Water Supply Planning

for the City Council February 13, 2014

Water Supply Planning

• Background information• Water Master Plan• Water Demand Projections

– Both Annual and Peak Day

• State Water Planning Process• Prop 6 and the SWIFT

Brazos County

Robertson County

Where Our Water Comes From

BV Groundwater Conservation District

• Regulates and Permits all of our Water Wells

– 9 wells; 7 in Simsboro aquifer provide 98% of water supply

– District-wide, Simsboro is over permitted

– Unclear what will happen when actual pumping reaches maximum allowable – will be many years from now.

• Recent TX Supreme Court decisions make regulation of groundwater very uncertain.

• Any pumping restrictions might be seen as a “Regulatory Taking”

TCEQ Controls Service Areas

• Certificate of Public Convenience & Necessity (CCN) define non-competitive utility service areas– CS Water CCN is fully surrounded – not likely to grow

Water Master Plan – Aug 2010

• Conclusions in 2010• Water Supply is most likely adequate to “Build-Out”• Short-term Capital work is required for TCEQ Compliance• Long-term plan for future major CIP projects for Growth and Re-hab

• Future Considerations – Must closely track:• Density of development and water usage (peak day and annual)• Availability of water permitted supply• State Legislative Initiatives and Judicial Decisions

• Alternate Water Sources– Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR)– Direct Potable Re-Use (DPR)– Desalination– Brazos River Authority System Operations Permit

• Master Plan Update in 2014– Engineering Firms SOQ packages are under review now

Annual Permitted vs. Demand

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

22,000

24,000

CS Water Annual Demand - Jan 2014

Year

Ac

re-F

ee

t p

er

Ye

ar

- Assumes 2.5% Growth Rate

Total Permits

Estimated Demand

Build-out of Water CCN

Peak Day Demand vