ' ��-.� — = � � rvvY � I !1¢�'Mrymuxmw n ri/d KwW Grigxla tarhg Cear I r � �z "zi+._� A'05'S1Tr� � Q. Nan „11 heYq Ntmo0Qf900bMMEeWib NU buy fA I MYm le bapQe¢'0Q ffgwe NJ. nd ! / h ..\. 29ff.b° `' —. WAewWtrR 4�3wrrA rtirW�u�w.►rMbwR MkaL6 LOT l 3 LOT 14 7.(784 Y N Ia. 2” xtil 28 � 275 5r e N013e'!58'M 9W.88' W L/�ir ra c ®r 7 Aa r D, h" ! auli13 EFti y�PtPE1.1N y 7. 23 /a L'. 1.065 C. MY OF KENAJ TRACTAi -A o Ih yp��• z K"700.51 a .SC'¢Fr 3.CS.QC.kff' .`10638' x5727 t].aQ' SHl.ji' xG �� TIa2Tl r A L h4y Q 10y �_rr.�P imap �r D RI K y 111 i y l7 I [miy r4F k%iy� plat# P _ I ° CITY OF KENAI o '�•..� \/ . — UNSUBDIVIDED 3. t PORTION OF rg SEC 33TGN Rif W 2 3 KE'NA BL160l YFSlL7N PARK �O •.44L. f rlr r 215 FNe$o Sine! 1 xtlnel. AK BBaPf Lp(:A7fpN ,..� ,-0� / k: 4 fF.�RCATE OF oWNERSMP ►Nn rtrnir><nriN � # 11 -Sffpi� /y w. ne•.er r.rnrr -neL ,r. me m. ¢+are er m. teas araP.rrr F°' OO usi5 �e. eutsmu7eo IN iNE Inv vQSECrkoN3a O anew wN aecrew M1rson entl w ladap apprewtl br uw KPNN °r T_BN. P. 11 W. E.11l.,AK ANp THE CRYOFMFNA1AHp IN,tan ¢nA b7 pv Irw cwnyr,.l nemwls�tltPr n- oar -roY � t+r 8¢P01YHR PLAN- MNN PrNMULA ppgM� IN TXE KEMak x CORONG � � •H� u�,. ��,e'.rn�'e Is v.buc zw .rw qml A :a.¢nx� :¢ ra¢ mb Ina ¢s m. m..xn¢ w ol/��/s��mk��c,,}}T. xY rumml'.eim eaPib ittNN P[xarSelA BGRWBN OY r•roanu / I erltir ar`i:w w�sah e�m+2+ara. r�so� a y c e e e AvNerla,tl ¢rre;d M "Villa ye with a Past, C# with a Future 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907 - 283 -75351 Fax: 907- 283 -3014 www.ci.kenai.ak.us State Personal Use Fishery, Capital Improvements (Requested Appropriation $150,000) The State of Alaska Personal Use Fishery is both a positive and a negative for the City of Kenai. We welcome our Alaskan neighbors to take part in this fishery, however the activity has grown to such a level that the existing resources which the City provides are not adequate to respond to the crowds. There are a number of issues which need to be addressed, these include enforcement, data collection, and State funding for capital projects to assist the City in providing a parking and camping area for the up to 15,000 individuals which participate in the fishery on a daily basis. Our residential subdivisions near the beach are being over -run with vehicles /campers as they simply do not have alternative places to park. On one day during the last year's season an estimated 15,000 people were participating in the fishery at the mouth of the Kenai River, and 10,000 participants is commonplace. One specific issue is the amount of fish waste that is deposited on tidelands owned by the City. When participants clean fish the fish waste is often thrown into the river /ocean where it ends up being washed up to the tideline. The City attempts to remove the decomposing fish waste each evening by utilizing a tractor with a rake to transport fish waste. The City recommends that fish cleaning stations be constructed in three locations, (North Beach, Boat Launch and South Beach) and that disposal of fish waste from the personal use fishery into the Kenai River be prohibited by regulation. Estimated costs for the construction of three fish cleaning stations is as follows: Water Systems Site Preparation Wastewater Disposal Systems Cleaning Facilities & Appurtenances Design, Administration & Contingency Sub-Total Less SFY 2013 Appropriation $100,000 30,000 60,000 75,000 35,000 $300,000 (150,000) SFY 2014 Request $150,000 The fish cleaning stations could also be used as data collection, and enforcement stations for ADF &G and AST. RR .t owl Aw p p W7 f r 9 � r �„ r i- ?4�, 7-- 0- � i - kk7 .f° aii r R7 �f �. rl *' Am 4--m 6p y J RR 1 4 MP 4k �T Q a or W-,�* _ — 4mm AV"A' AOKJW A - r E *or-. slow i 2012 a Table of Contents 2012 City Manager Dipnet Summary . ............................... 1 -4 City Manager Analysis and Calculation of Transactions ................... 5 City Manager Fee Increase Worksheet ............................... 6-7 Draft Resolution ................. ............................... 8 -10 Police Dipnet Report Summary .... ............................... 11 -12 Police Dipnet Report ................. ..........................13 -18 Parks & Recreation Report ........ ............................... 19 -22 Public Works Report ........... ............................... 23 -26 Fire Department Report ......... ............................... 27 -28 Finance Department Summary .... ............................... 29 -30 Revenue Expenditure Summary ....... ............................... 31 Revenue Summary ................ ............................... 32 Expenditure Summary ........... ............................... 33 -34 \' "IVilla a with a Past C# with a Future„ 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 51.1, Telephone: 907 - 283 -75351 FAX: 907- 283 -3014 1 111 i 1992 MEMO* TO: City Council FROM: Rick Koch DATE: November 28, 2012 SUBJECT: 2012 Kenai River Dipnet (Personal Use) Fishery Report The purpose of this correspondence is to transmit for your review and discussion the above referenced annual report. As detailed in the report, the City generated non -grant revenues of $362,088.00 against non -grant expenditures (current & projected) of $364,757.51, or revenues over expenditures of ($2,669.51). If you include grant revenues and expenditures both of these values would be increased by $111,073.03. The 2012 season, based on non -grant revenues, exhibited the greatest activity to date, exceeding the 2011 non -grant revenues ($320,634.00) by $41,454 or 19.70 %. This increase in revenue was caused by both an increase in camping fees ($5.00) and a greater number of participants. City personnel successfully responded to many challenges during the fishery this year. The higher volume of participants coupled with the Alaska Department of Fish & Game's decision to make the fishery around -the -clock (24hr) resulted in services being harder to provide, and conflicts being more difficult to solve. As was stated in previous year's reports, fish waste is a continuous and increasing problem, The volume of fish waste has increased dramatically and a twenty -four hour fishery eliminates any time to attempt to clean the beaches without being in conflict with fishery participants. It is our intent to undertake an aggressive program to eliminate /minimize fish waste on the north beach and solid waste (trash) on both the north and south beaches. Because of the greater magnitude of the fish waste problem on the north beach and the logistical challenge of providing fish cleaning tables, a collection, and disposal system, we want to concentrate on the north beach in 2013 and apply the lessons learned to managing the much lower volume of fish waste on the south beach beginning in 2014. Fallowing is a description of the general scope of the plan to address fish waste and solid waste (trash) in 2013: Fish Waste Management The legislature in 2012 (SFY 2013) included an appropriation in the amount of $150,000 for Personal Use Fishery Improvements to the City of Kenai. This appropriation will be used for the design and manufacture of three fish cleaning stations, consultant services to assist the City in preparing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for disposal of fish waste, and other related items. The fish cleaning stations will be fabricated on a twenty -four foot long dual axle- trailer with foundation jacks located at each corner. Each side of the fish cleaning station will have fish - cleaning tables with sufficient room for eight people to clean fish. A 1,000 to 2,000 gallon tank will be located in the middle of the trailer with a pipe /hose water distribution system to the fish- cleaning tables. One fish cleaning station will be located in the vicinity of the end of Kenai Avenue, on the beach side of the dunes. The second will be located on the beach side of the dunes approximately mid -way between the end of Kenai Avenue and South Spruce Street. The third fish - cleaning station will be located on the beach near the end of South Spruce Street. The fish - cleaning stations will be supplied with water through 1 -112" HDPE distribution piping connected to a hydrant. City personnel will oversee the use and management of the fish - cleaning stations. One employee will be dedicated to observing operations, refilling water storage tanks, cleaning the stations, and providing assistance to fishery participants. Fish waste will be collected at the fish- cleaning stations by a contractor. The contractor may dispose of the fish -waste in any legal manner. This may include, but not be limited to: 1. Disposal in a permitted solid waste landfill. 2. Disposal by grinding and discharge to a receiving body of water utilizing an existing or new Alaska Pollution Discharge Elimination System (APDES) permit. 3. Disposal through composting or the manufacture of an added value product, i.e. fertilizer. 4. Disposal by transporting to an approved and permitted offshore disposal area. Solid Waste (Trash) Management The City will contract for a third party to install and service twelve, six cubic yard dumpsters located on the north beach and spaced approximately 100 -200 yards from each other on the beach side of the dunes, as well as dumpsters in locations serviced in the past. On the south beach four to six dumpsters will be evenly spaced along the beach in camping areas. The dumpsters will be serviced daily and more frequently if required during periods of peak use. The estimated cost for the above programs is $233,836.44. To provide the revenue necessary to offset these increased costs Administration recommends increasing fees as follows: Fee Description Existing Fee (2012) Proposed Fee 2013 North Beach Parking $15.00 $30.00 North Beach Camping $20.00 $30.00 South Beach Parking $15.00 $30.00 South Beach Camping $20.00 $30.00 Dock Launch & Park $20.00 $30.00 Dock Park $10.00 $20.00 Presently, parking fees are for a twelve hour period beginning when the flee is paid. In 2013 the parking fee will be for a twenty -four hour period beginning and ending at 5AM. This coincides with normal fishery hours. Camping fees will be for a twenty -four period beginning and ending at noon. The proposed fee increases are estimated to increase revenues by $236,882.00. Attached are worksheets providing detailed estimates of operations and maintenance cost for both the fish management and solid -waste management programs. Also included is a daily accounting of revenues during the 2012 fishery. The total is slightly greater than what is included in this report as sales tax had not yet been accounted for in the raw data. Also attached is a draft Resolution which increases the fees as described in this document. In 2013 we plan to increase cash - management controls in place at the fee stations. Finance is currently exploring the use of computer /cash registers to generate fee receipts. This will provide an operational control not present at this time. Whether or not permanent power must be installed, and the overall cost of the proposed system will be the deciding factors in the decision to institute its use. In summary, I am again extremely pleased and impressed with the performance of our City employees in response to the fishery. Thank you in advance for your time and attention in reviewing this Report. If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience. 4 0 Analysis of 2012- Personal Use Fishery & Calculation of Estimated Transactions for 2013 Estimated Revenues Total Revenue from Parking (85 %) North Beach Revenues $ 148,481.00 5 125,208.85 Estimated Revenues Total Revenue from Parking (80 %) South Beach Revenues $ 127,265.00 $ 101,812.00 Dock /Launch Revenues North Beach Estimated Number of Transactions for Parking @ $15 /Transaction 8414 South Beach Estimated Number of Transactions for Parking @ $15 /Transaction 6787 Dock /Boat launch Estimated Revenues from Camping (15 %) $ 22,272.15 Estimated Revenues from Camping (20 %) $ 25,453-00 Estimated Number of Transactions for Camping @ $20 /Transaction 1114 Estimated Number of Transactions for Camping @ $20 /Transaction 1273 Total Revenues $ 362,088.00 Estimated Number of 22768 Estimated Number of Estimated Revenues Transactions for Transactions for Total Revenue $ 86,342A0 from Parking & Launch (80 %) $ 69,073.60 Parking & Launch @ $20 /Transaction 3454 Estimated Revenues from Parking (20%) $ 17,268 40 Parking @ $10 /Transaction 1727 Totals $ 297,094.45 _ 18655 1 $ 64,993.55 4113 Total Revenues $ 362,088.00 Totaf Transactions 22768 Total Estimated Transactions for 2013 ( -10 %) 20491 Prepared by, R. Koch Page 1 of 1 Worksheet to Calculate Increase in 2013 Personal Use Fishery Fees 11/21/2012 Estimate of Costs to Install HDPE Water Piping to Serve North Shore Cleaning Stations Cost item Description Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total Note /Comment Foreman (ST) HR 40 $ 30 -00 $1,200M Labor (OT) Foreman (OT) HR 20 $ 40.00 $800.00 Contract for fish waste disposal Labor(ST) HR 120 $ 14.00 $1,630.00 Four Wheeler& Trailer Labor (OT) HR 60 $ 21.00 $1,260.00 Materials & Equip. Shovels, rakes, cleaning supplies, etc, Misc. Fittings, Valves, Etc. LS 1 $ 3,500.00 $3,500.00 Equipment LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $1,000.00 Total Total $137,380.00 $7,440.00 Estimated City Operation & Maintenance Cost for Fish Waste Disposal (North Beach) Cost item Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total I Note /Comment Gabor (ST) HR 720 $ 14.00 $ia,0$0.o0 Labor Based on 7AM -11PM Manning of Cleaning Stations Labor (OT) HR 300 $ 21.00 $6,300.00 Labor Based on 7AM -11PM Manning of Cleaning Stations Contract for fish waste disposal LS 1 $ 105,000.00 $105,000.00 Four Wheeler& Trailer i_S 1 $ 8,500.00 $8,500.00 $ 64,000.00 Materials & Equip. Shovels, rakes, cleaning supplies, etc, LS 1 $ 7,500.00 $7,S00.00 Total 1 $137,380.00 Estimated Cost of Trash /Debris Collection Disposal (North & South Beach) Cost Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Sub -Total Note /Comment 6 cy Container Monthly Charge w/ Daily Service (North Beach) EA 12 $ 4,000.00 $ 48,000.00 4 cy Container Monthly Charge w/ Dai[y Service (South Beach) EA 4 $ 4,000.00 $ 16,000.00 Total $ 64,000.00 Prepared by: R. Koch Page 1 of 2 Worksheet to Calculate Increase in 2013 Personal Use Fishery Fees 11/21/2012 Component Estimate Estimate of Costs to Install HDPE Estimated Water Piping to Serve North Shore Cleaning Stations $7,440.00 Estimated City Operation & Number of Maintenance Cost for Fish Waste Disposal (North Beach) $137,380.00 Estimated Cost of Trash /Debris Transactions Collection Disposal (North & South Beach) $ 64,000.00 Sub -Total $208,820.00 Administrative Allocation (11.98 %) $25,016.64 Total $233,$36,64 $ 30.00 Total Est Cost ($233,836.64) divided $ 227,190.40 by Est. Number of Transactions North Beach Camping (20,491) $11.41 Prepared by: R. Koch Page 2 of 2 Estimated Number of Existing Fee Proposed Transactions Estimated Revenue Fee Area (2012) Fee (2013) (2013) (2013) Notes /Comments North Beach Parking $ 15.00 $ 30.00 7573 $ 227,190.40 North Beach Camping $ 20.00 $ 30.04 1003 $ 30,090.00 South Beach Parking $ 15,00 $ 30.00 6108 $ 183,240.00 South Beach Camping $ 20.00 5 3D.03 1146 $ 34,380.00 Dock launch & Park Dock Park $ 20.00 $ 10.00 $ 30,00 $ 20.00 3109 1545 $ 93,270.00 $ 30,900.00 Tota}s 20484 $ 599,070.00 Actual Revenue 2012 $ {36x,088.00) Estimated increase in Revenue for 2013 $ 236,982.00 Prepared by: R. Koch Page 2 of 2 tt KEidRL ALASKA Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING ITS COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE OF RATES, CHARGES, AND FEES FOR CHANGES ADOPTED DURING THE FY2013 BUDGET PROCESS TO INCLUDE INCREASING CAMPING AND PARKING FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PERSONAL USE FISHERY. WHEREAS, the City intends to undertake aggressive programs for fish waste collection and removal on the north beach, and solid waste collection and removal on the north and south beaches during the 2013 Personal Use Fishery; and, WHEREAS, these programs will include the manufacture, operations, and maintenance of fish cleaning stations on the north beach, and placement and sen•ice of solid waste containers (dumpstcrs) along the north and south beaches; and, WHEREAS, the program for collection and disposal of fish waste will include the removal, and legal and permitted disposal of fish waste from the fish cleaning stations; and, WHEREAS, the current fees are insufficient to support the estimated City expenditures associated with the Personal Use Fishery; anti, WHEREAS the Administration recommends that revenues generated, should be equal to or greater than expenses associated with the Personal Use Fishery, and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, to amend the City's Comprehensive Schedule of Rates, Charges and Fees "Parks and Recreation Fees" and "City Dock Fees" sections to: PARKS AND RECREATION FEES Multipurpose Facility — hourly rate (reservation) $125.00 Ice Rink Pass Family pass $45.00 Adult pass $30.00 Youth pass $20.00 Public Skate $1,00 Picnic Shelter /Gazebo Reservation Picnic Shelter (Refundable deposit $50.00) $ 15.00 Gazebo (Refundable deposit $200.00) $20.00 Community Garden Plot (each) $20.00 Adopt -A- Bench (Includes bench, shipping, installation $450.00 and maintenance) Nt%K Teat UnderUnjj ; IDEIZTED TEXT B AC:KrTEU1 Resolution No. 2013 -XX Page 2 of 3 North & South Beach Parking (Personal Use Fishery Season) [per twelve (12) hour period] (per 24 hour period 5AM -5AMj [$1 5.00] 530.00 North & South Beach Overnight Camping (Personal Use Fishery Season D2PM 12PM1) [$20.00] $30.00 CITY DOCK FEES Product wharfage (with crane; without forklift) Non - product wharfage (ice, nets, staples, etc.) Used Oil Dumping Boat Launch Ramp - (Includes Parking with Trailer) -First 10 minutes, effective August 1 -July 9 - (Includes Parking with Trailer)-First 10 minutes, Effective Jul, 10 -July 31 - Senior Citizen (Includes Parking with Trailer) - First 10 minutes, effective August 1 -July 9 -Each minute over 10 - Season.. Boat Launch Pass Parking Only -Per day(Vehicle with trailer must pay launch fee also) - Senior Citizen, [(Vehicle with trailer must pay Launch fee also)] effective August 1 -July 9 - Season Parking Pass Tie Up Fee -Skiff tied to land side of concrete dock-per day -Skiff tied to laud side of concrete dock- season pass -Boat tied to buoy in river -per day - Boat tied to buoy in river - season pass Forklift with operator (1 /2 hour minimum) -per hour Labor charge for call-out (2 hour minimum) -per hour $0.07 /lbs $0.04/ lbs $20.00 $30.00 $ 0.00 $ 1.00 /minute P150-00] $250.00 [$10.001 201 00 $ 0.00 [$100.00) $207.00 $ 7.00 $150.00 $ 1.0.00 $150.00 $ 50.00 $ 40.00 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this Resolution shall be effective on July 1, 2013, PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this — day of 2013. __ ATTEST: PAT POR'T'ER, MAYOR New Text )Underlined; f DELETED TEXT BR2ACXF.TEDI 9 Resolution No. 2013 -XX Page 3 of 3 Sandra Modigh, City Clerk Approved by Finance: New TexT Underlined; [Dfi].ETFD TEXT 13RACkFTEDI 10 ►ter MEMO: "'Villa ye With a Past, C# with aFuture"' Kenai Police Department bAcd 107 S. Willow St., Kenai, Alaska 99611 Telephone: 907 - 283 -7879 / FAX: 907 -283 -2267 1992 TO: Rick Koch — City Manager FROM: Gus Sandahl -• Police Chief DATE: 10/13/12 SUBJECT: Dipnet Report Summary Enclosed is the City of Kenai's annual Dipnet Report for 2012, with reports from Police, Parks, Public Works, Fire and Finance. For the 2012 dipnet fishery, the City had total non -grant revenues of $362,088 and total non -grant expenditures of $364,757.51. A strong sockeye return again brought a tremendous number of dipnet participants to the mouth of the Kenai River. Police dipnet calls for service increased from 121 in 2011 to 142 in 2012. TEOs wrote 106 dipnet - related citations, compared to 59 citations in 2011. The Department experienced its heaviest work load from July 17 to July 22. During this period, Police assisted City Dock crews with vehicle congestion more than any other year. Police also observed high volumes of traffic on Cannery Rd. during this peak week. Parks, Public Works, and Police all experienced an increase in dipnet expenditures over the previous year. The Fire Department had a decrease in dipnet calls for service, Other City Departments also experienced an increased work load during the dipnet fishery. In July, the City Attorney's office processed a total of 216 KPD citations ( 106 dipnet - related). The Kenai Library had a significant increase in users during the dipnet fishery. In July, the Library computers were booked up, and there was a 41 % increase in circulation over July of 2011. Two mobile vendors participated in the fishery. The vendors paid for available dipnet parking spaces, as opposed to having a reserved vendor parking area. This did not appear to be problematic for them. Salmon Frenzy volunteers helped direct traffic on Kenai Ave. and at the City Dock. Their efforts were highly appreciated. The City and Borough signed a letter of agreement which granted the City temporary ,jurisdiction on Dunes Rd. This agreement allowed the City Public Works to provide road maintenance and install signage. It also allowed the City to collect reasonable fees for 11 dipnet access. The agreement further allowed KPD officers to take enforcement action on people violating the City's posted rules (i.e. no camping, etc.). Although the City improved the North Beach access for setnet vehicles, east side setnetters were closed down for all but one fishing period during the 2012 dipnet fishery. Thanks to the efforts of volunteer groups the Kenai beaches were clean and free of litter by August 15` Overall, the City departments very effectively managed the City's responsibilities to the dipnet fishery. The remainder of the report provides greater detail of the City's 2012 dipnet operations (specific to each department). 12 KENAI POLICE DEPARTMENT 107 South Willow Street Kenai, AK 99611 Telephone (907) 283 -7879 Fax (907) 283 -2267 Kenai Police Department Dipnet Report 2012 Prepared by: Trent Semmens (TEO), Dominick Eubank (TEO), Alex Story (TEO), James Watkins (TED), Sgt. Kelly George, Sgt. Scott McBride, Lt. David Ross, and Chief Gus Sandahl Introduction This report summarizes the Kenai Police Department activity specific to the 2012 dipnet fishery. The fishery opened on Tuesday, July 10 "' at 6:00 a.m. and closed on Tuesday, July 31 at midnight. On July 20`h, the dipnet fishery was opened to 24 hours per day fishing for the remainder of the season. The Kenai Police Department employed four Temporary Enforcement Officers again this summer. All TEOs returned from the 2011 season. The presence of four experienced TEOs significantly contributed to smooth operations. They provided a continuous presence to answer questions, give direction, monitor and enforce parking and traffic flow, and provide immediate assistance for various issues. The TEOs spent a total of 538 hours working during the dipnet fishery. Out of these, a total of 457.4 hours were specific to dipnet (time on the beaches, at Kenai City Dock, or performing other dipnet - related duties). The 2012 dipnet season was unique; instead of starting slowly and increasing in intensity, dipnet activity started almost immediately. Within four days, the North Beach parking lot was at full capacity, and overflow parking opened during the first weekend. Overflow parking remained open, and at near full capacity, through the second weekend. During this time, South Beach was equally populated. After the second weekend the amount of dipnetters began to decline, often leaving the North Beach parking lot around 65% full. By the end of the season the North Beach parking lot was only about 1/2 full. In the spring of 2011, the Kenai Fire Department purchased a Polaris Ranger side -by -side which was used primarily by TEOs during the 2012 dipnet fishery. The Ranger was equipped with emergency lights and a backboard in order to help provide a visible law enforcement presence on the North Beach during the dipnet fishery. The Kenai Police Department's Polaris Ranger, purchased in 2010, was again utilized on the South Beach. Having a Ranger on each beach proved to be a valuable resource to officers and TEOs. The KPD Ranger was parked on private property near the South Beach entrance. The KFD Ranger was parked at the Sewer Treatment Plant. These locations allowed for efficient access to the fishery. 13 North Beach North Beach required the majority of officer and TEO working hours. The problems most encountered were parking violations (i.e. failure to pay or display permit). TEOs efficiently dealt with violators by leaving warnings and checking back within one to two hours to see that the situation was resolved. TEOs issued 106 citations this dipnet season. The majority of these citations were the result of paid parking violations, however more than 15 percent of the issued citations resulted from violations of vehicles operating in prohibited areas. As with every year, TEOs and officers encountered traffic related issues within the North Beach area. The peak weeks resulted in heavy congestion on Kenai Ave. Limited space for vehicles at the end of Kenai Ave. continues to cause problems with traffic flow. This issue has been compounded by the dumpsters and permanent restrooms that are located at the end of Kenai Ave. On the weekends this area was primarily controlled by Salmon Frenzy volunteers, fi-eeing officers and TEOs for other calls. Officers and volunteers worked hard to keep traffic moving as efficiently as possible. Heavy traffic in the evenings required near constant management by officers and TEOs during week days. The little league ball fields served as overflow parking for the 2012 dipnet season. The current signage and use of a Parks and Recreation employee on South Spruce was sufficient to control the overflow parking lot. When this area became saturated, dipnetters parked on North Spruce, In addition to these parking areas, Kenai Parks and Recreation opened another overflow parking area on Coral Street. This area was utilized by a few RVs, but the distance from the dipnet fishery deterred most dipnetters. Parks and Recreation again hired two employees to check parking pen-nits and camping permits on North and South Beach. These employees worked every day of dipnet, greatly reducing permit violations. It is recommended the Parks and Recreation department maintain these positions. The North Beach had two mobile vendors, who sold bags of ice, food, and beverages during the dipnet season. The two vendors stayed the majority of the dipnet season. These vendors were required to pay for parking, and were not given a special "vendor only" parking area. Several changes were made at North Beach for the 2012 dipnet season. Jersey barriers were placed along the beach entry /exit in an effort to keep the path clear for set net vehicles. These 14 barriers also helped reduce traffic to the left of the access road, a prohibited area. Despite these improvements, TEOs issued 20 citations to vehicles who failed to comply with signs and barriers. This area is marked with a total of six signs and adding more signs may or may not reduce traffic to the North of the access road. Jersey barriers were also used to mark no parking areas in the North Beach and Dunes road parking lots. Kenai Cily Dock The Kenai public boat launch area required above average police attention during the 2012 season. During the first week officers and TEOs were called several times to deal with parking issues. These issues were compounded by above average turnout. The most significant parking problem was caused by triple parking. Following the first week, public dock personnel enforced strict parking protocol where each vehicle was directed to a parking space. During busy days vehicles filled the main parking lot, overflow parking, and parked along the exit road. Due to several extremely low tides, dock personnel closed the dock for up to two hours on either side of the low tide. KPD and SPD message boards were used to notify motorists along Bridge Access Road of the closures. During these four -hour shut down times traffic started to back up onto the highway. During each instance officers responded to the area to move vehicles off the roadway, and then remained on scene to waive vehicles off. On one of these peak days, Police personnel were told that all boat launch parking lots in the City limits were at full capacity. To help improve traffic flow, the City Dock hired supplementary employees to help direct traffic. City dock personnel also created a two lane traffic pattern near the boat launch. The new traffic pattern created a lane for loading boats and a lane for launching. This system alleviated some of the congestion that historically builds up on Boat Launch road. The Alaska Wildlife Troopers (AWT) had a sustained presence at the City Dock, taking enforcement action on dipnet violators. Their presence and efforts were very appreciated by the Kenai Police Department. South Beach In prior dipnet seasons, residents along Dunes Rd. have been subjected to unreasonable noise (i.e. motorhome generators) and other nuisances that the City of Kenai did not have jurisdiction over. Due to the continuous presence of City personnel in the area of Dunes Rd., the City Manager proposed a Letter of Agreement between the City and Borough that would allow City personnel to help alleviate some of the problems experienced by residents along Dunes Rd. As a result, the City was granted temporary authority to: install signs, barriers, fencing; perform maintenance improvements; install temporary restrooms; collect fees from dipnet participants; and issue citations for activities that violate the City's posted rules and ordinances in the area. City personnel posted the Dunes Rd. parking lot as a No Camping Area, which was heavily 15 enforced by TEOs. During the peak week, one TEO was assigned to patrol/monitor this area until tam to enforce no camping laws along Dunes Rd., and to ask any dipnetters in the area to keep the noise down. In a debrief with the resident most significantly impacted in this area, the resident expressed being pleased with the City's response, and only had one minor recommendation to further help with next year. It is recommended that the City continue to enter into this agreement with the Borough to help these residents. The Law Enforcement presence on South Beach was less than on North Beach. Common issues addressed by Officers and TEOs were camping violations, lost children, stuck vehicles, and parking permit violations. During the 2011 dipnet season there were many issues with the access road to Inlet Fish cannery. In response to these complaints the Kenai Streets department placed several no parking signs along both sides of the road. These signs were very effective in preventing road blockage during the 2012 dipnet season, Miscellaneous During the 2012 season there were several instances that required response from KFD. During these instances, TEOs and KPD Officers assisted by clearing traffic and making the Polaris Ranger utility vehicle available for KFD use when appropriate. This year, as in past years, the TEOs collected a large amount of lost, mislaid and abandoned property. TEOs were successful at returning most of the items. There were a high number of vehicles stuck on the North and South Beaches during the 2012 dipnet fishery. On several occasions these vehicles were saved from the tide due to quick action by officers and TEOs. Dipnet Fishery Statistics This year, the Kenai Police Department responded to 142 dipnet fishery related calls for service. There were more parking violations this year, which resulted in a greater number of warnings and citations being issued. 16 DIPNET ACTIVITY 2011 Dipnet Fishery 2012 Dipnet Fishery 121 Calls for Service 142 Calls for Service 59 Citations 106 TEO Citations 1 Impound 1 Impound 208 Cash Pickups 169 Cash Pickups 299.7 Officer Hours Dedicated to Dipnet 313.6 Officer Hours Dedicated to Dipnet 446.1 TEO Hours Dedicated to Dipnet 457.4 TEO Hours Dedicated to Dipnet Dipnet Calls for Service - 2012 14 Minor Motor Vehicle Crashes 2 Dipnetter in Distress 11 Stuck Vehicles 2 Lost Wallet 10 Traffic flow problems 2 Individual harassing dipnetters 9 Parking Problems/Violations 2 Reported Intoxicated Drivers 8 Camping Violations 1 DUI 6 911 pocket dial 1 Abandoned Whole Fish 5 Speeding complaints 1 Fishing, After Hours 4 Vehicle Unlock 1 Harassment -other 4 Lost property 1 Found Property 4 Found Child — Reunite with Parents l Dipnetter Selling Fish 4 Found Property 1 Dipnetters Throw Rocks cr Setnetters 3 Help Disabled Person 1 Disgruntled Over Dipnet Fees 3 Operate Veh. in Prohibited Area 1 Reckless Driving 3 Refuse to Pay Access Fee 1 Intox. Individual 3 Dumping Carcasses 1 Dumpster Fire 2 Trespassing 1 Theft of Dipnet 2 Grounded Dipnet Boat 1 Abandoned Boat at City Dock 2 Traffic Control for Trash Removal 1 Child Abuse 2 Hit and Run 1 Indecent Exposure 2 Missing Child 1 Dipnetter Catching Kings 2 Intox. Person Causing Disturbance 1 Medical 2 Fights 10 Other 2 Boat Collisions Grand Total: 142 17 2012 Di net Expenditures (personnel and fuel Police Officers' Pay w/ benefits (272.6 +41 dedicated OT hrs) $21,442.91 TEO Pay w/ benefits (433.4 + 24 OT hrs) $8,820.15 Dispatcher Pay w/ benefits (182 hrs) (20% of Dispatch time + OT) $9,729.24 Fuel (TEOs $1364.89, Officers $841.25)* 52,206.14 Total Kenai PD Expenditures for the 2012 Dipnet Season $425198.44 *Fuel expenses represent 90% of fuel used by TEOs in July and approximately 20% of fuel used by Officers in July. Conclusion Overall, the 2012 dipnet fishery went smoothly and posed few significant problems from a law enforcement perspective. The presence of the four seasonal enforcement officers was critical to the department's ability to respond to calls and maintain a law enforcement presence in and around the dipnet fishery. Officers and TEOs spent many hours educating the public and enforcing city ordinances and state laws (in addition to handling dipnet calls for service). Adult volunteers again provided worthwhile traffic control assistance to officers on Kenai Ave. and at the City Dock during the middle weekends. Strong collaboration between the various City departments (i.e. Police, Fire, Parks & Rec., Finance, & Public Works) continues to improve the City's ability to manage the challenges associated with the fishery. 18 V -"V ills a with a Past, C# with a Future" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: 907- 283 -7535 / FAX: 907 -283 -3014 11111" 1992 MEMO: TO: Gus Sandahl, Chief of Police Terry Eubank, Finance Director FROM: Robert J. Frates, Parks & Recreation Director DATE: August 20, 2012 SUBJECT: 2012 Dip Net Report The personal use fishery opened at 6:00 a,m. on July 10th and closed at 11:59 p.m., Tuesday, July 31St. Preparation for another busy season began well in advance of the opener, including upgrades to the shacks, installation of fencing and signage, securing contractors (portable restrooms and dumpster services), and training. The Parks & Recreation department assisted with many other activities that were planned and coordinated through other departments such as Public Works, Finance and the Police Department. This year's season was similar to last year in terms of numbers of fish although user participation was clearly higher. This was probably once again attributed to a well advertised healthy run of fish and various closures affecting rivers north of the peninsula. Camping fees increased from $15 to $20 per 12 -hour period this season. Several folks I spoke to during the fishery indicated that although they've participated in other personal use fisheries elsewhere, this was their first trip to the Kenai River and plan to return since at least basic amenities and services are provided, unlike other areas. The price increase (camping), congestion and limited beach space didn't appear to be much of a deterrent; easy access, facilities and basic services, order, and emergency /police services appeared to be a very positive attractant and one that participants have grown accustom to expect. A total of 2,980 hours were dedicated to the 2012 dip net season from the Parks & Recreation Department. A bulk of these hours (1,744.25) were spent managing the fee shacks; 552 hours were spent patrolling the north and south beach areas; 91 hours were spent on managing overflow parking and assisting with vehicular traffic, including both at the Little League Complex (Spruce Street), dock and the Adult Softball parking lot. The use of the Adult Softball parking lot (July 20 through July 22) was necessitated due to the Little League parking lot becoming full. 19 A total of 55.25 hours were spent raking fish waste that had accumulated on the north beach at various times throughout the fishery. This process became much more difficult due to constant congestion on the beach once the fishery hours were expanded by emergency order on July 20th. A significant amount of time (76 hours) was spent cleaning the north and south beach areas on August 15t. Additionally, the KCHS Cross - Country Ski Team assisted as did a group from the Wildwood Correction Center. SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS & CONCERNS NORTH BEACH • Additional fencing (post /chain) needs to be installed down along the eastern end of the dunes. Foot traffic in these areas the past few seasons has been managed through the use of temporary fencing. There is approximately 1,100 lineal feet that needs completed. • Concern has been raised about the volunteers from the Baptist Church passing out rubber balloons while on the beach. Balloon fragments left behind can sometimes be ingested by birds. • Approach ramps should be added at either end of the walkways leading over the dunes and ramp treads added. • Additional "No Trespass on Dunes" signs should be installed along dune areas. • Occasional calls are taken seasonally with respect to State of Alaska (Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation) Disabled Veteran's Annual Camping passes. These have not been honored in the past but some consideration could be given to accepting these in the future. SOUTH BEACH • Signage protecting sensitive wetland areas should be added, particularly where fencing (post /chain) is not erected. This area stretches approximately .25 miles from Old Cannery Rd. leading north toward the mouth of the Kenai River. • One complaint was received by the department concerning increased vehicular traffic along Cannery Rd. Same resident also complained about trespass issues concerning private property. This seemed to be more of an issue during the second weekend when participants of the fishery were lined up (parking & camping) the entire stretch of the beach from Old Cannery Road to the mouth. Perhaps some "Respect Private Property" signs could be added to the fee shacks to elevate awareness. The following information is a detailed expense summary for the Parks & Recreation Department. 20 PARKS & RECREATION Expense Summary - 2012 LABOR COSTS QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL Administration (Director) Director 70 $ 60.65 $ 4,245.50 Dock Summer Aide /Shack (Reg Hrs) Dock Aide 144 $ 12.70 $ 1,828.80 Dock Summer Aide /Shack (OT Hrs) Dock Aide 121.5 $ 18.87 $ 2,292.71 Refuse & Litter Control (Reg Hrs) Gardener 1.25 $ 13.44 $ 16.80 Refuse & Litter Control (Reg Hrs) P/R Operator 425 $ 37.51 $ 159.42 Fish Removal & Raking (Reg Hrs) P /ROperator 3.25 $ 37.51 $ 121.91 Dune Walkway Maintenance (Reg Hrs) P /ROperator 7 $ 37.51 $ 26157 Shack Oversight & Support (Reg Hrs) P / Roperator 7 $ 37.51 $ 262.57 Signage & Fencing (Reg Hrs) P / Roperator 10.5 $ 37.51 $ 393.86 Shack Remodeling (Reg Hrs) P /Roperator 4 $ 37.51 $ 150.04 Post Season Beach Clean Up (Reg Hrs) P /Roperator 14 $ 37.51 $ 525.14 Training (Reg Hrs) P /Roperator 4 $ 37.51 $ 150.04 Dock Shack Attendant (OT) ParkSpry 105 $ 20.23 $ 2,124.15 Dock Shack Attendant (OT) ParkSpry 11 $ 20.23 $ 222.53 Traffic Control & Overflow (OT) ParkSpry 5 $ 20.23 $ 101.15 Refuse & Litter Control (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 2 $ 14.11 $ 28.22 Restroom Cleaning (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 3 $ 14.11 $ 42.33 Fish Removal & Raking (Reg Hrs) Parkspry 10 $ 14.11 $ 141.10 Shack Oversight & Support (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 32 $ 14.11 $ 451.52 Signage & Fencing (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 31 $ 14.11 $ 437.41 Shack Remodeling (Reg Hrs) Park Spry 8 $ 1411 $ 112.88 Post Season Beach Clean Up (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 14 $ 14.11 $ 197.54 Training (Reg Hrs) ParkSpry 2.5 $ 14.11 $ 35.28 Beach Shack Attendants (Reg Hrs) Park wrkr 953 $ 12.70 $ 12,103.10 Beach Shack Attendants (OT Mrs) Park wrkr 377.75 $ 18.21 $ 6,878.83 Dock Shack Attendant (Reg Hrs) Park wrkr 6 $ 12.70 $ 76.20 Dock Shack Attendant (OT) Park wrkr 26 $ 18.21 $ 473.46 Beach Aides (Reg) Park wrkr 288 $ 12.70 $ 3,657.60 Beach Aides (OT) Park Wrkr 264 $ 18.21 $ 4,807.44 Traffic Control & Overflow (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 51.5 $ 12.70 $ 654.05 Traffic Control & Overflow (OT) Park Wrkr 34.5 $ 18.21 $ 628.25 Refuse & Litter Control (Reg Hrs) Parkwrkr 64 $ 12.70 $ 812.80 Refuse & Litter Control (Reg Hrs) Parkwrkr 22 $ 12.70 $ 279.40 Restroom Cleaning (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 48 $ 12.70 $ 609.60 Restroom Cleaning (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 23 $ 12.70 $ 292.10 Fish Removal & Raking (Reg Hrs) Parkwrkr 20.5 $ 12.70 $ 260.35 Fish Removal & Raking (OT Hrs) Park Wrkr 21.5 $ 18.21 $ 391.52 Shack Oversight & Support (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 52.5 $ 12.70 $ 666.75 Shack Remodeling (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 24 $ 12.70 $ 304.80 Post Season Beach Clean Up (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 48 $ 12.70 $ 609.60 Training (Reg Hrs) Park Wrkr 41.5 $ 12.70 $ 527.05 Total Man Hrs 2980 $ 48,336.34 21 EQUIPMENT COSTS 1991 Pickup (1/2 ton) 1998 F150 (1/2 ton) 1996 Pickup (1/2 ton) 1998 Mid -Size Tractor *2012 Polaris Ranger *2012 Polaris ATV Total Equipment QUANTITY $ UNIT COST 0.75 Rental Price $ 1,000.00 0.75 Rental Price $ 1,000.00 0.25 Rental Price $ 1,000.00 0.25 Rental Price $ 350.00 1 $ 120.00 0.25 $ 25.00 *Purchase price divided by estimted useful life (one month's use) CONTRACTED SERVICES Portable Toilets Dumpsters Beach Cleanup Total Contracted Srvs MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES Printing Signs Misc. Supplies Shack Upgrades Cell Phones Fuel Total Misc. Expenitures TOTAL PARKS & RECREATION 22 1.00 $ 25,169.00 1.00 $ 19,395.00 1.00 $ 7,500.00 1100 $ 1,400.00 1.00 $ 300.00 1.00 $ 750.00 1.00 $ 1,244.00 1.00 $ 150.00 1.00 $ 2,000.00 TOTAL $ 750.00 $ 750.00 $ 250.00 $ 350.00 $ 120.00 25.00 $ 2,245.00 $ 25,169.00 $ 19,395.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 53,064.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 300.00 $ 750.00 $ 1,244.00 $ 150-00 $ 2,000.00 $ 5,444.00 $109,089.34 "Villa e with a Past Ci w a Future" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 Telephone: (907) 283 -7535, Ext. 236 f FAX: (907) 283 -3014 4 �� ihecGtyof // MEMORANDUM KENAI��ALASKA TO: Gus Sandahl, Chief of Police FROM: Mark Langfitt (Curly), PW Street/Dock Foreman THROUGH: Sean Wedemeyer, PW Director DATE: August 23, 2012 SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS 2012 DIP NET FISHERY REPORT This is a summary of the operations the Public Works Department performed in 2012 to support the Personal Use Dip Net fishery and their associated costs. 1. Install Sivnatye at various locatinns. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 3 8 24 $46.50 $1,116 E pment u�__ Operating ours Total E ui ment Hours Rate 1 Track/Trailer 8 8 $48.00 $384 1 Vactor Truck 8 8 $120.00 $960 Materials 6 18 $80.00 $1,440 Signs and posts PO #'s 99283, 99591, 99572 Yards $4,436 subtotal $6,896 2. Rebuild Beach Access road. Kenai Ave. and restrnnm turn nrnnnd nt Nnrtt, Rannh Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 4 16 64 $46.50 $2,976 E ui ment Operating Hours Total Equipment Hours 2 Loaders/Forks 8 16 0-6 00 $1,536 1 Grader 8 8 $120.00 $960 3 Dum p Trucks 6 18 $80.00 $1,440 Materials Loads Yards Gravel 1 20 @ 12 yards 240 1 $7.00/ d. $11680 Subtotal $8,592 23 3. Set toll booths and place barricades at North and South Beach areas. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 5 8 40 $46.50 $1,860 E ui ment Operating Hours Total Equipment Hours 2 Loaders w /forks 4 8 $96.00 $768 1 Dump Track 8 8 $80.00 $640 1 20 Ton Trailer 8 8 $60.00 $480 Subtotal $3,748 4. Grade parking lots and gravel roads and apply dust control. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 5 24 120 $46.50 $5,580 E ui ment Operating Hours Total E ui ment Hours 14H 25 25 $120.00 $3,000 140G 16 16 $120.00 $1,920 Sander Track 8 8 $45.00 $360 Materials $3,364 $48A0 $288 Calcium Chloride 4 Super Sacks $750.00 $3,000 Subtotal $13,860 5. Retrieve toll booths. barricades. and event specific siQnaee. Workers Hours Worked Total Man Hours Rate Total 5 8 40 $46.50 $1,860 E ui ment Operating Hours Total Equipment Hours 2 Cat Loaders 2 4 $96.00 $384 1 Dump Truck 8 8 $80.00 $640 120 Ton Trailer 1 8 8 1 $60.00 $480 Subtotal $3,364 6. Install new siena2e on Bownicker Lane and Dunes Road. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 2 4 12 $46.50 $558 E u�__ipment Q`peratin Hours Total E ui ment Hours Vactor truck 2 2 $120.00 $240 Materials Number of Items Sin post 6 $75.00 $450 New Signs 6 No Parkin $48A0 $288 New Signs 6 No Camping $45.00 $270 Subtotal $1,806 24 7. Add gravel to South Beach Cannery Rd Beach Access. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 3 4 12 $46.50 $558 E it ment Ogerating Hours Total Equipment Hours $50.91 $12,626 2 Dump Trucks 2 4 $80.00 $320 Loader L120 2 2 $96.00 $192 Materials Loads 'Yards $60.00 $480 Gravel L 4 12 yards 48 $7.00/yd. $366 Subtotal $1,436 8. Place barricades at Set Net Access at North Beach. Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total 4 8 32 $46.50 $1,488 E ui ment _Q perating Hours Total Equipment Hours $50.91 $12,626 L120 Loader 8 8 $96.00 $768 Dump Truck 8 8 $80.00 $640 120 Ton Trailer 8 1 8 $60.00 $480 Subtotal $3,376 9. Staff the Kenai Boating Facilitv (Dock 1 Boat Launch) Workers Hours Worked Total Man, -Hours Rate Total 6 Streets crew on ST 502 15 $46.50 $23,343 6 Streets crew on OT 248 25 $50.91 $12,626 3 Streets crew on DT 98 $66.78 $6,545 3 Temps on ST 244 $12.70 $3,099 2 Temps on OT 80 $18.21 $1,457 E ui ment Operating Hours Total Equipment Hours Vactor Truck 4 4 $120.00 $480 L120 Loader 5 5 $96.00 $480 Materials Portable toilets $3,738 Dum sters $566 Cleaning supplies $225 Paint for stripping $240 Light tower rental $600 Subtotal $53,399 10. Administration Workers Hours Worked Total Man -Hours Rate Total PW Director 15 15 $70.02 $1,050 PW Admin 25 25 $40.38 $1,010 Subtotal $2,060 11. Fuel 1189.5 gallons @ $4.30/gallon $5,114.85 25 1. Install Si age at various locations. $6,896 2. Rebuild Beach road, Kenai Ave. and restroom turn around at North Beach. $8,592 3. Set toll booths and place barricades at North and South Beach areas. $3,748 4. Grade parking lots and gravel roads and apply dust control. $13,860 5. Retrieve toll booths, barricades, and eventspecific si nage. $3,364 6. Install new si na e on Bow icker Lane and Dunes Road. $1,806 7. Add gravel to South Beach Cannery Rd Beach Access. $1,436 8. Place barricades at Set Net Access at North Beach. $3,376 9. Staff the Kenai Boating Facility Dock / Boat Launch) $53,399 10. Administration $2,060 11. Fuel $5,115 TOTAL $103,652 Personnel $65,126 Equipment $17,552 Fuel $5,115 Materials $15,859 TOTAL $103,652 ]PR Kenai Fire Department Dip Net Report 2012 Prepared by: Battalion Chief Tony Prior This report summarizes the activities of KFD associated with the Dip Net Fishery for 2012. In terms of responses, we saw a decrease in calls associated with the fishery compared to 2011 even though there appeared to be more people participating in the fishery this year. We did receive word from city dock personnel and other agencies that the emergency events were not down in numbers, it just happened to be that there were more self rescues and participants helping one another that resulted in our lower number of calls for service this year. Approximately $18,702.41 was spent on dip net fishery this year. Training: We begin preparing for the dip net fishery in June of every year prior to the influx of people who participate in the personal use fisheries. Training focused on preparing for both river rescue and beach orientation in the event of a medical call on either North or South Beach. A total of 60 man hours were spent on training and preparing for the season. Each shift spent time preparing and orienting themselves with both Rangers. Backboards and straps were placed on both Rangers in the event of a medical emergency, and spare keys were secured for quick access during non patrolled hours by TEO's. Due to the increased boat traffic during the fisheries, more time was spent training on water rescues from the boat and tactics to use for rescue of victims in the water from overturned vessels. As we progress in our training I would like to prepare our personnel by having a swift water rescue class to better prepare us to go to the victim instead of having to maneuver close enough to them with the rescue boat to affect a successful rescue. Cuffs forSersvice: 5 Medical calls with 4 of those requiring transport 1 good intent call at the mouth of the river 1 Dumpster fire on boat launch road 1 CO detector alarm in motor home 1 Possible Gas leak in Marathon's line 6 recalls associated from above calls rEquzpment: We again sent our rescue boat to Alaska Raft and Kayak to repair the air leaks and repair the old leaking pressure valves. After repairing the identified leaks, we began having leaks in other places. It appears that due to the age of the boat and the materials used in its construction, we are chasing leaks and creating new one by fixing the identified ones. We will be looking at $7,000.00 to $9,000.00 to replace the tubing above the rigid hull. Non purchased items listed as improvements over the past couple of years include: Slide -in units for the rangers to secure patients on a back board during transport off the beach Binoculars for the boat Hand held search light Rescue knives Anchor Chain and Rope Four stroke motor for the Rescue boat Other items identified that would make our operations more efficient for future emergency response include; Adding a mobile radio on the boat that would allow our personnel to only wear personal flotation devices and minimize the chance of losing a portable radio out of a pocket while performing rescue. A boat capable of firefighting capabilities on the water would add to our response capabilities should we have an lncident involving fire on one of the boats in the river or out into the inlet within our response area. connnuuications: Most of our responses during the fisheries have required communications with KPD, State Parks, and our TEO's patrolling the beach. Since KPD has changed over to ALMR it has been very difficult for our personnel to communicate and hear what is needed or how the emergency is evolving from our officers who are the first on scene the majority of the time. This also puts an additional burden on our dispatchers who are monitoring 2 agencies who are talking over one another because of the inability to scan each other and hear who might be talking on the radio already. We have begun the process of securing ourALMR frequencies and we will be reprogramming our radio's to alleviate this problem within the near future. conch rsion: Overall the improvements the city has made to traffic patterns, both at the dock and beaches, has improved our response times and cleared some congestion we have faced in the past while responding to emergencies. KPD and TEO's have been vital to our responses and continue to improve our response times and capabilities. 28 Nllaye with a Past, G1~ with a Future" "3 FINANCE DEPARTMENT 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794 �theccf�+of Telephone: 907 - 283 -7535 ext 221 1 FAX: 907 -283 -3014 V To: Dick Koch, City Manager From: Terry Eubank, Finance Director f , Date: October 10, 2012 Subject: 2012 Dipnet Summary Revenue and Participants The 2012 dipnet season concluded with total revenue, net of sales tax and not including grant revenue, of $362,088, a 19.70% increase over the 2011 season. The 2012 season's user fees saw an increase of $5.00 for per night camping on the City's North and South beaches. The following is a breakdown of revenue by location from the 2003 season through this season. $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 29 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201 2811 2012 South Beach $ 10,796 $ 39,490 $ 41,979 $ 23,003 $ 48,017 $ 58,876 $ 60,365 $ 64,509 $ 90,942 $ 127,265 North Beach 50,414 73,067 73,686 43,069 78,205 90,356 113,576 120,314 133,349 148,481 Oty Dock 41,575 49,305 49,540 39,157 64,583 55,363 66,569 85,964 78,194 86,342 Grant Revenue 41.150 156 920 13^.y563 11_- _073 Total $ ]D2 Z&5 &169 862 -1165.20 229. ,$ 1a0.N5 $ 204,�,45 12811iti9 $ 42730I d35 Og8 5 47 Efi1 Dipnet Revenue $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 29 2012 Finance Department Dipnet Summary Total revenue increased in 2012 with the increase in daily camping fees on the City's North and South Beaches and elevated participant numbers at the City Dock. Revenue at the City Dock increased $8,637,10.42% in 2012. Conclusion Revenue collection continued the 2011 trend of a more even distribution over the three week fishery. In prior seasons the second weekend of dipnet has always accounted for the highest percentage of revenue and participants. This season revenue collections remained at elevated levels for a sixteen day period and were not isolated to weekends. Increased enforcement of parking limits and camping was continued this year and undoubtedly contributed to the increase in revenue. A new cash register systein is being investigated in an attempt to increase the efficiency at fee shacks and strengthen the internal controls over cash collection. Overall the 2012 dipnet season was a success from the Finance Department's perspective. The safety of our employees continues to be our strongest focus. 30 2012 DIPNET REVENUE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REVENUE NORTH SIDE PARKING $ 148,481.00 SOUTH SIDE PARKING 127,265.00 CITY DOCK FEES 86,342.00 GRANT REVENUE 111,073.03 TOTAL INCOME $ 473.181.03 EXPENDITURES FINANCE $ 3,417.41 PUBLIC SAFETY 67,055.40 PARKS & RECREATION 220,162.37 CITY DOCK 81,839.00 PUBLIC WORKS 51,782.85 ADMIN SERVICE FEE 59,573.51 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 475,830.54 REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES 6 (2.668.511 $500,000 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 2012 DIPNET REVENUE vs EXPENDITURES ■TOTAL INCOME TOTAL EXPENDITURES 31 REVENUE NORTH SIDE PARKING SOUTH SIDE PARKING CITY DOCK FEES GRANT REVENUE TOTAL INCOME GRANT REVENUE, $111,073.03 , 22.63% CITY DOCK FEES, $91,523.05, 18.64% 2012 DIPNET REVENUE SUMMARY $ 148,481.00 31.38% 127,265.00 26.90% 86,342.00 18.25% 111,073.03 23.47% $ 473,161.03 2012 DIPNET REVENUE 32 NORTH SIDE PARKING, $148,481.00, 31,38% SOUTH SIDE PARKING, $134,900.50 , 27.48% 2012 DIPNET EXPENDITURE SUMMARY EXPENDITURES CITY MANAGER STAFF TIME GENERAL ADMINISTRATION TOTAL FINANCE FINANCE STAFF TIME DAILY CASH RECEIPT RECONCILIATIONS TOTAL FINANCE PUBLIC SAFETY STAFF TIME FRE & EMS RESPONSES POLICE OFFICERS KENAI DISPATCH - REGULAR TIME SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT OFFICERS TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY STAFF TIME EQUIPMENT PICK -UP 1 EXPEDITION RENTAL ATV TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT DIRECT EXPENDITURES FUEL TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECT EXPENDITURES TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF TIME SHACK ATTENDANTS BEACH AIDES BEACH CLEAN -UP MISCELANEOUS SETUP SUPPORT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF TIME EQUIPMENT PICK -UP 112 TON MID -SIZE TRACTOR ATV - POLARIS RANGER ATV - 4 WHEELER TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION EQUIPMENT DIRECT EXPENDITURES PORTABLE TOILETS DUMPSTERS CONTRACTED BEACH CLEAN -UP RECEIPT BOOKS, FEE ENVELOPES, & BROCHURES FUEL MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECT EXPEN. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS MEEKS CREEK BRIDGE AND TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS DUNES SIGNAGE BIRD VIEWING FENCING TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION CITY DOCK STAFF TIME DOCK STAF F TIME TOTAL CITY DOCK STAFF TIME DIRECT EXPENDITURES PORTABLE TOILETS DUMPSTERS MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECT EXPEN. PENDING EXPENDITURES DOCK FLOAT REPLACEMENT TOTAL CITY DOCK QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL 60.00 HOURS 103.99 $ 6,239.72 $ 6,238.72 1.29% 59.50 HOURS 57.43 $ 3,417.41 DIPNET SHACK AND BARRICADE PLACEMENT 72,00 HOURS $ 3,417.41 0.71% 9,00 CALLS 2,078.04 18,702.36 313.60 HOURS 68.37 21,442.91 182.00 HOURS 53.45 9,729.24 457.40 HOURS 19.28 8,820.15 1,674.00 58,694.66 2.00 MONTH 1,690,00 3,380.00 2.00 MONTH 1,387.30 2,774.60 6,154,60 1.00 ACTUAL 2,206.14 2,206.14 2,206.14 $ 671055AD 13.91% 1,950.75 HOURS 14.90 29,068.86 552 -00 HOURS 15.33 8,465.04 298.75 HOURS 15.02 4,487.82 106 -50 HOURS 19.07 2,069.12 70.00 HOURS 60.65 4,245.50 2,980.00 48,336.34 1.75 EACH 1,ODO.00 1,750.00 0.25 EACH 1,400.00 350.00 i.00 EACH 120.00 120.00 0.25 EACH 100.00 25 -00 2,245.00 1.00 ACTUAL 26,16990 26,169.00 1.00 ACTUAL 19,395.00 19,395.00 1.00 ACTUAL 7,500.00 7,500,00 1.00 ACTUAL 1,000,OD 1,000.00 1.00 ACTUAL 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,00 ACTUAL 2,444.00 2,444,00 58,508,00 1.00 ACTUAL 86,013,03 86,013.03 1.00 ACTUAL 6,000.00 6,000.00 1.00 ACTUAL 19,060.00 19,060.00 1.00 ACTUAL 111,073.03 $ 220,162.37 45.67% 1,172.00 HOURS 1.00 ACTUAL 1.00 ACTUAL 1.00 ACTUAL 40A6 47,070.00 47, 070.00 3,738.00 3,738.00 566.00 566.00 465.00 465.00 4.769.00 30,ODO.00 $ 81,639.00 16.98% PUBLIC WORKS STAFF TIME REBUILD NORTH & SOUTH BEACH ACCESS 76.00 HOURS 46.50 3,534.00 DIPNET SHACK AND BARRICADE PLACEMENT 72,00 HOURS 46.50 3,348.00 PARKING AND ROAD GRADING 33 1200 HOURS 46.50 5,580.00 OIPNET SHACK AND BARRICADE RETRIEVAL 40.00 HOURS 46.50 1,860.00 INSTALLATION & REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY SIGNAGE 36.00 HOURS 46.50 1,674.00 2012 DIPNET EXPENDITURE SUMMARY GENERAL ADMINISTRATION TIME 40.00 HOURS 51.50 2,060.00 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS STAFF TIME 384.00 18,058,00 EQUIPMENT LOADER 43.00 HOURS 96.00 4,128.00 FLATBED TRUCK AND TRAILER 8.00 HOURS 48.00 384.00 GRADER 49.00 HOURS 120.00 5,880.00 DUMPTRUCK 46.00 HOURS 80.00 3,680.00 VACTOR TRUCK 14.00 HOURS 120.00 1,680.00 20 TON TILT -DECK TRAILER 24.00 HOURS 60.00 1,440.00 LIGHT TOWER 1.00 EACH 600.00 600.00 SANDER TRUCK 8.00 HOURS 45.00 360.00 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS EQUIPMENT 18,152.00 DIRECT EXPENDITURES GRAVEL 288 YARDS 7.00 2,016.00 SIGNAGE 1 ACTUAL 5,444.00 5,444.00 CALCIUM CHLORIDE 4 EACH 750.00 3,000.00 FUEL 1189,5 GALLONS 4.30 5,114.85 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS DIRECT EXPENDITURES 15,574.85 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS $ 51,782.85 10.74% ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE FEE (DIRECT EXPENDITURES Q 11.98 %) $ 51,573.51 10.70% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 482,070.26 100.00% 2012 Dipnet Expenditures ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE FEE, $51,573.51 10.70% FINANCE, CITY MANAGER, $3,417.41 0.71 °k $6,239.72 , 1.29% PUBLIC SAFETY, , PUBLIC WORKS, $67,055A0,13.910 $51,732.85.10.740A PARKS AND RECREATION, CITY DOCK, $81,838.00 $220,162.37 , 45.67% 16.98% Dipnet Expenditues by Department by Year $600,000 5500,000 - 5400,000 - - - -- - -- -- - - - -- --- -- - - -- $300,004 5200,000 - — — -- $100,000 JIL Nil $0 — 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 City Manager ■ Finance ■ Public Safety r Parks & Recreation a Pubbc Works ■ Capital Projects City Dock Total Admin Service Fee WORKERS' COMPENSATION MEDICAL COST LRISIS In 2002 Alaska's workers` compensation premium rates ranked fifteenth in the nation. By 2004, we were number two. Every year since 2004 Alaska has ranked first or second for the highest workers' compensation premiums in the nation. In 2012, our rates were 160% above nationwide median costs. Alaska's rates are currently 1/3 higher than those of Washington, double those of Oregon and triple those of North Dakota. High premiums mean Alaskan businesses cannot compete with those of our sister states causing. Alaskan employers to lose contracts and Alaskan labor to lose jobs. While the frequency of injuries has steadily declined over the past 20 years, the average medical cost per injury has risen at a rate of 8.5% per year. In 2005 the legislature sought to contain rising medical costs in workers' compensation through adoption of a medical fee schedule outlined in AS 23.30.197. The average Medical cost per injury at that time was $29,000.00 — in 2011 it climbed to $48,000.00 compared to a nationwide average of just $28,000.00. The daily cost of a hospital stay for work related injuries more than doubled between 2010 and 2011 due to the adoption of a new medical fee schedule by the Division of Workers' Compensation, In 2010, the hospital daily rate was $8,906.12. In 2011 it was $14,650.00. Private health insurance pays between $995.00 and $1,768.00 plus itemized costs for hospital stays. For critical care, the rates for work related stays increased from $16,327.68 in 2010 to $32,554.00 in 2011 compared to just $1,732.00 to $6,791.00 plus itemized costs under private health insurance. MRI's increased from $1,720.51 to $3,041.60 between 2010 and 2011 and the surgical cost for a lumbar fusion rose from $7,633.34 to $12,717.32 in just one year. Not surprisingly, medical costs for work related injuries now comprise $0.76 of every dollar paid in workers' compensation benefits. Clearly the current medical fee schedule has done nothing to control medical costs for work related injuries. Study after study shows that medical fee schedules do nothing to control medical costs because once the fee schedule is published, charges rise to and above the fee schedule level of payment ensuring an ever upward spiraling of medical costs from one schedule to the next. The only effective cost control method is the Relative Value Scale Method which applies a multiplier to a value scale: developed and maintained by the American Medical Association for each medical procedure. Adoption of the Relative Value Scale Method along with a national medical treatment guideline is the only proven effective measure to contain out-of-control costs as it controls cost through pricing and limits overutilization and expensive, unproven experimental treatment through the adoption of cost and treatment guidelines. The legislature needs to undertake; serious changes in the next session along the lines of those recommended by the Medical Services Review Committee in their November 2009 report [see fink below] if Alaskan businesses and labor are to remain competitive. Unless substantial measures are undertaken, medical casts will only continue to climb while: the ability of Alaskan businesses to compete for contracts and jobs will only continue to diminish. http:llwww labor. state. ak.uslwcliormsl2009 -11 MS R Q Ffnaf Report.PDF. !� VEMBER 2009 REPORT OF !HE WORKERS' COMPE,NS TIQI MEDIC&L SERVICES REVIEW COMMITTEE' L _£TISTORY. In 2005 the legislature amended AS 23.30.095(j} by expanding the make -up and scope of the Medical Services Review Con ittee (the committee). Its new mission was "to assist and advise the department [of Labor and Workforce Development (DOL.VVD); and the board in matters involving the appropriateness, necessity and cost of medical and related services" provided under the Alaska Workers' Compensatioa Act. The corntraittee consists of nine members appointed by the Commissioner of the DOLWD as follows: 1. o ic member from the Alaska State Medical Association; 2. one member from the Alaska Chiropractic Society; 3. one member from the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association.; 4. one member who is a health care provider as defined in AS 09.55.560; 5. four members who are not within the definition of health care provider; and 6. the commissioner's designee who serves as chair. Also in 2005, the legislature enacted AS 23.30,097 concerning fees for medical treatment and services. Subsection, (a) of the statute was intended to provide temperas) cost control measures while the committee investigated and developed a more permanent solution. The statute mandated reimbursement of medical treatment and services to reflect: the lessen of (1) the usual, custom2q, and reasonable fees for the treatment of servicc in the community in which it is rendered, not to exceed the fees in the fee schedule specified by the board in its published bulletin dated December 1, 2004; (2) the fee or charge for the service when provided to the general public; o (3) the fee or charge negotiated by the provider and the employer under (c) of this section. (c) Ail employer or group of employets may negotiate with physicians and other treatment service providers under this chapter to obtain reduced fees and service charges and may take the fees and charges into account when forming a list of preferred physicians and providers. In no event may an employet or group of employers attempt to influence the treatment, medical decisions, or ratings by the physicians in the course of the negotiations of such a preferred physician and Provider .fee plans. The above limitations, were to sunset on August 1, 2007. The committee was unable to dev lop a permanent solution to Alaska's rising medical costs by 2007 so the sunset provisions were extended i This report is based upon numerous studies by various workers' coo- pensation research groups and national organizations as cited herein as well as information received from guest speakers appeasing before the committee. For background infotmation On the vatious groups and organizations as well as an index of the articles and publications reviewed, please see Exhibit 1_ -7- and an 8A16% increase in the 2004 Ece schedule was put into effect through.Varch 31, 2009. No permanent solutions were developed by December 2008, and the sunset provisions were again extended to December 31, 2010, adding another 8.986% increase to the 2004 fee schedule.' Two other possible cost control methods were provided in AS 23.30,097. Subsection (b) allowed employers to establish a list of preferred physicians for treatment of injured workers. Subsection (C) allowed employers to negotiate with providets to obtain reduced fees and service charges. An employee's use of the employer's physicians was, however, voluntary. The committee has performed significant research and investigation and has developed perinment solutions to address medical cost containment in workers' compensation. This report details the I problem, available solutions and the committee's findings and recommendations. IL PROBLEW In 2002 Alaska's workers' compensation premium fates ranked fiftezath in the nation. By 2004, Alaska had climbed to number 2, second only to California who drastically overhauled their system that same year. Since 2005, California's premium rates have dropped arid. Alaska has ascended to the "Number One' position, a position it Continues to maintain. 4 Vq&C the frequency of injuries in Alaska has steadily dechned over the past 20 years, the average medical cos t per injury has risen at a rate of 8.5% per year.' The average medical cost per injury in 2004 was X29,000. Alaska medical costs now average $40,000 per injury as compared to a, nationwide average of $26,000.6 Ave-rage hospital costs per stay in Alaska climbed from $12,000 M- 1994 to $27,171 in 2007 as compared to a nationwide increase from just over $8,000 to $15,455 during 'a-.e some time pellod,7 in 1988, medical costs comprised 52% of all Alaska workers' compensation benefits. —,,hLv now comprise 72%. Tile nationwide average is 581X4.8 2 The two im-telses totaling 17,402.% were based on the medical consumer price index for all U.S. urb= consumers as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor, 'fhe increase in the Anchotage medical consimict pace index during this period was 14.569% and the overall increase in the U.S. consumer price index was IZ05%. 3 One of the problems the committee has recognized is the lack of comprehensive data collection,. T e Natio, C a Ihe medical cost data available in Alaska is limited to that gathered by the nal Council an Compensation lnsurazce (NCCI) which receives cost data submitted by Alaska's Nvofkcrsl I compensation insurers, Thus, while the available data is representative of Alaska's workers' compensation medical .costs, it does not include medical costs inc=ed by self insuted's -which reptcs=t some ofAlaska'6 largest employers. 4 Exhibit 2: 2004, 2006 and 2008 Oregon Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking Summaries, 5 Exhibit 3: NCCI State Advisory Forum 2008, p. 21; NCCI Alaska State Adviseq Forum 2009, P, 37. '111 annual CPI increase during this same period has been less than half the annual me inct ual _dica) cost increase. 6 Exhibit 4: NCCI State Advisory Forum 2009, p. 35. 7 Exhibit 5: NCCI State Advisory Forum 2008, P. 81. 8 Exhibit 6: NCCI Alaska State Advisory Forum and 2009, pp. 31-32, 111. INTRODUCTION. Medical cost containment became a focus for many states in the early I 990s vilien the medical portion of the workers' compensation benefit doliax began to grow more I quickly than other claim costs. The factors in the upward spiral of medical costs were not just price but utilization with utilization being the dominant force making workers' compensation injuries more and more expensive to treat.9 Higher prices and utilization pushed work=, compensation medical costs higher than Group Health particularly in specialty areas such as -radiology and sulgery.l' This focus led to growth in the development of cost containment strategies which included the adoption of fee schedules, the creation or adoption of evidence-based medical treatment guidelines and the development of return to work programs through R pTass-roots 0 approach to workers' compensation systems." Each of these three strategies is discussed, below followed by Alaska's current cost containment model. These discussions are followed by the conunittee's findings and recommendations for controlling medical costs in -Alaska, W. FEE SCffEDULES. Workers' compensation medical fee schedules specify, maximuin -allowable payment amounts for medical procedures and services covered under workelrs, compensation insurance. AD but seven states c=ently employ a workers' compensation medical fee schedule as one method of controlling medical costs. A Variety of approaches are used to construct and maintain these schedules. Some specify their medical fee schedule in their statutes as percentages of Medic= but the majority of states give authority to in agency such as the Department of Labor. These agencies then typically rely on an advisory committee or hire an outside consultant to draft a proposed medical fee schedule." A_ Medical Provider Fees Schedules. These schedules provide maximum payment amounts iot medical providers and do not, therefore, 'include hospital or facility charges. The schedules utilize a system of coding which has been developed over the years to identify each current medical procedure. The system is known as the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code and identifies thousands of medical procedures. The code is maintained by the American Medical Association (,AMA) and is universally utilized by medical providers. 9 Utilization is not just the numbe-- of treatments per injury but the types of treatment as welt Cie., from simple diagnoses to more "complex" diagnoses which are paid at higher rates .\ -) For a thorough illustration of the imp-act of ufffization oninedical costs, see The GOst CIIn=drv,-N, The New Yorker, Arul Gawande, June 1, 2009, attached as Exhibit 7. 10 -Meafuring 47e Eadorc Driving Medical Seven i Price, Ufz4r,,ation, &Wx, Restrep 0, Shuford and Beaven, NCCI Research Brief, January 2007; Effeaitleixexr of V,—C Fee S,-hedmlex: A Claw Look, Lipton, Como, Moore and Robertson, NCCI Research Brief, February 2009, 11 fr/rorkers' Compensation Me&cal Cost COXI�-'nmenl,' A NaYiO-V--1 112ventO!Y, Workers Comptasation Research Institute, Febmaty 2009; Inlrodkezion to the Nw Fork DisabiL,* Prevenjon para&gm, Dr. Jennifer Christian, Chair, The 60 Summits Project, March 2009; Preventing NI-eed,`ess VorA DisabihV by He 5ing P.-oph SIV Employd, American College of Occupational and Envitonmeptal Medicine-, Septembei 2006. 12 Workers' Con ansaiion Medical Cost Conlaimrent. A N-atiowllntefavy, p. 2, Workers ComDensation Research Institute, February 2009. -3- Because some services are not reflected in the CPT codes, Medicare developed a secondary set of procedure codes known as the Health Care Procedure Coding System (HCPCS). This system includes such services as supplies,. materWs, injections and emergency transportation services and other services not included in the CPT codes. From these codes, two general types of fee schedules have emergeV3 i. Usual and Customary Rite (QCRJ- This method aligns the particular CPT code with the usual and customary charge for that service M' the area in which it is tendered. The fee schedule is then geared to require p•ment at a certain percentile of the usual and customary charge. States employing this method require the collection of pavment data for each CPT code to create their fee schedule which is usually updated annually. Alaska's current fee schedule ufflizes this method. (See pp, 8-9, infra) Problems with UCIR schedules include high maintenance costs as constant data collection and rnision is :necessary to update the usual and customary charges. Prior to 2005, the Alaska fee schedule was -updated aviaually at a cost of $60465,000.00- Annual user costs ate in excess of several thousand dollars. In addition, despite the cost control measures intended by this method, upward pressure in price is constantly applied. Once a fee schedule is published, charges tend to - r1se to and above the level of payment thereby g=aatceing an annual increase in the usual and customary charge. Studies reveal this method to be the least effective in controlling medical costs. 14 ii. Resource Based Relative Value Scale Method OORV—S). This method was created in 1988 by a multi - disciplinary team of researchers from Harvard University . which included statisticians, physicians, economists and measurement specialists. The RBRVS system now constitutes the basis for Medicare and Medicaid's payment schedule as well as nearly all group health, health maintenance oTa=atiozs as well as 26 state workers' compensation systems. The American Medicg Association (AMA) owns and updates the 5 RBRVS Periodically. As of May 2003, ific,&MA had submitted over 3,500 corrections to Medicare! Under this method, the AMA asmigas a value (relative Value unit D! IWU) W each CPT codie. The RVU is based on three separate factors: estimated physician week /time (521/o), physician expense associated with the procedure (44%) and malpractice expense (4%6)," The RVUI is then -adjusted by geographic -region to reflect the variation - provider costs (a provider performing a procedure In in Manhattan has greater overhead costs than a provider performing the same procedure in F-I Faso). This value is thea multiplied by faxed conversion factor set by the state to detetmine, theamount of payment, For example, in 2005 a 99213 CPT code (office visit for an existing patient) was worth 1 discussed 13 CPT' and T--ICPCS codes do not apply to hospitals. Hospital payments are therefore disc s, d elsewhere, in this report. 14 Effedivever.r of VC Fees Se-hedAries, A Closer Look, Lipton, Cotro, Moore and Robertson.. NCCI Research Report, FebrwAxy 2009. 15 Makin ,g Workerr Corr i=alien Afe&calFee Scheduler More Effective, Appendix 1, Robertson and Carro, NCCI Research Brief, December 2007- 16 Id 139 xelative value units, or RVUs, Adjusted for NorthJersey, it was Worth 1.57 Rvus, Using the 2005 Conversion Factor of $37.90, Medicate paid 1.57 X $37.90 for each 99213 performed in North Jersey or $59.50. in 2009, Medicare utilizes a conversion factor of $36.0666 for each tdat'ive value unit. Because the work and expense factors that make up an RVU are provider far-tots, the RBRVS system is criticized because it does not include consumer factors such as outcomes, quality of the service or demand, Ctitics maintain that payment based on eorr rather than effee skews incentives, leading to overuse of caraphcated procedures without consideration for outcomes. [Contrast this method with evidence-based medicine (HBM which is based on Outcomes as discussed belov"] According to this critique, the RBRVS system misaligns incentives because the medical value to the patient of a service is not consideted and thus there is no financi ' a' incentive to help the patient nor to mii' e costs, Rather, payment is partly based on difficult, of the service (tire "Physician work" component) and thus a profit -maxirrizing physician is incentivized to provide maxdmally complicated services, with no consideration for effectiveness, i1 CGmpai"ison - of Fee Schedules. Studies of state fee schedules reveal the following: " a-) There are substantial differences in fee schedule rates from state to state In 2006, Alaska, tenth the highest fee schedule rates, -was on average 3.5 times higher than Massachusetts, the state with the lowest fee schedule rate-&, b.) This interstate variation is not related to interstate variations M- expenses incurred by pto-viders in producing the services. In fact, provider expenses in Alaska are slightly lower than. in Nfas sachusetts.18 c.) Most state fee schedules create fmannI al incentives to undrus, p ri mary care ;md overuse 1:111vasive and specialty care given the significant price vari ations between th Ose groups, For example, primary medical in Alaska is paid at 1851/o above, Medicate rates, Surge y, however, is reimbursed at levels 482% above. Medicate and radiology at 3120/,." Some states avoid 17 The two must noteworthy 'studies are the 2006 and 2009 Workers Compensation' Research Institute studies entitled Begchmarks for Dejigning Vorkerr' Compensation Medical Fee schedwles.. 2006 Eccleston, Liu, Workers Compensation Research Institute, 2006; and Workers' Compensation,, Medical Cost Containment: Workers Compensation Research institute, February 2009. 18 Although lhe study was based on data from July 2006, there is no evidence to suggest the cost of doing business in Massachusetts has suddenly decreased or that costs in Alaska have suddenly increased. Bennhmarks for Dadgni?rg Workers' Gowfiensalion me&aal Fee Schedules, • 2006, P; 9, n.5; Eccleston, Liu, Workers Compensation Research Institute, 2006. 19 These figures are based on the 2009 fee schedule for the various provider groups. Tile Workers Compensation Research institute study revealed payments for these groups was lower in 2006 with surgery at 41.7% greater than Medicare and radiology at 273% Primary care was divided into three categories: general medicine, physical medicine and evaltation, and management. Costs above Medicate for these groups were 287%,'- 53% and 127%, respectively. Id. at 9. Exhibits 8,9. -5- these uncial incentives by following a RBR TS .fee schedule system and setting one conveys +ion factor across all different service groups within their state. d.) The most effective fee schedules are those based on the RBRVS system and a conversion factor which sets the maximum allowable fees at no more than 40% above Medicare:" e.) While fee schedules provide some element of control over medical costs, they are ineffective in controlling utilization, Moreovet, their effectiveness is declJinirtg as the proportion, of workers' compensation medical costs subject to physician fee schedules is declining by about one percentage point per year due in part to a growing proportion of xeimbursements going to hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers not subject to physic€an tee scheduler's B C ►uipatient Facilities anc Hospitals Fee Schedules. facilities and hospitals pose tedarzical difficulties to the development of tee schedules giver, that a host of procedures, providers and equipment is involved M' every hospital stay or outpatient facility use. Medicare requires facilities to assign Diagnosis Related Groups (1DRG's) to inpatient care and Ambulatory payment Classifications (APCss) to outpatient surgery. The National Hospital Association therefore develops DRG's and AFC's and assigns a relative value to each group or classification much as the AMA develops the RBFcVS. Currently, Mechem utilizes a fixed conversion factor for each DRG and APC value. Alas", however, uses an average daily rare for hospitals and facility fees. (See pp. 8 -9, iszfra.) V. EVIDENCE-BASED MEiDICAL TREA'lTlV ENT GUIDELINES. Fee schedules have a very limited impact on utilization and therefore arc:, by themselves, ineffective in controlling medical costs. Therefore, as states began to adopt fee schedules and other mechamisms in an attempt to control escalating medical costs, utilization. increased.' This inverse relation between cost and utilization is best illustrated by the observation in one study that when medicare lowers its reimbursement rates for a particular ,geographic area, some providers modify their practice to offset the cost reduction either by switching to more highly compensated procedures or performing snore procedures.' Givers the increased utilization, states began to focus not just on the price of medical services but on the effectiveness of the trealment through the creation and /or adoption of medical treatment guidelines. Medical treatment guidelines have evolved in the medical communiq, in response to the ernergence of a significant body of evidence developed through clinical study anal xesearch. From this body of research providers have developed the practice of evidence- based medicine (EBIvi), defined as &c integration of clinical expertise, patient values, and the best evidence into the decision ma1mg 20 Id.; E a- i'verress of WIC Fees'Schecisrles, .A Closer I-ook, Tipton, Corro, Moore and Robertson, NCCI Research Report, February 2009'. ?1 Id 22 Measuring the Factors Driviirg Medical SeveriO. Price, L7tiltiatior�, Mix, Restrepo, Shuford arxd Beaver, N'CCI Research Brief, January 2007; Efjettveness of WIC Fee S'chedArles, A Closer i -ook, Lipton, Corso, Moore and Robertson, NCCI Research Brief; February 2049, 23 Making barkers Compensation Medical Fee Scbedukes More Effective, p.9, Robertson and Corro, NCCI Research Bxicf, December 2007. -6- Thus new or experimental procedures which have not been clinically process for patient care. I all studied or procedures which studies have shown to be ineffective are less apt to be utilized if at all in the practice of evidence-based medicine." The focus of EBM is to improve patient outcomes utilizing the best evidence available. W2&hington was the first state to -investigate the effectiveness of various treatments and in 1989 pub"'-shed its first treatment guideline detailing recd ended treatment for low back fusions. Other states soon followed. In 1989 the Texas legislature authorized the development of treatment guidelines. Colorado and Minnesota soon followed.' California's 2004 workers' compensation reform included adoption of a national guideline created by the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOE4. Today, some 26 states and every Canadian Province have adopted or created treatm ,, . 27 ent guideline The use of guidelines in 'Workers' compensation aims to achieve optimal patient outcomes. From these efforts to revievv and staudatdi7e treat Ment in workers' compensation, two -national guidelines havemetged: Off=al-,DisabtleyGuid.,Iznes—Tr�,atmei;lin 'V-6rker-,'Cottxbensafiondeveloped by the Worry Loss Data Institute (ODG Treatment Guidelines) and the 0,7voa6oXa,`Med&ne Prwfice Guidelines developed by the American College of Occupational and Envaiontneiltal Medicine (ACOEM I s = annually through systematic .Practice Guidelines). Both guideline developed and updated u ou h a syst ati physician review of the medical literature" 24 The most common definition of EBM is taken from Dt, David Sackett. EBM is "the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the car, of the individual patient. It means iftteg-tating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from wsternstic research." EBM is the integration of clinical expertise, patient values, and the best evidence into the decision making process for patiant cate. Clinical expertise refers to the clinician's cumulated experience, education and clinical skills. 'I-he patient btings to the encounter his or Her own personal and unique conc--ras, expectations, and values. The best evidence is usually found in clinically relevant research that has beets conducted using sound methodology. The evidence, by itself, does not make 2 decision fot you, but it can help support t tile patient care process. The full integration of these three components into clinical decisions enhances the opportunity for optimal clinical outcomes and quality of life, Sackett, D.L. et al. (1996) Evidence Based Medicine. that It Is and What It Isn't, B1q j 312 (1023), 13 January, 71-72). 215 ACOEM 0=tpadonalMedieine Practice Cuiddthes, Lee S. Glass, M.D, IAIABC Journal, Vol. 41, No, 2, Fall 2004. 26 Treatment Guidelines for 77orkers'CoqPMsaliot; Gregoty Krohm, LUABC Research and Reports, October 2004. 27 Jurisdictional Adqjpfions of Treatme-vt Gurdcliner in North Zimerwa, Wotkets Compensation r., .�, -scarch Institute, 2008; Work6rf' Com pensaiion e&ral Cost Containert A National Tab le 18, Worliers Compensation Research Institute, Febnmq 2009. 28 Evaluating Medical Treatment Guidatine Setsfor 1,viured Wlorkerr ir, Cahf;ornza, Rand Institute for Civil Justice and Rand Health, 2005. Although Rand found a total of five guideline sets which met their screening ctiteria, only ODG and ACORN were comprehensive enough in scope to be practical in a workers' compensation context we There is concern that claims adjustors and case managers may not have the neccssM skills to . interpret guideline recommendations and apply them to control treatment expenditure" California therefore implemented an expensive utilization review process which his eliminated some of the medical cost saving-s reahzed by use of treatment guidelines. IMplement_qtionofguidelines has t therefore been most effective in those states that have invested in an expert medical director to manage the development and implementation of the guidelines over the course of several years. To be effective, EBM needs to be introduced and the local practitioners and medical associations need to be educated by a credible advocate before implementation. V.I. . DEVELOPM qT OF RED T Tayough their study of medical litexatrite and drafting of the 2" Edition of the ACOEM Treatment Guidelines, ACOE M physicians jealiz.cd another major component of workers' corripm sation bad beer, largely ignored: educating physicians and other key players to prevent needless work disability. In an attempt to bring the focus to finding better ways of h2ndling non-medical aspects of the pr disability, authored a paper entitled Prevetiring Needless fork process that affect dimbility ACOEM physicians a DilrabiZqq by HeOing People Stay BMPIqY6d" Out of the article developed a grass -roots effort wined at wnsfoffning workers' compensation systems by involving all stakeholders with a goal of addressing how employers and insurers can work more effectively with healthcare providers to reduce, the disruptive- impact of injury and illness on people's daily lives and work to help them remain actively employed." The effort is promoted and lead by an occupational and environmental Medicine physician who started The 60 SuEmrmts Project :aimed at holding a summit in each of The 50 states -and 1.0 Canadian Provinces to implement the process." Some 15 states have either held summits or are p pre to do so. Through the process, the participants come to agreement on a set of preparing common goals and set about transformmigy the way the compensation systern operates in order to reach those go-As. A successful 60 Summits process creates a -widespread openness to active return to work/stay at work programs thereby achieving a reduction in medical and disability costs while bringing the focus of the system back to hinifing the impact of injuries on the lives of AmericZs workers. VII._&USK&!S MEDICAL COST CONTROL MFASURES. Prior to 2004> Alaska utilizcd only a -U CR based. fee schediile to control medical costs," The schedule was created by a third party vendor and medical provider reimbursements were limited to the 90' percentile of the usual 29 -Approach, Stanhop and Ford, LUAC journal, Vol 45, o.1, Spring, 2008. 30 Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, September 2006, 31 There is a wealth of epidemiological studies of the imilact Of uncmPloYment on physical and rnental illness and mortality. See, Jowwal of Epidemiological Community Health 2005; 58.501-506; AMM,,all JoItIlIal of Indpend.-rk, Aledzdne 2004; 45-,408-416; Oar pationlai EfItirozzmentalMedidre 2001; 58 (1), 52 -57 ;1 merj,,an JmrnalPkeb& Heallb 1999; 89 (6): 893-898. 32 The physician, Dr. Jeruffer Christian, is a former Alaskan occupational medicine physician and past president of the Alaska State Medical Association. 33 See fort-net AS 23,30,095(f , 2004, repealed in Sec. 74 Ch. 10 FSSLA 2005. M customary and reasonable fee charged. The fee schedule was updated annually until 2005 when Alaska's cost control measures were expanded through the adoption of AS 23.30.097(a) which limited provider fees to the lesser of 1) the 2004 fee schedule; 2) die fee charged to the general public; or 3) the fee or charge negotiated by die provider and the employer. Since 2005, the Lee schedule his undergorLe two legislative price increases and provider costs are now reimbursed at the rate identified in the 2004 schedule times 17,402%." Hospital services are paid at an average daily rate of $8,906.00 f6i: medical /surgical rooms and $17,701.81 for ICU/CCTJ rooms plus medical supplies and surgical implants (reimbursed at 20% above the invoice price)." There is no fee schedule for medi-vac and other emergency ttansportatior. services s° VH1. FINDINGS. A. Qbjectives. Throughout this process, the committee has Tecognized, the dual Purposcof its mission: 1) to develop permanent solutions to escalating medical costs in Alaska's wolketr,, compensation system while 2.) ensuring that access to medical care will n.ot be co p x raised either by setting the maximum allowable reimbursement of medical fees and services too low or by overburdening providers with paperwork and other administrative requirements thereby complicating the provision of medical services to injured workers, 'r' he committee finds California's 2006 study foliowing its 2004 workers' compensation rr k form experience -a good method of tracing the above objectives. California's reform introduced ACOEM INIedical Treatment Guidelines and significantly reduced fee schedule reimbursement rates for medical services. A 2006 study conducted by UCLA Center for Health Policy Research for the California Department of Industrial Relations did not find evidence of access problems for most injured -workers in Califomis, not did the study find large niuunbers of physicians to be limiting or giving up their workers, Compensation practices.'' To measure the effects of reform in Alaska, the committee finds -a similat study should be undertaken five years after the adoption of any changes to assess the impact of those changes upon medical costs and access to medical care and outcomes. 34 The 17.402% increase was built into the 2007 and 2009 legishthe cytcmions of the 2005 sunset provision in AS 23,30.097 (a). The incteaseiul the U.S. consumer price index during the same penod, v,,-as just 12.05% and the increase in the Anchorage medical consumer price index was 14.569%. 35 The Alaska hospital payment system tequires; employers to pay twice fox medical supplies., once in the average daily rate and again as a separately billed item. Unlike Alaska's workers' compensation, Medicare and group health "bundle" medical supplies into the hospital procedure group rate and thus do not pay extra fox medical supplies. In addition, although implants are paid at 20"K, over the invoice price, some implant providers forego Paymmit altogether rather than reveal the invoiced price. 36 The attached correspondence regarding the costs associated vith R recent emergency medical eVaCuation from the North Slope to Seattle illustrates the problem which has emerged from the lack of any medical cost containment mechamilsms M' this area. Exhibit 10. 37 -4oress- to Medical Tnalmegt in the California Workers' C-,am K pensaiian Syslem, ominski, Poarat, Roby and Cameron, 2006, -9- D. Alaska's Fee Schedule. The committee finds that Alaska's medical costs continue to rise at an average of 8.51/1c per year despite implementation of e fee schedule and other cost control measums. Based on the research and data currently available, Alaska's workers' compensation paps an average of between 1.85 - 482% above Alaska's Medicare rates and that this differential does not correlate to any interstate variations in provider expense.38 The committee further finds that Alaska's hospital and facility costs are the highest in the tiation also with no evidence of correlation. to provider expense. Finally, the committee finds that any fee schedule must cover all medical services and treatment including emergency medical transportation services, supplies and other services as identified in the Ilicalth Care Procedure coding System (HCPCS). Based on these findings and the committee's research, the committee concludes that Alaska's UCR based fee schedule and its average daily hospital/ facility rates should be discarded and 2 fee schedule utilizing a value based system (RBRVS for providers and outpatient hospital charges and DRiG for inpatient hospital /facility charges) should be adopted, The committee further concludes that the schedule must also include cost control measures for emexgmcy medical transportation semces as well as pharmaceutical and durable manufactured equipment. Moreover, given the large cost differences among provider groups (surgey, vs. general medicine), the cCr,nn-Ii-,tP-r recognizes that adoption of a single conversion factor would drastically cut costs of some user groups (surgery and mdiology[diagnostic imaging]) -while likely increasing others (general medicine). -Although a majority of the committee agrees with the recommendations of those -who have studied fee schedules that only one conversion factor be utilized, the conirmaec recognizes that to do so may make any dmige politically improbable given the huge disparities in payment values =iong the various provider groups. Thus, a majority of the committee concludes that at least isaitially* multiple con-vc.-sion factors will need to be assigned, Others oin the committee recognize that this distorts tILe entire basis for the RBRVS system and continues to foster the o-,reMfffiZation Patterns of surgery, diagnostic imaging and other high cost diagnostic testing. C. _Alteipag Cost Control Meth �ds- 71-.e committee finds that the additional cost control mechanisms adopted in 2005 (lit ting fees to that charged the general public or m negotiated by the provider and employer) are incfffficrivc as the department and employers lack access to the fees charged the general public or negotiated in order to r-riforce the statute. In addition the employers are unable to negotiate with providers given the small size of their market share. More-over, the committee finds that although employers may establish a Est of preferred physicians for treatment of injured Workers, the employee's use of a preferred physician is volunta-1, and, thus, no such lists have beam established. The committee therefore Lids the cost control measures outlined in AS 233.30,097(a) — (c) have had litt1b, if any, impact or reducing medical costs mi Alaska. Based on the studies cited herein, the committee finds the adoption of a fee schedule to be but one small component in the management of rising workers' compensation medical costs. One study suggests that a reduction in costs through a fee schedule may actually incentivize providers to increase utilization thereby further increasing costs. As utilization is the primary driver in the rise of workers' compensation costs, the committee finds the ultimate adoption of s single RVTJ f" 38 Surgery accounts for: 53% of'Alaska's overall medical costs. Radiology and laboratory services account for another 13%. General medicine, accounts fbi-- 27% of overall costs. lber=ailung 8% represents mcAications and d-urablc.medical equipment. . -10- 1 . schedule conversion factor and the education and promotion of FBM as defined by Sackett and the ultimate adop6on of EBM treatment guidelines are accessary to effectively control medical costs. The comrrdttee also finds, however, the adoption of EBM treatment guideliqerequires greater study and public involvement than this committee has managed to gamer. It, may be wise to view this as a public, health intervention since it will affect thousands of people, thus requiring careful thought, planning And attention to public perception and buy-in. Selection and adoption of treatment guidelines with over-emphasis oil cost control without explicit focus on the benefits of changes to workers, coupled with overly -hasty and poorly-planned implementation can cause widespread confusion, needless system disruption and delays, and resistance by system participants uhc, might otherwise cooperate as occurred in California. Further study with more public 'involvement and discussion of the purpose, anticipated benefits and intended outcome,-, of guidelines adc)ption is likely needed before practice guidelines can be implemented. D. Other Methods for 1—inp-ro-ving Wow =,;' Cgm)enggtion. Du g its study of various 1 fin tu y ari US rnedical cost control methods employed in other jurisdictions, the conunittee has realized the vital role advisory councils play in the development and improvement of workers' compensation systems throughout -Nor& America. Although Alaska has attempted to promote change through &., efforts of an informal ad hoc group, the committee believes that a formal advisory council should be statutorily created to monitor the performance of the Alaska workers' compensation system and, on an on -going basis, make recom- mendations to reduce injuries and improve the effectiveness Of care delivered to injured workers and the overall outcomes produced for injured workers, their e=ployv:rs and the state's overall economic and social well - being. 'Ile establislunent of such a council would not only assist in pxov-dir-19 the public involvement necessary to implement treatment guidelines but could play a central tole in the improvement of Alaska's workers' compensation system as a whole through adoption of the framcwoek, model, and process offered by The 60 Summits project. The minority while in favor of creating an advisory council believes that a medical sere; es review committee that is more medically dominated is important to maintain to address areas requiriag more specialized knowledge and -medical consensus. The minority suggests that joint meetings could be utilized where needed as in a, 60 Summits process. IX. RE, COMMENDATIONS. Based on the above, the cofWnittEe rccommend8as follows: A. Medical QQsts. The cozen- tee was not utian='ous on all sections listed below. One al member s a gr e e Wi th member abstained from the fee schedule language it (b) below and although I the concept of evidence-based medicine and treatment guidelines, M10 believed the language contained ire section (c) should he eliminated. Amend AS 23.M097 to take effect January 1, 2011 to read as follows: ,a) All fees and other charges for medical treatment or service are subject to regulation by the board consistent with this section. A fee or other charge for medical treatment or service may not exceed the lowest of (1) the fee schedule as published by the depattmeat Under. (b) of this section; [THE USVAT-., C,USTO1\MRY, AND REASONABLE FEES FOR THE TREATMENT OR SERVICE IN rpM CONMONITY IN WHICH rl' IS RENDERED, FOR TREATMENT oR SERVICE,. (A) PROVIDED BEFORE AUGUST -1, 2007, NCrr TO EXCEMD THE FEES IN THE- FEE —11- SCHEDULE SPECIFIED BY THE BOARD IN ITS PUBLISHED BULLE111N DATED DECEMBE.R, 1, 2004, (B) PROVIDED ON OR AFTER AUGUST 1, 2007, BUT BEFORE MARCH 31, 2009, NOT TO EXCEED THE FEES OTHERWISE APPLICABLE IN (,A) OF THIS PARAGRAPH ADJUSTED BY THE PERCENTAGE CIIANIGE FROM 2.004 TO 2006 1N THE mEDICAL CARE COMPONENT OF THE CONSUNIIER. PRICE INDEX FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS COMPILED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATIST CS 1 (2) the fee or charge for the tmattnetit or service when ptovided to the general public; of (3) the fee or charge for the treatment or service negotiated by the provider arid the employer under (c) of this sectior, (b) The ftartment shall annuW establish a schedule of feed by bulletin on or before .December 1 of each year to take effect op - n - JauM I the on . follng-year. The fee schedule rates shall be established in consultation with the p -- L dical Services geviev, QQwMfttee or its successor as a, subcommittee of the advisory council and be. based on the foliocvi s anclards as adopted lsv the Cetztexs for Medieare and Medicaid services _w effect at the firne the are provided, regarfflegs, of where senices are proyided: (1) The American Medical Association Current Procedural Terminology Codes (QU (2) the HealthcgEtComman Procedure Qoding-Sv_s "em HCPCS,),.-,. the Medic (41 the AMbqjatory Payment Classifications; ��the Relative Value Unigq as adjusted a=ually us;Lwg *Utmqst rec=tly published resource-based relative value scale-, The Average legate Price as obtained from the qurre4t i�sec ie�an,� Drug Topics Red Book or other national Diiblk-ation as determined by the deuanment. The department :nay establish by regWation in consultation wi.k the Me di c al Services Review= comxqiqee or its successor as a subcommittee of the a 3jsorygounc� I evidenct based utilization atid treatment Videlin.es for medical _services There _16a department are correct medical mtatraent for igjured workers, (d) An employer or group of cmp3oyers m2y estabUsh a list of preferred pliysicians and treatment service pxowiders to provide medical, surgical, and other attendance or treatment services to the emP107cis em-Ployees under this chapter; however, (1) the employee's -right to chose the employee's attending pbysician under AS 23,30.095 (a) is not unpauea; (2) when given to the employee, the employers preferred physician, list must clearly state that the list is voluntary, that the employ6a-'s choice is not restricted to the list, that the employer's rights under this chapter ate not impaired by choosing an attending physician from the list, and that, if - th e employee chooses an vuendiag physician from the list, the en-ployce snag, in the Manner provided in AS 23.30-095, make one change of attending physician, from le4lisf or otherwise; and -I?- (3) establishment of a list of preferred physicians does not affect the employees choice of physician for an employer medical examination under AS 23.30.095. (e) An employer or group of employers may negotiate with physicians and other treatment _ service providers under this chapter to obtain reduced, fees and serti ice charges and may tape the fees and charges into account when. forming a list of prefe;=d physicians and providers. In no event may an employer or group of employers attempt to influence the treatment, medical decisions, or tatizzgs by the physicians in the course of the negotiations of such a preferred physician and provider fee plans. (i An employer shall pay an employee's bills for medical treatment under this chapter, excluding prescription charges or tra sportatiou for medical treattmeat, Within 30 days after the date that the employer receives the ptovidees bill or a completed report as required by AS 23.30.095 (c), hichever is later. All bills, invoices or charges for medical treatment of services must he tendered to the ern to t r insurance carrier or tWrd paM administrator as ap &rable. within one year from the date; of etv ice ox Ata3m atcce to ce or the char es will be denied as ani melt' and cannot be balled to or paid b ,the em io ee as pgovided in AS 23.3 .0 7 . (g) A physician or other provider of treatment services under this chapter, including hospital services, that submits a bill fox medical treatment to the itzsurer or self irnsure:d employer shall also submit a copy of the bill to the employee to -whom the treatment was provided_ An employee who notifies the insurer or self-insured etxsployds adjuster in writing of an overcharge in the bill that was not previously identified by the insurer or self-insured employer's adjuster shall be entitled to a reward equal. to 25 percent of the billing reduction or reimbursement achieved due to the employee's report. Ibis reward does not apply to overcharges of an amount under $100 if the insurer or self- in sured employer`s adjuster elects not to pursue correction of the bill.. O) An employee may not be required to pay a fee or charge for medical treatraent or sers�ce provided under this capte3. (i; Unless the employer controverts a charge, the employer shag reimburse an employee's prescription charges under this chapter wiftzin 30 days afte.:_ the employer receives the health. care . provider's completed. repott and an itemization. of the prescription charges For the employ =ee. Unless the employer controverts a ci7axge, .an employer shall reimburse o y tranTortation expenses for medical treatment under this chapter within. 30 days after the employer teceives the health care providers completed report and an itemization of the dates, destination, and transportation expenses for each date of travel for medical treatmwt. If the employer does not plan to make or does not matte payment or seirnburseroent in full as required by this subsection, the employer shall notify the employee snd the employees health care provider in writing that payment will not be- made tamely and the reason for the: nonpayment. The notification must be provided not later Char, the date that the payment is due under this subsection. B. Workers' Compensation Adxitorry Council V in favor of creating an advisory council, a minurity belie- es that a medical services mvtew com=ttee that is more medically dominated is important to maintain to address areas requiritag more specialized knowledge and medical consensus. The minority suggests that joint meetings could be u i i ed -where needed as it a 60, Summits process. `l:`he minority does not approve of sunsettiog the IvfSRC anew suggests we -13- should minimally recognize the need for a Medical subcomtnittee of the advisory council and create such if sunsatting prevails. A majority -recommends sunsetting the Medical Services Review* Committee on December 31, 2010 and. enlarge the scope and purpose of the committee through axnendmeat of Title 23 Chapter 30 by adding a new section creating a Workers' Compensation Advisory Council comprised of a. 4 employee representatives from organized labor; b. 4 employer representatives to 'include at least one self-insured representative, one oil industry representative and one general contractor representative, C. 2 insurer representatives, d. 1 department tepresentative, e. 2 ex officio legislators; and f 3 medical providers. One representative from the Alaska Medical Association, one representative froth the Alaska * Chiropractic Society and one from the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association. Voting rnember,-, shall include employer and employee representatives. Although a simple majority of the committee recommends the medical providers be given a vote on the council, the com=ttee as a whole Nvas unable to agree on whether medic-a! provider representatives shmild be given voting power. The committee unan-irnously agreed that voting rights should not be extended to any of the other representatives listed in (c), (d) and (e) above. All council recommendations or decisions shall be- by a 3/4 majority of the voting members present. Representatives shall be appointed by the Commissioner of the Department of Labo- and Workforce Development for a five year term with initial terms ranging from 3-6 years. Failate offt representative to attend three consecutive meetings shall result in the removal of the representative from the Council. ' In the event of removal of a representative, another shall be appointed to serve for the -unexpired portion of the removed representative's tetra. Legislative members shall be appointed annually by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. The Council should be mpowered to submit recommendations to the department and the- legislature regarding an, endments, to the Alaska Workers' Compensation Act and any otftej- state laws, regulations, court and commission decisions that affect the design, function, operation, and outcomes of the state's workers' compensation system. C. 60 Summits. Rnlist the services of the 60 Surnit-Lits at the next Govtmot's worker safety and train' g conference. Allow the Advisory Council and the Departrnent to use the frmr_wo:rk recommended by The (50 Sununits 'Project as a way to identify and make needed miiptoveaients in j-etum to work /stay at worl, provisions and policies, investigate EBM guidelines and consider other mechanisms for the improvement of the outcomes being produced for injured workers, employer,,; and the state's overall economic and souil,,velfate by Alaska's workers' compensation system. D. data Collection. Require by statute that the division collect medical cost information from employers: In addition, mandate tepwing by the State of Alaska's group health third-party administrator medical costs paid under group health by the State of Alaska to aide. She division in its -14- efforts to bring medical costs m- Ime with group health. Require ageacleS within the State of Alaska to coordinate, integrate and share healffi infonmarior, technology efforts, E---S—tu—dy-. Legislative intent should to re id the q -91011 to cG-nttact with an - depeadent research urgaaization to study the effects of the changes adopted in AS 23.30,097(b) and The study shall assess the effect on medical costs, employee access. to medical care nd (c) above. o,r,,e.t z certain period fallowing implementation of the d1anges. and outcomes DXJ'F-D, this — day- of November, 2009. MEDICAL SERVICES RFVIFW COALMjrjEE Dr. R. J, Hall, AMA Member Kevin Smith, Lay TvIernbet (self-insured) Vince Beltrami, Lay Member {labor) Di. Willim Pfeifer, ACS N.'ember -25- Dr. Andrew Mayo, AI-WHA Member P= Scott, Lay Member — (industry) Tammi Lindsey, LY Member (industry,) T=ia L. Heikes, Designated —Chair 1 INFORMATION SOURCES Information provided has been obtained from the sources listed below. Although it is believed that all recent (2005 to present) relevant articles/papers /reports have been included in the materials providedf members are encouraged to conduct further research to provide additional relevant information to the committee at the websites prtavided. Upcoming events and background information is also included where available. 1. NATIONAL COUNCIL ON' COMPENSATION INSURANCE, INC. NCCII www.ncci.com National Council on Compensation insurance, Inc., based in Roca Raton, FL, manages the nation's largest database of workers compensation insurance information, NCCI analyzes industry trends, prepares workers compensation insurance rate recommendations, determines the cost of proposed legislation, and provides a variety of services and tools to maintain a . healthy workers compensation system, Provided below are sorne relevant excerpts from their Mar& 2009 digest. MARCH 2009 — Regulatory Digest Workers Comp Medical Reforms, What is .lust Over the Horizon ? --- Tuesday, June 16, at 3:06 p.m. BT As the ongoing growth in medical severity exerts continuing upward pressure on premiums, medical costs are coming to dominate workers comp benefit payments. Workers com? is not alone in facing this financial challenge, Research suggests that without reform, medical spending countrywide may groin from the current 17 °Icy to exceed a third of GDP in the United States by 2050. In this course, we will discuss some of the new reforms or new approaches to provider reimbursement that are currently being considered. These reforms provide insight into the likely direction of medical cost reforms in workers compensation over the next decade, i Changes on Died Fee Schedule Implications of 2009 Medicare Pricings The 2009 Medicare changes Vail) likely acct states having Medicare -based physician fee schedules. The magnitude of the impacts will vary by state. For states that adopt the 20119 Medicare Resource used Relative value Scale (RBRVS) and Budget Neutrality Adjustor (BINA), but have their own state - specific conversion factors, absent a change in the conversion factor, the Medicare change would have a significant impact on their medical costs. Physician costs could increase by almost 8%, For states where the physician, fee schedules are based on a percent of Medicare, winch adopt both the RBRVS and the conversion factors (C s), these changes would have a less significant impact on their medical cosh. Physicia;r costs could increase by approximately 2%, For states that adopt the, 2009 Medicare RBRVS, but not the BNA, and have their own state - specific conversion factors, these changes would not have a significant impact on medical costs. 2. WORK LOSS DATA INSTITUTE www.worklossdata,com Work Less Data Institute (WILD is an independent database development company focused on workplace health and producti-,tity, with offices in California and Texas. WLDI products include Official Dpi sabil Utv Guidelines, (ODG), now in its 14th edition, which provides evidence-based disability duration guidelines and benchmarking data for every reportable condition. New medical treatment guidelines fir work-telated conditions are also available with ODG in a complete integrated product, QDG Treatmeni currently in its 7th annual edition.. Both put evidence-based medicine to work for those involved in workers' comp and nonm occupational disability, including insurers, TPA's, health care providers, case managers, employers, benefits administrators, risk manages, and claims attorneys in the management of return-to-work and utili7ation of medical services following illness and injury. Each are available in various electronic and textbook formats, including data licensing for seamless integration with existing claims systems. 5recial Studies on illness and irijury affecting the work-force have also been released, extracted from ten million cases or mor e. within the ODG database. Other guidelines available from Work Loss Data Institute include the IAIABC Impairment Guides (available on Web versions of ODG), and the ^CCTIP ChirWractic Practice Guidelines (currently in development). Finally, NVLD1 publishes the Employer Health Rw, siar, a complete directory of products mid services used to improve the health and productivity of working people. 3. fINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION' OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS flAIABC) Www. ial a t .or t~ International Association of Industrial Accident Boards & Commission (IAIABC) is a not-for- profit trade association re * presenting government agencies charged with the administration Of workers' compensation systems throughout the United States, Canada, and other nations and territories. Founded in 1914, the IAIABC is the world's oldest trade association dedicated to promoting the advancement of workers' compensation systems throughout the world through education, research, and resource management. A dynamic gr()1J.P of members encompassing specialties in a variety of workers' compensation areas are united by annual memberships. The IAIABC represents workers' compensation profes5ionals, medical Providers, insurers, and corporate agencies with 60 jurisdictions and over 150 associate corporate members. Many of the most influential and committed leaders in the field of workers' compensation are active members of the IAIABC. Committee work is the heart of the IAIABC, Individuals from a number of jurisdictions ., and corporations combine their special on-going administrative interests to form over 30 committees and subcommittees, The committee research and work products are invaluable, to the IAIABC and workers' compensation industry. Many are continuous projects that provide ongoing support for workers' compensation systems, such as self insurance and EDL The IAIABC organizes and sponsors four major annual events: the Annual Convention,. the Medical Institute, the Workers' Compensation College, and the All Committee Conference. 4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE (WCRI) www.wcrinet.org The Workers Compensation Research Institute is an independent, not-for-profit research organization providing high-quality, objective information about public policy issues involving workers' compensation systems. Organized in late 1983, the Institute does not take positions on the issues it researches; rather, it provides information obtained through studies and data collection efforts, which conform to recognized scientific methods. Objectivity is further ensured through rigarous, unbiased peer review procedures. The Institute's work takes several forms: Original research studies of major issues confronting workers' rs, c"ornpensation systems (for example, permanent partial disability, disability management and litigiousness). Studies of individual state systems where policymakers have shown an interest in change and where there is an unmet need for objective information. Studies of states that have undergone major legislative changes to measure the impact of those changes and draw possible lessons for other states. Research briefs that report on significant new research, data and issues in the field. Presentations on research findings to legislators, workers' compensation administrators, industry groups and others interested in workers' compensation", S. RAND INSTITUTE. Rand.org Since 1948, RAND has operated as an independent nonprofit organization. RAND's research is commissioned by a wide range of sources. Federal, state, and local government agencies provide the largest share of the funding; however, RAND also conducts Projects for foundations, foreign governments, and private-sector ' firms. Contributions from individuals, charitable foundations, and private firms, as well as earnings from RAND's endowment, offer a steadily growing pool of funds that allow RAND to address problems not yet on the policy agenda. RAND's revenue in FY08 was $230.07 million. The Rand Center for Health and Safety in the Work-place is a subsidiary of Rand. It's mission is to conduct research land analysis that helps improve worker health and safety and reduce the economic costs of workplace accidents and illnesses: The Center pro'vides rigorous, objective analysis and a neutral venue in which to convene stakeholders from government, industry, and labor. RAND currently has 13 ongoing research projects in the. field of occupational safety and health. About half deal with prevention topics and half with workers' compensation issues, including return to work and medical guidelines for treatment of injured workers. in addition to these research studies, RAND has been working under contract with NIOSH to assist staff there with a jo strategic planning and with preparation of evidence packets for review by the N t na I Academy of Science. Funding for the research projects comes from the California Commission or Health, Safety and Workers' Compensation; the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, NIOSH, Zenith Insurance, Duke Energy Foundation, the Alcoa Corporation, the Wait Ditney Company, and the Department of Defense. Further information and access to publications can be obtained at: httpl/www.rand.org/­"multi/`clisw/­` 6. Iti EDICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES. a. American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine http:// www. acoeni .orFlpracticegu1deline�s.aspx b. Occupational Disability Guidelines. We have been authorized by Work Loss Data Institute (see above) to review access to the ODG Guidelines on the Web at, URL: www,od I.treatment.com Usemarne: alaska (lowercase) Passcocie. 2525 Once on the site, the ODG treatment guidelines are found under Section A of the Contents Page -- the most important piece of each chapter is the Procedure Summary -- while the CIDG return- to-work guidelines with links to the UR Advisor are found under Section B. 44 MEDICAL FEE RESEARCH INP OF ARTICLES TAB TITLEISOURCE,fpATE I Measuring the Factors Driving Medical Severity: Prue, Utilization, Mix, NCCI, January 2007. 2 Factors Influencing the Growth in Treatments per Claim. NCCI, Fall 2008. 3 Alaska Workers Compensation Medical Data Survey. NCCI, October 2007. 4 Workers Compensation Premium Rate Ranking. NCC[ 2008. 5 Fee Schedules as a Cost control in Markers' Compensation. IAIABC, July S. 2004. 6 Effectiveness of WC Fee Schedules: A Closer Look. Executive summary, NCCI, February 2009. 7 Technical Paper: Effectiveness of WC Fee Schedules. Research Report, NCCI, February 2009,. 8 Making Workers Compensation fcrledical Fee Schedules fwore Effective. NCCI, December 2007. 9 Benchmarks for Designing Workers' Compensation Medical Fee Schedules. 2006. Workers Compensation Research Institute, 2006. 10 Medical Care Provided California's Injured markers. An Overview of the Issues. Rand Institute for Civil Justice and Rand Health, September 2007. 1 11 Narcotics in Worker's Compensation, NCCI Annual issue Symposium 2009.. 12 Medicare`s impact on Workers' Compensation. NCCI Anhual Issues Symposium 2009. 13 Prescription Drug Study. NCCI November 2008. 14 2008 Oregon Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking Summary 15 Medical Services Review Committee Sample Hospital Billing, Misty Steed, Corvel Corporation, August 21, 2009. 16 Workers' Compensation Medical Cost Containment; A National Inventory February 2009. Workers' Compensation Research Institute. 17 NCCI Alaska State Advisory Forums 2009, pp. 20 -35. 18 introduction to the New Mork Disability prevention paradigm, Dr. Jennifer Christian, Chair, the 60 Summits Project. 19 Preventing Needless Work Disability by Helping People Stay Employecf, American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, September 2006.. 20 The Cost Conundrum.. Raul Gawande, The New Yorker, June 1, 2009. 21 Access to Medical Treatment in the C011fomia Workers' Compensation System, Kaminski, Pourat, Roby and Cameron, 2006. 7 MIEDICAL TREATMENT GUIDELINES INDEX OF ARTICLES TAB TITI_EISOURCEIDATE I Jurisdictional Adoptions of Treatment Guidelines in North America.. Dec. 2007. 2 Practical Implementation of Treatment Guidelines in c Workers` Compensation Environment A New Approach. IAIABC, 2008. 3 Treatment Guidelines for I}# orkers'C"ompensation. IAMB,- Oct. 2004, 4 Controlling Physical Therapy and Chiropractic Utilization within the Workers° Compensation System: A. Retrospective Review. IAIABC, 2083. S ACOEM Occupational Medicine Practice Guidelines. IAIABC, Fall, 2004. 6 ACOEM Position Statement. 1998. 7 official Disability Guidelines Treatment in Workers' Comp., Work Loss Data Institute, 2007. 8 ODG Treatment in Workers` Comp, Methodology description Using the AGREE Instrument. Work Loss Data Institute, 2007. 9 An Independent AGREE Evaluation of the Occupational medicine Practice Guidelines, Executive Summary, 2004. 10 Analysis of California Workers` Compensation Reforms. medical Provider [Vetworks and f0edical Benefit Delivery AY 2002 - 2007 Experience. California Workers' Compensation Institute, Dec. 2003 1 11 Analysis of California Workers' Compensation Reforms; Medical Utilization & Reimbursement Outcomes Accident Years 2002 — 20X California Workers' Compensation Institute, Dec. 2007. 12 7124109 ODG pager point presentation and notes 13 Chiropractic Management of Low Back Disorders. Report From a Consensus Process. 14 Evaluating Medical Treatment Guidelines Sets for Injured Workers in California — Rand Corporation, 2005. 15 Treatment Guidelines by Jurisdiction 16 A Shad), of the Effects of Legislative Reforms on California Workers` Compensation Insurance Rates. California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Workers' Compensation. January 2006, 17. Medical Treatment Authorization Guidelines Californic Sample, September 2, 2009, 18. Do Treatment Guidleines Change Provider Behavior and Result in More Cost Effective Treatment. Powerpoint Presentation, Dr. Mafia Juris c, iAIABC Conference, September 23, 2009, Minneapolis, MN. 19. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn t. Sachet„ Rosenberg, Gray, Hanes, Richardson, BMJ 1996; 312 (7023). 71.72. 20. The Path to Change in the US .Healthcare System; Chiropractic Cost - Effectiveness Supplement, American Chiropractic Association, et al. Ad& 2008 Oreg'on Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking Summary RyM1:ke_Man1e andLaID2ttgi Oregon employers in the voluntary market pay, on averag e, the 3 big lies t w Orl s C omp en sa ti on premium rates in the nation. Oregon's premium rate index is $1.88 per $100 of payroll, or 83 percent of the national median. National pro- mi-arn rate indices range from a low of $ 1.08 in North Dakota to a bi gh of $3.97 in Alaska, with a nledian value of $2.26. No jurisdictions have an index raw above $4; 6 are in the $3.004199 range; 31 are i ' U the $2.0042.99 range; and 14 have indices under $2.00. Indices are based on data from 51 jurisdictions, for rates in effect: as of .January 1. 21108. Figure 1.2008 Workers' compensation premium index rates *H1 Table 1. Orecon's rankino in the too 10 classifications j��A 11gill q. Y •, rig, Clerical office employees NOC 49 47 college, Professionai Employees & clerlcaE 41 38 Restaurant NOG Restaurant 45 v 41 Hospital., Prof?_sslonal amplayset 40 A I 66�r� r. center & drivers - pal 34 TrucVjng: NOC -A4 employees & d0vers 25 1­16Bfth:cbro'emoc�,iies:- RefiraTrient. nurslng, convalescent 32 1 Aw 1 NJ DE MD 'DC L_J Under$1.60 U00-M49 $3.0043,49 Above $3.50 Classification codes from the National Council on Compensation k8urance MCI) wcrc used in this study. Ofapproximattly 450 active class6s in Oregon, 50 were selected based oa relative, importanoe.'ai; measared by share of losses M' Oregon. To control for differences in industry distributions, each state's rates were weighted by 2002-2004 Oregonpayr6ff to obtain an average manual rate for the, state. Usted in Table I are Oregon's ratkings in the top 10 of the 50 classifi- cations used. Table 2 (on the back) contains the premlu'm IRRe 1ALLRBIg for R1151 jurisdictions. - o. j Table 2. orkar ' compensa{tion premium-rate ranking +4y4."."�V. �+.+45k!• rl��.. n 3 .!i y V LYI „s'"vc1�iV rrf `"tn ti'r Fr..� 1 1 Alaska 3.97 176% January 1, 2008 2 °, S." Montana : , ' .. 3.86 155. °m : July 1, 2007 . . 3 ' 12 Ohio 3.32 147% July 1, 2007 4 7" Vermont 3.14 139%. April I; 2007 ." 5 19 New Hampshire 3.06 1369'fl January 1, 2008- 6 ; 8 Maine 3.04 136% January 1, 2008. ..:" 8 3 Delaware 2.96 131 % December 1, 2.007 8 4 Kentuoky 2.95 131 %. October 1, 2007 ' 9 9 Alabama 190 129 °k 114arch1,2007 10: 1 "a Dkiahotna Z:813.;, 128 %' 13111 0 -slate Furst! > ";91tIRB'iivatE," 1 "1 21 Illinois 2.78 124% . ianuary t, 20013 11 Louisiana' ouisiana 2.76 122°/5; Oclober 1, 2007 13 25 South Carolina 2.74 121 °!° May 7, 2007 14' .. " . 2 Ca6fnrtti 2 72 121 °l0 :.." January 1, 2008. 15 18, Pannsyivania 2.68 119% April ", 2007 16 "• 23 New Joisey . 2 66 ; ; 1169% " .€anua€y 1, 2008 . 17 . 17 Texas 2.91 118% January 1, 2008 18 30 Nevada 2.58 115°!°; March 1, 2007 19 10 Meta York 2.55 113 %/" October 1, 2047 20 14; Connec.0cut, 2.46 109 °!d, . January 1, 2008 21 26 Tennessee 2.44 108° July 1, 2907 22,' 3r North Carolina'" 2.43 10895 .. April 1, 2007 24 21 Minnesota 2.333 103% January 1, 2008 24 32, Mississippi 2.33 ' " -` ', 103 Yo March 1, 2007 25 41 Georgia 2.29 102% August 3, 2007 29 ; "'." " 22 Rhode lsiaaid'_ 2.26 " ' 100% ` February 1, 21707: 28 6 Florida 2.20 9W /n January 1, 2008 2B 25.: Missoufl :." 2.20. 97 %' January i, 200$ : . 29 16 District of Columbla 2.16 96% November 1, 2©117 32• 27 New McActi' : r 2.15- :. 95%'" January 1, 2008, 32 39 Michigan 2.15 95% January 1. 200i 32 33 Nebraska . :. ' 2.15 ' 95%- February 1, 20[37' 34' 35 VAsconsir 2.12 949u October 1, 2007 34 32 Idaho 2.12 " 94`Ya January 1, 2008. 36 15 Hawaii 2.08 92 %° January 1, 2000 3s 44 South DakpIs 2.08 82ae6" July 1, 2007 37 2S V4yorning 2.06 91 %u January 1, 2008 37_ washin�tvr3 . .: 1.9 ®,. :. ..- 13810- January 1, 21138' 39 42 OREGON 1.88 83 "/. January 1, 2068 41: 34 Wes', V&rgln a . 185 .. _ 83oa . " July 1; 2007 . _ 41 45 Iowa 1.86 82 °r "L " January 1, 200E 431. Kansas 1.77. ` " , 78% January 1, 2063'.. 43 29 Colorado 1.76 76.11 January 1, 2008 44 40" Maryland 1.72. 7696. January 1, 28308 46 46 Arizona 1.67 74 °k January 's, 2ROS !fi,.. 3& Utah 1.63::. .. 72% ,: December 1, 20^1 47 48 Arkansas 1.61 71° lanuary1,200E 48 49 Virginia. " I.43 _ snk- April 1, 2007 49 47 Massachusetts 1.39 62°/ Septenber 1, 20107 50 54 Indiana`. p 1.23 55% Januaryi,2006 51 " 51 North Dakota 1.06 4P /. July 1 2007 tdoles: Starting wtt`i the 20(}6 siu4. wtren bAm or mcrra S ales' index Rate vaiues are tiiasame, triay now2ra r ssignad the same ranking. The Index r8tes reflect aparopriata adjustments to the chamotarziios of each Indrviduai slate's residual matkei. 'mates Very by ciassihention and irourar in each stalEr AcLml cast to an employer can be abiusied by the employe; s experience rating, prertium d scount, retrospective rating, and dividends. Ernpioyers ail sedum %air workers ecrapenssttan miss,hrough accident prevention, setety training, ane by helping in,,ured workers return M work nulckly. t R1 tee The infbrmadan in this t,r t is in the public domain and bray be rep hued without permission. r ,.° the DCBS Vj7eb site, },tio-Adchs.orei onr 018. To sign zap for electronic notification u,,'retu publications, see the l"nfomiaiion a4lanagement lame page, �r�xt +�. clusestate .crn,u,Rl��;/irnd /e�.tei arcrl,! NT QF lnfonneticn Management Division JDEPART uMER Aso wiatarst. NE, Room 300 �S]NESS PO. Box 14480 SVRV"ICES safer r, Olt Q730Q -04175 440.2062 (10/081COM) 5 03- 3 7 5 -1115 4 2III Oregon Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking Su'mmary' Mup.11-1111ent 0 t ollsulner & ffilsillvs� Services By Derek Reinke and Mike Manley Oregonenvloyers inthevoluntarymarketpay, onaverage, the 42nd highest workers' compensation premim rates in the nation. Oregon's premium rate index is $1.97 per $ 100 ofpayroll, (it 79 percent of the national median. National prenjium rate indices range from a low of $1.10 in North Dakota to a high of $5.00 in Alaska, with a median value of $2,48. Two jurisdictions have = index rate above $4; 1€I are is the $3.00-$3.99 range; 29 an in the $2.004$2.99 range; and 10 have indices under $2.00. Indices are based on data from 51 jurisdictions, for rates in effect as of January 1, 2006. Classification codes from the National Comcil on Compensation Imumnee, (NCCI) were us'--d in this stady. Figure 1.2006 Workers' compensation premium index rates Table 1. Oregon's Hr 10 classmeations NK M ME E to Rl CT NJ D C)r E Mt) MD J)C DC=W Under $2,00 $2-0042,99 S3.0043.99 Bove $4.00 Of the approximately 450 active classes in oregoD, SO were selected based OD relative ftnTorumce as measured by share of losses in OregGI_ To control for differences in industry distributions, each state's rates were xeighted by 2000-2002 Oregon payroll to obtain an average manual rate for that state. Listed in Table I am Oregon's rankings in the of the 50 classifications dsed. top I() Table ^6 (on the back) contains tine premiuim raie ranking for all 51 itirisdictions, Table 2, Workers' compensation premium rate ranking ' 1 f4 t Q I Unto, I %1 uv I I117b I July 1.1u ub 14 1 11 Conneclicut 1 2.90 1 117% January 1, 2{)06 '6 is .10 District of Columbia 1 2.86 1150A November 1:2005 18 2 20 Pennsylvania zoo 1130A I April 1, 2006 20 28 2 Illinois 2.69 108011? January 1, 2006 22 16 Rhoda Island 2,68"" 103% 1 January 1, 2006 24 22 Missouri 2-50 1 101% January 1, 2006 26 25 Tennessee 2A8 1 100% 1 July 1, 2005 28 28 1 VWoming 2.40 960/0 1 January 1, 2a06 30 26 Nevada 2.36 95% 1 January 1, 20D5 32 34. Idaho 229 92% January 1, 2006 34 24 Wast ftirwa 2.20 88% January 1, 200EI 36 35 Washinflion 2.17 8W610 Jailtiary 1, 2006 AJ%ough some states may appear to have the same index rate, the ranking, is hwol, on cat Avicis rr;or to rounding tj ",0 deri- M1 Fda=, The T�dFX raves reflect appropriate adjusWwits for the characterstics of each indk4oual state's residual ma*,Bi,. Rates, wry by classlication and insurer in earn state. Actual Cost to an effipioyer can be adjusted by the employees WqrlenCe rating, premium discount, retmspective rating, and dividends. Employers cart reduce theirworkem- compensation rates through accildent prevention, safety trening, arw by ftalpilg injured warkers return to vmrk. The information in this repo?l is in the public domain mid be reprinted withow parmission. Visit the DCBS Web site, ft L&_ To sign V,for electronic not ification of new publications, seethe 1*rrnafionManqge1neni home page hQ--11wM'w- cbs. stal a&: a0m I DEVf � 4FNT C Inf-6on 11-age..t Divikon UMER 350 Wimer St. NE, Room HO IN E' Pia, BaN 14490 ffig (503) 379-9254 Salem, OR 977 309-0405 r &A� 440-2082 (1 0106100M) I V 2004 Oregon Workers' Coi.. - Premium Rate Ranking S : imary WparynenvoIJ . op.sumer.&- Bushjes,� Services By Derek Reinke and Mike Mariley Oregon employers in the voluntary market pay, on average, the forty-second highest workers' compensa- tion preirdura rates in the nation. Oregon's premium rate index is $2.05 per $100 of payroll. National pmrnium rate indices range from a low of $1,06 in North Dakota to a high of $6.08 in California. Three jurisdictions have an index rating above. $4.00; 13 are in the $3.00-�3.99 range; 26 are in the $2,00-$2.99 range.; and nine have indices under $2.00. Indices are based on data from 51 jurisdictions, for rates in effect as of January 1, 2004. Classification codes frond the National Council on COM- pensation Insurance (NCCI) were uqed in this study. Of the approximately 450 active classes in Oregon, 50 Figure 1, 2004 Workers' compensation premium rates . * ."* W 11 ME MA R1 Nj DE MD 'D--=M Under $2.00 VW-$2,99 $3.00-s3,99 Above $4,00 were safected based on relative importance as mm- sured by share of loss ' es in Oregon. To control for differences in industry distributions, each state's rates,were weighted by 1998-2060 Oregon payroll to obtain an average manual rate for that state. Listed in Table I are Oregon's rankings in the 10 largest (by payroll) of the 50 classifications used. Table 2 (on the back) conWas the premium rate ranidng for all 51 jurisdictions. 0 Masv. On uPc3E*a InTOMM1101), VAO zLtVz ra"Mug has 13�Oft MVl%9d sine* K was origibally published. AP,hovqb %Ofr* states may appear to have the same Index rate, the caking is based on calmialuoris prior to roundfq to WO dadnWl places, The index rates rePsd 61PPMPrizto Adjustments for ffie characteristics of eaeh indiv4uaj kata`s restdusl trwrimf. Rates vary by ciastificabon and 'nSUrOr in 020h 'ItAI&, A=W COe! to an OVIVII)YOCOn Do ad,,UV,,fj by 09 arnp'oyer'z twporience rating• premium discount reftspocli" rating, and dividendE. EmptoyQn, can reduce th-Ir warken;'compentstion Moo through accident preventiort, Itsfaty tratnjqg, and by heaping inured workers teturn to Work. The infortrawn in this report is in the public doInaill and may be reprinted h p.11 it h, ww.cbs.3jWe.0ray. To receive elearoidc wrificarion of new Publicanom, see the hiforrmfion Mawgetnew kbBourd, lPfb='atmn Martagemrnt Division IOP 350 &;N M T IRS� S � IN _VW M. Bay 14480 1 S Salem, OR M09-0405 In (503) 376-8254 440-2082 (12/041COM) Ell c-E, :3 E 30 LL .2 20 > Cr 10 0 LL :11 Alaska Claim Frequency 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Policy Year 6a-ved on NCO's financial data. Frequency of ]a-,t 11me claims, CQVr ;ht 2008 NOtfMal Count! on COmPCn5aVOn InSr1rasIce, Inc. MI PJghts RLSefved, -7 Medical Severity in Alaska Is ..Outpacing, the Regional Medical -CPI 1.0 Indexes of Medical Severity* and Medical Care CPI,, 1998 1.01 Average Annual Percent Change, 19981-2008 Alaska Medical Cost per Claim = 8.5% West Region Medical Care CPI = 4.4% 1998 1999 .2000 2001 2002 2003 200'' --#-AK Medical Cost per Claim (Accident Year) -V-MCPJg.W� -,R dalms M.- ,-�!;V, ,Ii data through 12/3112008, developed to ulthnate .: Medical Severity is represented abeam as unlimited medical losses.at ultimate without adjustmentt for Excludes high deductible 'policies Source, r4CCJ; US Bureau of Labor Statistics 1P COPYrIght 2009 National Council on Compe"satiori Insurance. Int. All Rjahts. Reserved. d, 4V 30 25 20 15 10 0 Alaska Medical Average Cost per Case vs. Countrywide --*-Alaska * Counftywide figure Is preliminary Sourre, NCCT financial data valmd as of IV31108 0 CapyrigM 2009 National Council an Compensatlort Inswerice, Inc, All Avg, Hospital Cost per Stay; i n Alaska Avg. Annual Pct. Change, $24,000 1994-2006 Alaska = 7.0 %a United States = 4B% $20,000 27,171 $12,000 �- Alaska $8,000 - United States 1994 1995 1998 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 '2003 2004 200 2008 Source; American viosp;tal Association Copyright 2409 National COuncV on camper'"tk�n Insurancc,, Inc, AX Rights ReserVtd. 91 U Workers Compensation Benefit Split in Alaska All Claims—Alaska 2008p; Pr°e1lmInary based on data valued Is of 12431POOS 1988, 19M Sesed on date fiJucs?igh 17-/3112007, developed to Tait MOte Based on the states wherO NM prcn deq raterveldng servIces, induding slzte Funds Excludes Ngh deductible pollcles 0 Copyright 2009 Natlorml Council on Compensation insurance, Inc. All Rights Peserued. 31 1. Workers Compensation Medical Losses Are More Than Half of Total Losses All Claims —NCCI States i1•. a 4, Accident Year 200813: ft-ellmlnarY based On data valued as of 12131/2008 1988, 1998. Fused pan data through IW31/'2007, developed to uitimeW Based on the states whim NW provides ritemaldng services, Including s"te funds lExcludes high deduWble pcittles Copyright 2009 National Council on'0:ampensetlon Insurance, Inc. All Rights R ervf�d, Ama1s ofldedzczne: Tho. Cost Conilndr : Reporting & Essays: The New 'Y orker. , 'THE NPW _ �.• 2 ANNALS OF MEDIONE THE- COST -CONUNDRUM What a Texas town can teach w about health crime. by Mal Gawande .age 1 of 11 C osfel care is oft V care. Photograpt byPhillip Toledano. Yo Pap 2 of I i Annals of medidne:'The Cost Cowand=: PUPOrting & Essays: The, New Yorker t is spring in McAllen, Tc;,-.as, the momirig sun is wwm. The streets are lined with palm trees . mid pickup, tm6ks,' McA Bea is in Hidalgo County,which has the lowest household income in the comtry, but it's a border town, and thriving foreign.-tradc zone has kept the unemployment rate below ten per cent. WAR en calls Itself the Square Danoc CaplW ofthe NIJorld. "Lonesome Dove" was set around hem. McAllen has another distinction too: it is one of flie, tuost expensive health-care markets in the country. Only n calth care. In 2006, Medicare Miami which has much higher labor and living costs--7spends more per person 0 11 spmt ffftebn thousand dollars per enrollee here, almost . twice the llafORal average- Tice income Per- capital is twelve s. three thousand dollars more per person hero than the average person -thousand dollars. in other words, Medicare spends The explosive trend in American medical costs seems to have o=trred here in an especially iatmse form. Our country's health care is by fax the m0stexPmive it the world. in Washington, the airn of health-can reform is notiust to extmid medical coverage to everybody but also to bring costs under control. S endin on do and the like now consumes more than one of every six dollars we earn, The financial burden has damaged the global competitiveness of American businesses and bankrupted millions of families, uvell.thDse with imuranct., It's also goqeimezt. -me greawt. threat to'Amerias ftsOal health is not Social Security," President Barack devouring our eo�erftmezt. 11 Obarna said in a Much speech at the'White House. "It's not the investments That we've made to rescue our economy during this crisis. By a wide margin, the biggest threat to our nation's balance sheet is the skyrocketing; cost of health care. It's not even close" The quesdon we're 110W ftallfl(211Y grappling with is how this came to be, endwhat cm be done about it McAllen, ­s ­ roost ,expensive town in the most expensive counlay for health care in the world, e meda-goodpaceto.- look or some answers, From the moment . I arrived, I asked almost everyone I encountered about , T&Allea's health costs .—a businessman I met at the five-gate McAllen-Miller lhtentational Airport, the desk clerks at the Embassy SuiteS.IiQtel, a Police- academy cadet at bioDonald's. Most weren't surprised to hear that McAllen was on outlier. "Just look aromd," the cadet said, "People are not healthy here-" McAllen, with its high poyprty rate, has incidence, of heavy drinking sixty per cent higher thm the nationeJ average. And the Tex-Mex diet has contributcl to a thM-eight-per-cft obesity rate. Otte -heaten, r-mcb-owning fifty - three- year -old cardiac surgeon , day, I went on rounds with Lester W0, a weather who grew up in Austin, did his surgical training Tfith the Army all aver the country, and settled into practice in Hidalgo County. He has u ot lacked for busi tars: in tone past twenty years, he has done Some eight thousand heart opemtks, which mdnausts me just thinlzmv about it. 1 walked around with him as he checked in on ten or so of his patients who v�erps=p mtting at the it= h9spitah where he operates. It was easy to set what had landed' them under his knife, Few or'bot of heaft disease. were Ulking pmyentive They were nearly all obese or diabetic h. M-py had a fhmily history . ha, Of Measures, such as cholesterol - lowering drugs, which, studies indicate, would have obviated =9.wy forup to if I s essentially the same dernogmphics. Both counties lovrer, too. El Paso Cott ty, eight ltund ud Inn l top the border, lie-health statistics, and similar percentages of non- in 2006 Medicare expenditures (our b-,si apl5roxittation. of ovor' -all spemditsg pa, e. leo_haff as mu& as in McAllen, An unhealthy population oouldnit.possibly be, the reason thatMckllen's health-cam costs are SO high.. (Or the reason , that America's but we WwE among the lowest rates of smoking and are. Wernaybemomobe tharl'any other indu,.�alizednatiwi,. alcoholizm, and We are U11 the middle of the range for cardiovascular disea&6 and diabetes) Was the explanation, then, that McAllen was providing unusually good hWth care? I took a walk ftough Doctors wns; 'the McAllen metropoun area, with Robert Allow Hospital at Renaissance, in Edinburg, one of the: to ' in , � EL Houstou-tramed general gurgeonwho had grown 4p here and returned home t.6 practice, Tile bosPital campus sprawled . across two city blocks, with a series of three- and four-.9tory stucco buildings separated bY golfing-green lawns and he heart r he black aspbalt parkiug W& He pointed but the siiam--4he c center is overhere, t enter is over.tI re, now we're cooling to the mlagn centor. We went inside the -surgery buitding, It was sleet: RAd mo&rr, with recussrd, Tagt� 3 of I I 'Annals of MediriUVIlle Cost Conundrum; kvpollinF, & Essays: 7hIe New Yorker lighting, classical music piped into. the waiting areas, and r nurses moving from patient to patient behind tolling black COtjpUt�rpo&. We chaugei into scr6bs-aadUleyn took me through &e sixteen operating rooms to show me the laparmeopy suite, witty its flat- screen video monitors, the hybrid orerating A room with built-in imaging equipment, flie surgical robot for mi riftnally invasive robotic Surgery. I was WVrossed. The place had virtually all the techriology V fl-tat you'd find at 14arvard and Stanford and the Mayo Clinic, and, as I walked &uue, that hospital an a dusty road in South Texas, tyl,., struck tee as a repatkable thing. Rich towns get, the new whW buildings, fire L zeks, and roads, not to mention the better teachers and PORm officers and civil engineers. Poor towns don!t. Butthat stale datsn'thold for health me. At McAllen Medical Center, I saw an orthopedic, surgeon work under an ope.-atitig microscopa to remove a tumor that had A AWi wrapped around the spinal cord of a fourteen-year-old, At a 7;#effXXe home-health agency, .I spoke, to a nurse who could provide venous -drug " Ous heart fail - . rfflospital, I watched Dyke and a intra _drug therapy for patients with congestive ture At McAllen He& team of six do a coron.—Y-UterY bypass using technologies that didn't exist a few years ago- M Renaissance, I talked Ileonttoloest who trained atT%Y JfOspft4-iU Boston; W bfOught MaAllen Clew skills and techrologips fog " preinatuit uptome aftd say, I never ymew Arad yet there's no evidence technologies available at McAllen are better than those found ,nce that the treatmerkts and teclulwlog c Ile with Medicare show that those in McAllen and El Paso country, The elsewhere is the , aWuajrepQ-,js that hospitals f offer comparable technologies—n00jaataI imensive,-Icare, units, advanced cardiac services, PET scans, and so on. Public statistics show no diffffeaw in sloe sin ly of doctors. Hidalgo Couay zeWally has fewer specialists than the national average. . Nor- does the care given in McAllen stand out for its qua ity, IA,,dicarc rark liaspitals on twenty -five Metrics of care. On all but two of these, McARWS five largest hospitals perl'ormed worse, an average, than El Paso's, McAllen costs Medicare seven thousand dollars morq pet Pelson each Year than does th' average city in America. But not, so far 7 as one can tell, because it's delivering better health care. no night, I wrtit to-dinnormith six Wlen doctoTs, All were what you would call bread-and-butter physicians: --prac,,r in the m6m . m f 6t ...... 0 busy, full: time, pnvate �Ie doctors who work from seven g to seven a hi a . n som imu later, their waiting room teerning arid .their desks stacked with medical charts to review. .Somtwr ountry,s most expomn,c place, for health care. I have were dubious when I told them that McAllen was the c Or-m-adi -"rl- -ap-mb -et -a-M luml Om ME, ?"M=ark tie nt $4,891, —14,�O _5 61vwa Ad;�kuf tliarx =Y tests MOTe "MU,Ybe size service is Better Here," slip cardiologist suggested. People can be seers faster esrd get their readily, he, said, Others were skeptical, "I don't think that explains the costs he's talking ahem," the general surgeon said. ,It's malpractice,"r &family physician who had practiced here far ddM-:thnc years said. rote I'McAllen is legal hell," the cardiologist agreed. Doctors order unnecessmytests j= top. ttthemselves, hesaid. -Bveryont thought the lawyers here were worse than elsewhere. I n malpractice law that capped pain explanation pumled me. S-.Vera! WUS age, Texas Passed a toug lars idwi lawsuits 90 down? suffering awards at two hundred and fj-nty thousfm6 dol ,.D "Practically to Zero," the cardiologist a( knitted, ,,Comp on,,, tae general L surgem finally said. "We- all know these argu=nti are bullshit Ibert is'ovefutilization here, pure and sLmple." Doctors, he said, wat racking up charges with extm tests, strvias, and procedures.. The surgeon came to McAllen in the mildilineties, and since than, he said, "the way to practice raedidne has Annals of Medicine: The CCO, Conulidrum.� Reporting & Essays: The N' ,,w Yorker Page • - of 11 changed completely, Before, it was about how to do a goodjob. Now it is about 'How much will you benefit ?' ' T,,voryalie agreed that something fundamental bad changed since the days when health -care costs in McAllen -were trjj- ,But young doctors don't anymore," same as tho5o its El Paso and elsewbere, Yes, they had morrotechnoloU. the,family physiciar, said. e surgeon gave me an exarnple. General surgeons are often asked to see patients with pain from gallstones, IF there arefij any complications—and then; usually aren't—the Pain goes away on its Own Or with pain medication.. With But some have, recurrent m5buctioD on eating a lower -fat diet. most patients experience no further difficulties. episodes, and need surgery to remove their gallbladder. I tolld pain requires some judgment. A surgeon has to Seeing a patient who has had uncomplicated, first -time jalLs provide reassaranm (pnople are often scared and want to go Might to surgery), some education about gallstone disease and diet, perhaps a prescription for Pain; in a few weeks, the surgeot, might f011oNv up. But incyeRsinglY, 1 W8 iold, McAllen, surgeons simply operate. The patient ' vmjilt going tomo&rate her diet, that' toll themselves. The pain was just going to some back. And by operating they happen to make an extra seven hur dred dollars. I gave the doctors around th6 table a scenario. A forty -year -old woman comes in with chest pain after a fight with her husband- An EKG i8 normal. The chest pain goes away. She has no family history of heart disease. What did mr,Mjen doctors do fifteen years ago? Send her home, they said, Maybe get astress test to coftfiTm that there's no issue, but even that might be ovetkill.. And today? Today, the cardiologist said, she would get a stress test, an echocardiogram, a mobile Colter monitor, C, and maytt even a cardiac catheterizatioln. "Ch, she,& der;n Uely g ettitig a oath," the internist said, laughing grintly. whethe, oVeMSeOf M�dicaj care i6M'y the pr6bl6'Ai b McAll6iii'l turned ice n To dete.-w.J Sp. et,.a ecbndmist ktDamamith's Diftitilte for Health Policy and Clinical practice, whi6h, has three decadei of e*rfisr in examining regional pattexus in Medica e payment data. I also turned to two private firms--1)2Hawkeye, an' independent company, and Ingenix, -UnWHealtheare's data - analysis cornpany—to, analyze commercial insurance data a ji i for UcAllen. The answer was yes. Compared with patients inEl Paso andn do wide, patients in McAllen got more of -pretty mia&6 eve,,rythili g--mom diagnostic- testing, more hospital treatruent, more surgery, mom home care, The Medicare payment data provided the most detail. Between 2001 and 2005, critically ill Medicare patients received alraost fifty per cent MOrc specialist visits in McAllen than in El Paao, and were two-thirds more likely to see ten or more spocialists- in a six-month period. In 2005 and 2006, patients in McMien received twenty per cent more abdominal ultrasounds, fljAy per cent more boric-dewity studies, sixty per cent more str= tests Frith ,ebocardiography, two h undred per cent more pewee- conduction Stt4ies to diagnose crpal -t unn I syndrome, and i e hundred aand filly per cent more urine-fiG'A'studies to diagnose prostate troubles. They received oa6-fifth to tiro-thirds and bladder scopes. They also received two to thr ee more, gallbladder Oporations, knee T*acemeuts, breast biopsies, times as many pacemakers, iniplanWe defibrillators, cardiac - bypass operations, . carotid endarterectomin, and oomnary-artery stents, And Medicare, paid for five times as many horafiturse visits, The PrimarY cause of Mcikllen?s raost thwgs, more This is a disturbingandperhap& surprising diaWsis. Americans F&�t6 is better•. Rat research suggests that where Medicine is emccrued it may actually be worse. For example, Rnchester, Miraesota, where the Mayo Clinic dominates the scene, has fanjastiaaby high levels of technological capability and —$6,,68Fpercnrol1eein2OO6 hich s I in the lowest fifte-en per cent of the country , w i quality, but its eight thousand dollars less than the :figure for McAllen. Two mmornisrs wo"8 at Dartmouth, Kath e fi ne f3sicker acid Aj3fitabh Chandra, found that the more money, Medicare spent per person in a given state the lower that ftc's quality Ur of sponding—Louisiana Terns, California, and ng tended to be. In fact, the fO states with the hi&e�t levels Florida—were rear the bottom of the nati0aal-rank-ings on the quality of patient care, In study, another Dartnaouth to=, ied by the internist Elfi6tt Fisher, examined the treatment received by a million elderly Ara ericm diagnosed with cc I on or- rectal cancer, a hip fracture, or a head attack. They found That patient in highei-spending regions received sixty' per cent morc care that eistwhere. They got rhare fmqumt tests and procedures, more Visits with specialists, and snore frequent admission to hospitals. Yd they did no better than other fun satisfaction aftents, whdther this was measured in terns of survival, their ability to Wory 0? a on with the c I are, they received, If anything, they seemed to do worse . -A -,orals of Medicine. Thp, Cost Conundrm: Repordug & Essays, The Neiv Yorke, Page 555 of 11. is without risks. Complications can wise from hospital stays, meditations, because nodft in medkhm procedures, and tests, and when these things are of marginal value the harm can be greater than the benefits. Tn recent yeas, we doctors have markedly increased the number of operations we do, for instance, In 2006, doctors performed at least sixty million surgical procedures, one for every five Americans. No ether country does anything like as many operations on its citizens. Are we better off for it? No one knows for sure, but it seenis highly unlikely. After all, sor'4c hundred thousand people die each -vow from complications of surgery ----:far more than die in car crashes_ To make matters worse, Fisher fomrd that patients in high-cog areas were actually loss likely to receive low-co , st preventive, services, such as flu and pneumonia vaccines, faced longer waits at doctor aad emergency -zoom -visits, and I were less likely to haNT, a Ormary-care physician. 11ey got more of the stuff that cost more, but not more of what they needed. In an odd way, this newt is reas=ing. Univenal coverage woW t be feasible unless we can control costs, Policymakers have worried that doing so would require rationing, which the public would never go -along with. So the idea that there's plenty of fat in the system is proving deeply attractive. "Nearly WAY pet cent of Medicare's costs could be saved without neg2tively affecting health outcomes if spendiing in high- and medium-cost areas could .be reduced to the level in low-cost areas," Peter Orszag, the President's budget director, W stated. Most Americans would be delighted to have the quality of care fotmd in places like Rochester, Mdmesota, or Seattle, Washington. or Darharn, North Carolina—all of Which have world-class hospitals and costs that fall below the nationd average, if brought the cost curve in the expensive places down to their level, Nledlcare E probleras (indeed, almost ail the federal government's budget pmblems for the next fifty years) would be solved. The diffficnIty is liow to go about it. Physicians in Places like .h,1,Wj= behave differently from others The $2.4-trillion quesqou is why. hiltless *e:ft�rar6 it,6fit; heeth i' ftni will fail; had what ! considered to be a reasonable plan for finding out what was going on in McAllen. I would call on the heads of it hospitals, in their swanky, dworator-designed, chuffigueresco offices, and I'd a* them. The first hospital I visited, McAllen Heart flospital, is owned by Universal I ealffi Services, a for -profit hospital chain with headquarteis in King of Pmsia, Pennsylvania, and revenues of five billion dollars fat year- I wont to see the hospital's chief operating officer, Gilds Romero. Truth be told, her office seemed less chunqgueresco than Office Depot. She had straight browt hair, sy=aihetic eyes, md looked more Ile a young school teacher than 1;je a corporate officer with ninateca years of experience. And whion. I inquixed, "What is going on in this I place?" she, looked surprised. is WAR= really that expensivc7 she asked. I described the data, including the numbers indicating that heart oporatiew, and catheter procedures and. pacemakers were biAlig pedonued in McAllen at double the usual rate, "Tbat is interesiing,". she said, by which she did not, mean, Ilk-oh, you've caught ue' but rather, "nat is actually ituteresting °' isle prof lu;r. ofMcAllen's outlandish costs was new to her. Sbe puzzled over the trambers. She was certain that her doc-Lors pwfbrinei sargery only wher, it was necessary. It hadlo be one ofthe other hospitals. And she .She wasn't the only person to meat on RcuaissRnee, It is the noweathospitalin thr, area. It is physicianowna And ft has I reputation (Which it disclaim) far aggressively recruiting high volume physicians to become investors and send patients there. Physicians who do so receive not only their fez for whatever service They proyidt, but also A percentage of the hospital's profits from the Pests, surgerY, or other cart patients are given, (in 2007, its profits totalled thirty - -fluor million dollars. )'Rometo and others argued Uml This gives physicians an unblY temptation to oYcrarden Such an, arrangement can make physician investors rich. But it can' ' t be the whole explanation, The hospital gets b a sixth of the patients in the region.; its margins are no bigger thatu . the other hospitals* —whether for profit or not for profit—and it didn't have much of a presence until 2004 at the earliest, a full decade after the cost explosion in McAllen began. "Thos'e, are good points," Komero, said- Sh ' o, couldn't explain what was going oil. The following afternoon, I visited the top managers of Doctors Hospital at Ramissauce-We sat in thdir boardroom around ore end cif ayacht-length.table. The chairman of the board offered me asoda, Tne chief ' of staff smiled at me. Tnc chief financial officer shook my hand as If I were an old friend. 7b e CHO.,however, was having a hard time a fik_SeVW_year-old anesthesiologist with a Bill pretending that be was haoy to see me. Lawrence Gelmau Was Annals ofMediciiie: The Cost Conuhdnm: Repotting & Essay The XiW s, Yorker P4ge 6 of I I' rhtort shod� of white h.air and a weekly local radio show tag-lined "Opinions from anUnrelenting Conservative spirit," He had helped fowd the hospital. He barely greeted me, and while the others were Uying for a how-can-1-help- YOU A*y attitude, his body-lauguago Was ' more iet's-get-this-over-with. e So I asked him why MoAllen's health-care cost were so high. What he gave M o n the th e was a disquisition pry creation of Medic ft, the upshot and history of American health-cm fimcing'going back to Lyndou Johnson and the pe of ,whir 'The people in c% of the purse, stringi don'tknow ,h was: (1) Government is the problem iii health cart, ' Vhstthqy'= doiqg,"f2) if anything, government insuranr� programs like Medicare don't pay enough. "Las. an anesthesiologist, know that they PAY Me temper rent of what a private insurer }rays" (3j Govertiriierd programs are ofy,,aste,,Tvery person in this room could easily go through the expenditures ofMtdicara and Medicaid and see all kinds of waste." (4) But not in I'AcAllm. The cliniclaus here, at least at Ductors HosPital at Renaissance, "are PrOyiding necessary, essential health Care,,, Gelman said. "We don't indent patients!' Ilion why, do hospitals in McAllen order Do much more surgery. and s=8 and tests than hospitals in M Paso and elsewhere? c6uld offer was this- The other doctors and hospltaL- in In the end, the only explanZliOrl he mid his mllehgues IvIcAllen'May be gverspending, but, to the exte,3t that his hospital provides costlier treatment than other places in the country, it is makillge, people betior in ways that data on quality and outcomes do scot measure. Wp provide better health care titer El Pas0r'GehnaD RskeA "I would bet ym two to one that we do." It was a depressing cnnversatio cot because I thought the mecutives were being evasive but because they weren't being evasive. The data onl&Allen's costs were clearly stew to them. They were defending McAllen reflexively. But they really didn't knoW the big picture Qf what wag happening. Ajjd fieg . '�'Mop 6 art titer P ": on ' cicaf eiiecii(i6s fbi-h SlIftib I i h6te:h6ifth'agquo ids ufi&-istand their Vowth rate and their market share; they how whether they losing Money or maktrtg O , Ib Py :mow hat if their " doctors bring irL enough business--surgery, imaging. honle-Rulsing refcaa"ey make money; and if they COMOre they have only the vaguest notion of whether the doctors get the doctors to bring in. more, theY Tusk - But - they are . more or less ef ftcient Ihaa their counterparts are Mdmg ffieir communities as healthy as they can, or whether elsewhem A doctor sees a patient in clinic, and has her check into a McAllen hospital for a CT scan, an ultrasound, tbree, romi& of blood testa, auother ultrasound, and then surgery to have her gallbladder removed. How is lawrence Ge He treatment for the patient? It 'iman of GildalUrnero to know whether all essential, let alone tbebutpossi isjj,t What they are responsible or accountable, for. health -ca e costs ultimately arise fton the accumulation of individual decisions doctors make, about which services and treatments to v,,rite an order for. The most eXp mive piece, of medical eauiPment, as the saying goes, is a doctor'5 lad, as a rulf, hospital executives don't own the pen cAps. Doctors do. f doctors wield the pen,,athy do they doitsit diffcr=tIyfrmn one place to ano.ler? Brenda Sirovich,,another Dartmouth researcher, published astudY last year that providrd an important clue. She and her leant surveyed some 6&t hundred plimary-cffe, physicians from Might. -cost cities (su& as Las'Vegu and New York), IoW-cost cities (such handle avariety of patient cases. It tamed out that differences in decision - rocking emotged in only some Y&ds of cases. In situations in which the right thing to do was'Well established—far example, whether to recommend a mamraograrn for a fifty-year-old wonua (the answer k yea}—physicians in high- and low-cost cities nude the as= decisions. But, possible amount of �Osting and in owes in which the science was imc1mr, some physicians pursued the maximmu procedums; some pursued the mumurn, And which kind of doctor they were defended on where they came from. Siro7ich asked doctors with typical heartbum symotoms and 'tors how theyw d treat a seventy-five-year-old womm "adequate health inamet tb,coycr tests and medications." Physicians iu:hiO- ind low-cost cities were equally likely and' for an ulcer-musing bacteriim—stcPs strongly re0ommeaded by to prescribe antaoid th=PY to check - H. pylori, national guidelines. But when it came to ineUsmes of less certain vulue-� d higher cost --;he difference."were considerable. More than seventy Per =t Of physicians in light -cost cities IrObOd the I)AfiMt to a gastroenterologist, ordered an upper endo3copY, or bath, while half Is TuMv in 10,%,-cost cities did Physicians ftm high-cost cities typically recozuutended that patlenU with rink controlled hypertension see them its the office everyone to three. &4 visits twice yearly. Ifi cue after mcerWn case, more was not niontn' vbae those from low -cast cities recommon mm"suili-better. But physicians.from. be most expensive cities did the mostoxPonSive Vials of Me4icine: The Cost Conodrttttt: Reporfifig & Essays. The NeMYorker Poe 7 of 11 Vv,4y? some of it could reftect differences in training.1 remember when my wife brought out infant son Walker to visit his grandparents in Virginia, and fie took a terrifying fall down a set of stairs. They drove him to the local community hospital in Alexandria. ACT Am showeO that be had a tiny silbdural hematoma—P small area of bleeding- in the brain- During ten hours of obsemdoY4 though, he was fte.—eating, drinking, completely alert I was a surgery resident then and had iem many cases Me his. We observed each child in intensive care for at least twenty-four hum and got a repw Cr .soap, . That was how Fdbm trained. But the doctor in Alexandria Was going to send Walker home. That was how bed been trained. Suppose things change for the worse I asked hJuL JVS sxft=elY Unlikely, be said, and if anything charged Walker could always be 'brought back. I bullied the doctor into admitting him anyway, The next day, the scan and the pa&nt were fine. And, looking in the tortboob, I leanwd that the doctor was right. Walker could have been managed safely either way. There was no sip, however, 1hat, McAlie n's doctors as a group were trained any differently hm 131 Paso's. one morning, I tact with a hospital administrator who had extensive experience managing for-profitbospitals along the border. He offered a differ possible exp1mation: the culture Of Money. "In EI Paso, ifyou took a random doctor and looked at his tax returns eighty -five per cent of his income would come.frora tilt usual practice of medicine," he said. But in McAllen, the.administrator thought that percentage would be a lot less. He know of doctors who owned strip malls, Orange graves, abaft nent complexes ---or imaging centers, surgery centers, or another pact of the hospital they directed pWenls to They had "ontrepreneurial spirit," he said. They were innovative and aggressive in finding ways to increase revenues from Patient care.'"ffieres no lack of work ethic," he said. But he had often soon fmanoial copsid-trations drive the decisions doctors made for patien"e tests they orderr4, th6 do& t I oft . an th& dire:,fion medicirie had t*en: ift 146AR& told me the same thing, `Its•i trio: hire, M: Y'fxiend, " buc surgeon explained. , No one teaches you how to think zbout money in medical school or residency. Yet, from the moment you start practicing, you must thint, abold'it. You must consider what is,covered for a patient and what is not, You must pay attention to kwa;uce rejections and government reimbursement rules. You must think about having enough money for the secretaty and tiro nurse and the rent and the malpraptico insurance. Wyoad the basics, however, many physicians are rmarkably oblivious to the financial implications of their decisions. They see their patients. They make their rmmmendations. They send out the bilks. And, ss long as the munbers. come out all right at the end of each month, they put the. money out of their minds. Othas think of the money as a means of improving what they & They ibis 1. about bow to use.1he insurance money to maybe install eledronic health recozz* With, colleagues, or provide easier phme and e-. nail access, or offer expanded hire an extra nurse to %6�itor die". "c patients more closely, and to maka'sure that patients don't, miss tbDir mamwgrams and pap smears and colonoscopies. Then there M the PhYS1013nS 'AIIO see cheit practice primarily as a revenue, slirewn. They instruct their secretary to mae-hine, add start doing their patients' scans themselves, so flw the iMMOO payments go to theta rather than to the hospital. They figure out WAYS to increase fileir high_margi work and decreasolkeir low- margin work. This is a busioiess, air all. . In every community, you'll find a mixtare of these views among PhYsicim, but an.e or , anothertends to predomivate. McAllen seem simply to be the commimity at one aCreme. Ina few cases, the hospital executive told meU! d-seen the behavior cros's over into what seemed like -outright -aud. "I've I had doctors hue come up to me and say, 'You want one to admit patients to your bospitM, you're going to leave to pay me., rr ,vHcrw much?,, I asked, ,,The arnoimts—all, of I them were over F huncired thousand dollars per Year," he said. 'Bic doctors were specific. The most he was asked for was five-hundred thousand doll= per year. HeAldn't pay agy ofthern, he said: "I mean, i gaft sleep at night~" And he emphasized that these were just a handful of doctors–Buthehad never beets asked fora kickback before DoMingtDMCAIIen. A na is of Medicine: The Cost Contirrdium: Reportino & FISS ays: The Nolw Yorker Page gofll woodypoweli is z StanfDrdsociologist who studies the economic cultuWr f cities. Recently, he'aiid his research team•studied why certain regions—Boston, San Francisco, 9anDiego­--7becmne leaders in biotechnology while others with a Similar conuntratioa of scientific and corporate talent—Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York—didnot. The answer they found was what Powell describes as the an-.hor-ten wt theory of emnomic developmont. Just as an anchor stop will 4ofine the character of a mall, anchor tenants in biotechnology, whether it's a. company like, Genentech, in South San Francisco, or a university like U.I.T., in Cattibridge, define the Character Of an W0110111fc community, They set the norms- The anchor tenants that set norms mcdaraging the free flow of ideas and collaboration, even with competitors, produced enduringly successful communkies, while those fitatmainly sought to dominate did not, Powell suspect that anchor tenan✓ play a similarly powerful commu;* role IR other, areas of economics, too, and health care may be no exception: I spoke to a madzfing -rep for a McAllen home-bealth agency-who told ins a proem unaM4 similar to what Powell, found in biotech. bier jab is to persuade ' doctors to use her agency rather than others. The competition is fierce, I opened the phone book and found sevent6w pages Of listings for home health. agendas --two hundred and sixty in 0, A patient typically biings in between twolvehundred and fifteen hurtdrmd dollars, and double that amount for specialized cam. She described how, a deic'adeor so no, a few early agencies began rewarding doctors who ordered home visits with more tlm trinket, they provided firLas to professional sporting events, jewelry, and other gifts, That set the tone. Other agenioiesjump in, some began paying doctors a supplemental salary, as directors," for steering business in their direction. Doctors came to eVect a share of the reveam stream. Agencies that want to compete on quality struggle to remain in business, thr TOP said. Doctors have askedL her for -a modical-director salary of four or five fftousand dollars a month in return for sending her business. C)ne asked a 'cOljc*W 'Of tai ion far his rhild;aikother "I eiplaindd, the riffes -and regulatia rWftced the auti�ltickbacic law, add told Seib such doctors. "Does h hurt my busirtess?" She paused, "I'm OK working only vith ethical physicians," she finaliq said. About fifteen yeaig ago, it seems, somedting, began to change in McAlkja.,k few Ica&rs of local iustitations took profit growth to be a legitimate ethic in the profioe of medicine. Not all the dmtors accepted this., But they failed to discourage those who did, go hem, along the banks of the Rio Grande, in the Square Dance Capital Of the World, a medical commimity 4 to treat patients the way subt a s treated home bu c a� as profj an ers. prfino-mortgage le der v r te t T he real puzzit of American b-Ath =e, I realized on the airplane, home, is not Why McAllen is different ftom Fl Paso. It's why E Paso isn't like- McAllen. Every incentive in the wstem is an invitation to go the Wkv McAllen has gom Yet across the country, large numbers of communities have managed to con"! their health Costs rather than ratchet thorn UP. I talked to Denis Cortese, the C.E.0- of to Mayo Clinic, whieb is among the highest-quality, lowrz-cost health- care systems in the country. A couple of yew, ago, I spent several days there as a,,qsiting surgeon. Amoup ,, the O&p that stand out from that visit was how much time the !doctors SpeWL-wfth paflen�, Tliize was no chijrn—no shuttling patients. Most pfihepatients, like those its my clinic, yeqund (Zi—Paacat RU —cofC-n —cancer . qumdab6ut vrntymEu_te.,,But' and a number of other complex ' issues, including heart disease. Tice physician spent an hour with her, sorting things out. He phoned a cardiologist with a guest on.. "I'll be ffieic," the cardiologist said. Fifteen minutes later, he was. They mulled over everything together. The cardiologist adjusted a medication, and said that no further testing was needed. He cleared the patient for surgery, and the operating room gave her 510,- the new day. Tire whole interaction was wonisliftg to me. Just ha* g Vae cardiologist pop down to 006 the PadW with the surgeon would bb unimaginable at my.hospital. The fi= required wouldn't-pay. The time required just to ()Igmliw the system wouldn't pay.' The, ' tenet core tnet of the Mayo Clinic is "Ift needs of the patierit come first"--not the convenienec ofthe- doctors, not their revenues. The doctors and nurses, and . even the janitors, sat in meetings idmbst weekly, working oz ideas to make -the service and the care better, riot W get more money out of pati�w. I asked Cortese how the, Mayo . Clinic:made this POW— e. Antmis of medicine: - 'fie Cast C0nWdn=: Reporting & Essays'. The New iFo er • Page '9 of l 1 "lt's not easy," he said- W decades ago Mayo recognized that the fast thing it needed to do was elimrranate the financial barriers, It poor all the money the doctors and the hospital systeru received died began paying everyone a saluy, so that the doctors' goal. in patient care couldn', be i creasing their income. Mayo proe�aa#ed leaders who fog sed first on whatwas best for patients, and then on how to make this financially possible. . No OLD owe actually intands to do fewer ene= —Ve scam and procedures than is clone elsewhere in the?cotmtry. Tne aim is to raise quality and to help doctors and other staff members work as a team. But -almost by happenstance, the result has been 10 Wer costs. "When doctors put their heads together in a room, when they share expertise, you get more thinking aced Tess testing Cortese told tne, Skeptics saw the Mayo model as a 10041 phenomenon that wouldn't carry beyond the hay fields of northern iutinnesota. But in 19fi6 the Ntaye Clink opened a campus in Fioida, one of our most OV ensive states for health care, and, in 19&7, another one in Arixoom. it waa difficult to recruit staff mmubers who would accept a salary and the Mayo's collaborative way of practicitsg. �,eaders were woricing against the dominant medical culture and incentives, The expansion sites•toak at least a decade to get properly established, But eventually they achieved the same high,_ quality, low -cost results as Rochester. Indeed, Core says that the Florida site has become, in some respects, the most . efricicnt one in the system. The Mayo Clinic is not an aberration. One of the lowee -cost markets in the couatry is Grand junction, Colorado, a community of a hundred and twenty tbousand that. nonetheless has achieved some of Medicare's highest cpaality -of care scores. Michael Pramenko is a family physician and a local medical leader faere, Unlike doctors at the Mayo Clinic, he told me, those in Grand junction get piecework fees from insurers. But years agcy the doctors agreed among themselves trr °a'syste xa tliat paid l3aerii's kimilar fW*lieffi r fltey tats iViediM Wicaad, ni ptrvats -is s`rarace aaii�nts; so rlaaf ; there wtoufd be little incentive tia cherry -*k patients. They also igre'ed, at the behest of tine mgt a hehltla plan iaa town, ar, H.I LO., to meet regularly on small peer- review committees to go over their patient chatts together, They focussed era rooti ,out problems hike poor prevention practices, unnecessary back operations, and unusual hospttnE- complication rates. Problems went dawn. Quality went up. Then, in 2004, the dogs' 9Mula and the local RX0, rtointly created a regional information network: —a. community elide electronic- record system that shared office noies, test results, and hospital dam for patients across the area. Again, problems went down. Qua* weaat up. And costs eurlcrz lower dmjust abcsut anywhere else in. the United States. Graced junction's medical community was not following anyone else's recipe. But, :like Mayo, it created. what BilloftEisher, ofDartmouth, calls an accountable -care orgmeizatiam The leading doctors and the hospital system adopted treasures to bhmt harmful facial inr coves, and they took eollecft responsibility for irnprovitag dm sum total otpatient care. agpazaach has been adopted in other plates, rota: �e Ceisiurger Health System, iatl�anv lle, peransylvania; the . Ylarshfield Clinic, in Marshfield, Wisconshr, lutermountabi Roaltheare, in Salt%,ake City; raiser kcal MOntc, its Northern California. All ofthesn ftaetction cma similar principles. All are not - %r -profit institutio, rs. And a.11 have town et.[ o? s. - -- hera yell look across me spectrum from Curd function to McAilM --�sti th�� three o d Mffr nca ira�e costs of carp- ---you come to reali e'that we are witnessing a battle for the soul Of American medicine. Somewhere in the United States at Us moment a patient with chcst pairs, or a t€inaor, or a cough is seeing a doctor. And the darraning question we bpe to ask is whether the doctor is set up to meet the r4ae6 of the oati+mt, first aged foremast, or to Maximize revenue. There is no iasma= system that will maize fire two aims match p rfe. oily. But h nng a system that does so much to misaiigra them hl s proved disastrous. Ae economists have of m painted out, we pair doctors for quantity; not quality. As they point rant less caftan, we also pay them as individuals, rather tlaamr as treeaalaors of a team wig t4grtlaer far their patients. Both practices leave made for serious problems. Provkft bealth care is lira buildimig a house. Tire task: re quires experts, erpevssive equipment and mrtateriais, and a huge amount of coordination. lmagmn U instead of payi g a contractor to pull a teamr.together and keep'them on track, YOU paid an ele&iciann for every outlet he recommends, a plumber for ever;' fsaaacet, and a campenier for every cabinet. WoWd you be surprised if you got a home, with a thousand outlets, faucets,, and cabinetk, at three times the cost You expected, and the svlscrle tiling fell apart a couple of years inter? Geititig t� countz'y's best electrician on the job (ire. An.nais of Medicine: ne, Cost Cotxtlzrdmm' R.eportingr & Bssagys: The New Yorker page 20 of I I #a;red at llatvsrd, sorrraebtrtiy tells you) isra'# going to s€ilve this problcm. Nor will changing the person -who wz tes him the check. This .last point is vital, Activists and policymakws spend an inordinate atnouat of time arguings, about whadler the solution to.high medical casts is to have gov&MOnt or private insurance companies write the checks. Here's how this wWe debate goes, Advocates of a public option say govdr went financing would save the most money by having, leaner administrative casts and forcing doctors and. hospitals to fame lower payments than they get from private - i uran", opponents say doctors would skimp, quit, or gan-re fh;e system, and snake us wait in be for out° care; they maintain that private insurers are better at policing docttusn No., ti :e skeptics say; all insurance companies do is reiect applicants who need health care and stall ter paying their bills. 7:hen we have thQ tconomists who say that the people who should tray the doctors are the ones who use them.. lane consutness pay with their own dollars, make sure that they hzave some "skin in the game," and then they'll get the care they deserve, These arguments miss the maim issue. Whm it comes to pWdag care fetter aad cheaper, changing who pays the doctor will snake no more difference than changing who pays the electrician. The lesson of the high -r lity, low -cost communities is that someone has to tae acuountable for the totality ok cam. Othcr�isc, yosu get a system that has no brakes, You got 'McAllen.- , One afternoon in McAllen, i. xodc down McColl Road with Lester Dyke, the cardiac surgeon, and we passed a series o, rj�lce plazsti that seemed to be northing but home- health agencies, imaging centers, and medical-equipment stores. ' Medicine Baas become a pig trough here," he muttered. ?dyke is &mW the fn vocal critics of what's bappened in McAllen "We took a wrong turn when doctors stopped belug doctors and became businessmen," he said. _ye began:taiking about the- various proposals being touted1rWasbing'to n te'fix the c Owb1em t asl`�dltrrfi" - vhethter expanding publk4usui ,ce programs: like Medicare and slLriWdng the role bf iiisur�ace'�asripaieies vvtitil� rho the trick in McAllen. " l don't have aproblem with W' he said. "But it wou't snake a diffreren ." In McAllen, government payers already pmdominate --riot many people have jobs with private insurance. Htsw about daring the opposite and incmasing the role of big insurance companies? ' What good would that dui" Dyke asked - The third class of health -cost proposals, I explained, would Push People for use medical savings accounts and hold high-deductible insurance policies. "They'd have mare of their own money on the line, and that'd drive them to bargain vath3 you and other surgeons, right?" He gave rite a goi=jcal took. We ivied to imagine the SOBnaflo. A cardiologin tells wi elderly.wornaa that she steeds bypass =gery and has Dr. Dyke see hrerr..'lhey discuss the blockages in her heart, the operation, the risks. And now. they're suppoaed to haggle overbeprice.as if he were selling a nag in a souk's "I'll -do tbreg•vessels for - Shitty t ottsand, -.- but ifytsu take four IT it tl w in an extra night in the l.C,U2 - --that sort of'thing^ Uyke shook his Bead, "loo comer up with this stuff?" he asked. "Any plan. that relies cm the sheep to negotiate withthe wolves is doomed to failure?, Instead, McAllen and other cities like it have to be weaned away om tsar untenat�effitc u�tety- driven _ -- - cvSi��f#��aith ce,...ste�� step.�d. that - will. FUe�. z'o�- t�'.cta.xcd.11€.sluiais -tf #bey��i�agetberacr- font. -� - �,..�_. �._ ... Grand Junction -tike a0cowtable-cam orgatral=tions, in wbicii doctors coilabnrratc to increase prevention am' the quality of care, while discouraging ovextreatnaeM underftatment, and sheer prof tag. Under one approach, tuers- whether publiic or private - -would allow clinicians who formed such orgw&atioas and met Quality goals to keep half the savings they generate. Government could also shift regulatory burdens, and even malpractice liability, fm'the doctors to the organizer M other, sterner, approaches would penalize those who don't 1wrm these organizations. This will by necessity be an expeziment, VR le will need to cite in7dcpt3r makes tie hest systems sa Oee3afuh- -#he peer - review catnnrittees? recraitkig more p nary -care dormers and trues? puffing doctors oar salary ?T -and dissemiinhe wheat we leant. Congress has provided vital hording for research that compares the effectiveness of different treatments, and this should help reduce -uncertainty about wbich treatmeats are hest, But we Al so need to fund research that compares the eflecfiveness of different systmu of MT-40 reduce our uncertainty about which systems work best for communities. Theso are empirical, not ideological, questions. And we would do well to form a tractional institute for health-ewe delis '•y, bringing ; together clinicians, hospitals, insurers, employers, and &izens to assess, regulauiy, the quaiitt atirithe cost of our care, review da- strategies ft. produce good results, and AnuaU of Medicine: The Coe, Conundrum- Reporting & Essay'_$: The Now Yorker Page 11 of 11, mak6 clear recommendations for local system. Dmmti,. M''provementl and savings will take at least a decade. Bilt a, choice insist be made. Whom do we want in charge, of inanaeq the fall complexity of medical care? We can turn to ins=n (whether public or private), whicl, have proved repeatedly that they can't do it. Cr we can turn to te local medical communities, which have proved that they can. But we ha ve to choose sqme=-,-- because, in much of the country, -to or. r, is in charge. And th e're su It is the mostwaste;ful and the least sustainable health-me system in the world. Someddng even more worrisome is going on as well. In the war over the culture of medicine—the War over whether our country's anchor model will be Mayo or Mc ,klim—lhe Mayomodel is losing. In the sharpest ecaumnle downturn that our health system has faced in half-a century, many people in medicine, don't see why they should do the hard wool: of organizing themsolves in ways that reduce waste and improve quality if it means sacrificing revenue, In El Paso, the for-profit health-cam, executive told me, a. flaw leading physicians recently followed McAllen's lead and opened their own centers for surgery and iautging. V&en I was in "Tulsa a few months ago, 9, fellow-surgton explained how he had made up for lost revenue by shifting his operations fot well-imured patients to a specialty hospital that he partially owned while keeping his poor anil uninsured patients at a nGnprofit hospital in towt. )Rvor, its Grand JimcCon, Nlichael Framenko told mt, "- some of the doctors are beginning to complain about `leaving money oa fbetable."' As America, stmggles to extend health-care coverage while curbing health-carie costs, we face a decision that is more important than whether we have a public-mmmce option, more important than whether we will have agingle- pkyor system in the long run or a mboure of publfc, and private insimince, as we do now. The decision is Wbether,%,e rewardI' leaders who- ae trying.tOujId a now 4n4'OtandJW ti on ..Ifwed McAllen won?,. be an outlier. It will be our future. To jet njore of !he New York es signature mix of pal!lAcufture and the arts: NNO—ibe Now 47 lizues (one year) for only $39.96 *plus applicable sales tax First Natne Last Marne. 1 cfty state Privacy Policy 'Non-U SA -Click Here 7 Choose ip E5�1- zea - )Ours korccrs' CumPcntatan Fs* Scheruis Pramittm over Us&GRre Fa SciutEuit, July 21104 zzo 120 196 89 Ba rk 40 40 S i 9 a 9 o °u V aI � � � V � � i= x � � r i 6 Notes: Florida, Illinois, New York and Pennsylvania have distinct fee schedules for different paw of the state. For each, we created a single statewide indent by averaging the different sub -state fee schedules using employment in each sub -state region as weights. Medicare establishes distinct sub -state fee schedules in 14 states. For each, we created a single statewide inu'ex using the saute Procedure. Rhode Island has different billing codes for physical medicine than other states. Fo r Rhone Island the overall index: is based on the tee schedule levels for only surgery, radioiy, general medicine, and evaluation and management. rNk 6 COPYRIGHT @, 1006 WORKERS COMPENSATION RESEARGt{ INSTITUTE- rF .4 iTablie 1 Workors' Compensatton Fro Schadtda :cater for Five Commonly Blllyd Procttduras, July 2OD6 State Surgery: 39481 (arthroscopy, knee with menlscectomyl Radlology. 72141 (MRl, spinal canal] cervical] General Madfcina; 95904 (nerve conduction sanraryWxaad; Phi elcal Medlctnt: 971 tG (therapautle procvdirralexerclatr) Evaluatan and Maa;grltttnt: 99213 jastablIthed pallerd office vlslGtxpand*d probtemt, low evhsplarltY3 Awbama .$2,318 5758 $47 $4iS 857 iVaska $4,181 $2,339 1(219 $si $127 IArizons $2,135 $689 57£ $36 Ssg A kansa� 51,125 $981 $65 $33 $62 Callionla _ $3,294 $646 $81 $33 $48 $1.365 $531 $74 $26 $71 ul $2,886 $1,25'8 _ $12'3 $3IP $72 PPW� ads and Monroe Counties' $960 $842 $65 $32 $91 $1,576 $1061 1 $75 $34 $64 5683 $634 866 1 52,089 $ 1,192 $103 0 11MCls: RA ion 606 Chic -) $5,779 $1,417 5165 $1,490 =$32 Kentuck ;1,369 $622 $61 $1,387 $276 $64 $1,043 $802 $61 f €44 $83 Marytand I $847 $569 $$0 $6! I $31 $22 $57 $66 MassachusettC wt ":9 $577 Nilohl an Y6&+, _. i_ $7317 $75 $3t; $71 Minna SUE !,ta4 $884 368 $36 $T9 Mssissl ' I 5iN' =4 $828 $6f 444 h4antana 31,8,50 $3,274 856 $26 -. -$rq S5D Nebraska $1,7 7 $1,221 $74 $39 S7O ivavrda i� New Mexico i $2,496 $1,818 $1,615 $1,078 $76 $38 $59 $36 $59 Sol New York:?JeW York Ct 52,1413 $880 €106 $34 $49 NorthGurattna 33,3 4 ( $830 846 525 551 North Dakota $1,234 $948 $53 $28 $37 Chia i� 1„216 $727 $63 S33 iq1 aklanama $1.573 $896 $78 $30 $56 3regon ..._ $1,5115 1953 $110 $49 $95 nn Pes Ivatva: Phrlsonlphia` $1,335 $81? $51 $31 $58 570 Rhode tslanuf 52,355 $385 $61 WC South Carolina $904 $6954 $53 338 472 South Dakota x^ ,513 $1.0323 1 $55 $27 $49 'finnesaoe - -_.. $1,5 °5 $n36. ,. 8.60 534 $7s Texas 01tah E740 $932 !0134 $743 i $66 $68 $34 ' ig $33 I $,54 $61 Vermont $1.36£3 $612 1 573 Sr27 I $$ - Washfn ton $869 PER ,$40 "0 576 $55 West V 'nia I 8651 5526 $5r Wyoming $1,532 $1,128 $82 W97 $55 Range lowest to hi hes+ $619 - $4.181 $625- ;2.339 $48-$219 W22 - 582 j4 b - $127 Range (2nd bowed to 2nd hkjhest $661 - $3,779 1559-$1,015 $47 - $165 $25 - $51 $42-495 Mini: Genera: medicine Is lar$e,y composed of, neurology and neurclogical testing- Florids has distinct fee sc'redures for 3 d-a°re em parts of the state. Illinois set; different fas schaduiss for 211 mg9ans. Both Now York and F?annsyivanla (etso have distinct lee schedules for 4 different regi= of the slate. we only snow the fee schedule amount of nne region forlheae 4 slates In this iAW. . ,a,dn,., a ��ss::a �m aye e:uer*ss err ps:g� mameme - rnerarcra .. t6 rat USreti in lit:otle Istatrd 4 ^:asltarl CahlfranS�',IdrF FdbSetisiiuk.. .- . COPYRIGHT J2006 WORKERS CGMPENSATf(. N RESEARCH INSTITUTE Y+`oAYXRS` COMP],- NSATI0N MEDICAL COST GONTAa.. 41FNP' A N'AT10N.AL I"NyBZgT✓7RX A1Tc3UST 31, 2009 Table d C mpari on €Selected Fee SctteoaUle Alit��ranaes by CPT Code as of January 1, 2008 This table provides a compartson of fees fcr sefxted procedures Codes often used n workors aornpvlWart cases. Nate that a nurnber of states have dNTerpnt f s a9krvred within fire state. These siatrs have chosen one spec)ftc Wdn of all these avaSlabte and f-utnotad which fbes they are using, The GPT £odds userl here are standardized 11%rMnt procedural terrninodagy, published by the A,rrier%art Medtcal ASSOelatpol'.. In a nurnber Of cases th>' roiessi(Dna4 oam anent and the techniml com anent have been added together to qet one £es far the fisted service �GS't 39zRIS- ; "v* E= y :Car$ 9BYts4- 3t - .y� i�H;tzirlffri� C1A€'?l Irs 04x7 lS3rraO- ':,VT W21 - GPi 79Aa. CPT iZif CAT Haut t ..�Y�acialms; Clsr+or C1T79F44a�_- Fsli�+t PMtfe.' tr4 Gr"F 29tEa ku7r7t*v t N }„ �i"T) at "Chbst X4bm SeRS , Lrtrpinr "jtrt d-trT ^7 7" Ar* Ere h V' "&1U0,ff*MPy, cbar71SS� N* 401 of Sta#e Atilt C I Turtnell Two trie7� rithaat "C �l kI m7 Alabama Tzz" tg't 4 g ^ae J- =543 T 5... - -- ••_•.•••» t 9. isµ .. � 529 15Q t4 SS02 33 ArLruna I szj:Wt Kt c� — - "0 qa A, B , Columbia I , er s9 ~e57.675.7 sl 71 C3} a $a es 4a2 -� Idaho .,__..e. F2.277.150 �$.3�...0. 18.2... _. 1; es.c9 s7 L47 � � 7 is -27 c 440773 ,A ._�_- - -J - 13 rl_ St ,, _,.,.i 4ua5,�., ..: 35 ;?d7193 .. .`Q, .. ,, - -_S3i a;a _. ". _ _ . L uC I ,,_�,.u9 � .. ���''.... _ ».".,4E 9t3.il 61 -�n9 M%tr land s. T .3 t+i Cr7F 437 37^ 2g i 1 ZTT g9 3 S! S' .. _ t _ _•-- �.�� ^'.R3 .� _ _. .:: _ i I y�6V Rr � i'i'7 FA3lstss,ppi - -,� n ^: -_' �' -i zan. 'a {;7 'i .� •:z�. ryisrrin .......,.... .. SI,_ _ .i Montana Nevada 52 -JS 76 s� 057 a ! - - F9i9e ttwat) - sret rt �i,... . I .. p r.' 3 "Ltl 4, -w York 3` 52:97335 5� 1 5 5 f ; 7 -- .'� —. -- _. _ a y are a' 9 I - ..- 435.74 } si` yo _ _ x3 � I '� t )W-a oma 3 S1 52S4S r._ lY., • -.' ._ ... - r �" ao L s z� ssa 15 1 I ' � 8fl r1S si.. 13 8 St 321.73 5t a'- 7 i Z 9.t 36? 13 _ _ - 453.43 i :-Cl` 4_ ,. $3173 _ ,.532£' F ��si.nzz _ ...,� %c'7 Qltrtt- .[;Irt9lYna ,. X) I Es, r k a !",'ih rssfi ;9 .&3 C^ ! .. �" 4 Qff t�:Q ' -�..: . � -..,_ _..... __ .. _.... - . .., _ - .:.�._. -_ .._ -,_ µ F� y 8ni "SFE4 (Y0 S 2':;3!7" ;7,F '9.B" SBCR 18 35..,._5 _ SE�9C.7J YN2 27 _.�i . M. U2 A7 Imo•- . - --•,• ..c•:,� '� . 22 COPYRIGIrT 2009 woRKERs ccmPENSA-noN REsEARcIi INSTITUTE WORKERS' C0 iTP&NSATi014 MSDIC&L COST COV7AUI —I NT: A NATIONAL INVENTORY AvGtTST 31, 2009 Table 4 Comparison o Selected Fee Schedule Allowances by CPT Cole as of January 9 2008 this fai])e pTOVrde5 a comparison oflpp , for seft-c'ted procedure codes often used In workers compensation eases. Note that a number n € states have fees allowed within the stFlte. ri os� sues lave' ctlosen One spectFic MdP of all those avalfable and inotrtoted wfth flees they are usinq. The CPT codes used Here are standardizC J "csrr?nt pro�rluraf t�rminndt7f)y" f?ublixherl by the .ATr+eri zn Medfcat As $ttOrt- to a rirtMber of c asms flee rafessissnat c�m>�eTtent sold the techrtfca! component have men added to ether to et one fee. far the fisted service. " CPT M30 -. CPTS47ZZ. -_, ' 1C!T71#20 -. CPT $inTc+paaett fRltltyr How F {q - 6"ttf 4' i t3� -CJi7 3tb+ v P'iiucWU*j or ; OYT9fl40 CPT, fit4 - i urntrnr tlsuttt3Xs Nt_ : 4'Px l 7-pu rr 9cfiir, l uinbar Gex►duttititt 1Y[citi1. Q wP'rrtt r�ri�LenEla I }t p� 1— . i ;6w1N0 i/lak,x 3Eatn l0.rth Lsertnetora Trditnv! TvFV Marva iroltlrvatti:Ctirtk��t i Cxwtrr . J"u i`ederal � . 7 Yva .. ar^*) ra rn�:.. F' EC •h FP® schrrdute is s.a cn gvPR.aphlo area ar M79n *f r r I . ^2 �F a r W Y "'frr't I" 7 T 2' '1 UZI 3£ s S F7 !y—Mira _L —..., ��L asaa.Qa ssr.sa ait �ai.9z 5 r_ - �...,,. ___. t Cafdfwmlr Capfortda re9uln.n:z say Y.fsy doo't use d, it od thaaa e9ur4alarrd is 0721. and il,is is U1 Tt* fur "t vxsa. oades sm hen vary, fnraslagpatttla or dtirsytraciie manE �� 96920 (tT4,76), 969Z9 (S8525), 96940 (53522), g8445(W,'.jE), 93942 M"7). 93943 (433,08). putatiPn see t +rnFees 4or 90926 (33E22) ,90928 (S5 34), 90957 {STiS.273, 2 Flarida -Mss d "r<Fara:K M.s mxioruing }o gsvgra N of 1a bons Fees quoted here -r thane tar }a,�,ffty 9a, yrtt padffi ang Mu. a cauRrlrs. T°ha sPkforsidy it this an !s 3 Georgia and Korituaky - T%al for x- .11`Praresaionaf n.r1 teahre;r ci cPnpnnants. �'�'. A GMrgea - E—n iS in r,, Pniy 4 khrtq units ggtlanxrviNl, - - 5 rg!rtvia -Foes Tarr tt Iweenm and tf;era ara Aeiwa7r?9.drfYersstei sehedulffis. Trze ns+es l)stad are tyr Una Cai�r.9w xxpa, - 8 Msry'lantl .7hara rnaximatn ratmhursst(e elEavtPe,ees i+.tr� 3 are pae or"af!•ertiyo 5 -19-Ca for the 1#a!"n!Pr•s wen r M'satsaicpt - Raiefouremani rrrr h-P."] Qutgmtia ^t t =p'T7tr12ri fo583.57 an Ar C:p[ 12131 it i 533 E:5 Tt+ese Teea ore besst;d Pro thane pa FS {n I �81an a. !Fn N" Twit City ntahnpoill— a2a n,.,= vp .. 9 3F ion - ry y _ tY by 8ewgrap s; lacat:r7w ei sot,im. syRv. a • Foes va b location and em" ara ezamvle� of the thus eWd N am u...,.r......_..�_.. i *nn *sae. - Lne suig:Cal ilQa are sSate�' at lha genera! aulyery rate: a bPw-d uads8� wF beard a3igtDfa neum OF wrilto +'+void d@ aClaiv canaq A tngltar arwt.a,nt i.* , 1429{ Wwsid (M 1 the rare (1.Yd Ter r,� rT eF,an ra *ere rro -rnw, t 7z.2,os. eaaao +rwrrra ha>k+S7T:T6S, aryl 6d72T , ,,,ig M pit bs,1 :. s,`-P, song and oincludes tha tachat;^nt and i nafe -3s nk ZU% Of .di CT scan had . ,,I P+rrfom+ad is z hOM`tet .mosey 4 Would Mrs been paid +S 1so94 rsr MedK <rP a ©PP$.rMctt was 52'!9rAT. Phys+. ^n: Ihnrapy wss visa paid nn a sndirt9 srxltl "f1 M.,+ h wl OD, thr+:ve rikaEatfnra are besad as tha u rrcnt 43QX aTMedstara, Prexeeua{y, rr!Imtursaarrenfwas daaer7onew fay the numter oTP -t'ri. Ta (4-6 6triry vxe Rtgirsst a! 15C9F wT Medbna. Irwn 7 -12 art 1317% al rgc:t:car erxl visits 18 and barar,a ct ?ono+ wr'+!weq;cxrei.. tr. Marsh -f t7a_�, our re a:anadu ?. ct -An"d not veto to pety alt T'T ai '.7w -S PT rft r ate, bulal! pttlTe'isiana3 h+ts dian8ed itPttt eperceM w! the nekeana! irlr'.6ir+te !a a 'fwtllwnr tT ne -..soc WadFcare is sGghtPy [ear t):en y+a r linne7 aen yvei +too to eurGVCl -s). Trtern x.ere Asa a Tow otherchangssiv 9rs MF59n Marcta. 7'he TCi MFS rt angwtl g-,e refisrfsyr�r }tl, y esy yyl qn tRetsri 2v�Da tot ncfTon M•,RUAre r3awg=aptsia art o Ctr3tindex rtr Ters•row.o. T97s- Fels nary by presider 9aw9,^aphfac! lwc 2Wn arad pinm.bt %0r $TTtA The files -- - provk,'ad at:t it svrrirns earl ea aes nn.v rnffiars 'mwdEer28" wh;sgi la tt!sprefesa;wevi raP;rpPna7fi a.'a,ese tr_s and 23 cOPYRIG;�i'r 2009 woRKFRS Ci?Xtf F8it89TIC71P Rp,5Enxcx INSTITFsT$ 10 SEP-03-2009 15:38 FraweSG 335 02!2 LMG S(.3/2009 4:37 ; 03 Pjj pAGE 2/002 Liberty Norther t ,SePttmbcr 3, 2009 VIA FACSIMILE.*. 866-335-0242 Bin-It Guardian Flight Inc PO Box 71410 Fairbanks, AK 99707 Pase!2/a Fax server K) lim 243U9 AK M34-3649 T& 90?.3w 20A RE-: ChLim Dear Sim, f. As you know., via are the insurance company handling � reported June 27, Z009 injury and Workers Compensatio'n-'Eum, We are it) receipt of- your billinq,46r transportation services Your Company rendered June 28, 2009 tbta(,►ng $157,255.00, We would aopr-aclate yo r' time and attention to the following proposal and your ability to work with us Xa reduction of these fees and charges. - At this time wXwould propose paying the amount of $76,627-50 which is 50% of the total ag6unt charged. If. you 're able to accept this PrOPOSBI and Waive SO% of your billing, please contact at',once for inarnediate payment. We will be able to proms Payment within n ho rs of your contact. W �ae�za- nm=cc Analyst, Agra q Ma is Wmher ar uiwny WrLW Groop 651670900300000 'LL LIBERTY NOtTHWEST Po Sax 243fi4s HFALTH lt6UPANCE CLAIM FORM I C, ANCHORAGE m 99524 k44h VA4&i o frig 7051 Tox FEW llUVT air "P.l NOV-20-ZG09(FRI) 12:09 P. 002/002 16!24 PAW MAP%" MaAa low =MOW sad v4WMft �Wwm-,.w a 't!•�=4ktm!, Cklir FOX PECE7VED 11 -20 -' 09 12:10 FROM- TO- ANCR DLWD W/C FRAUD P002/002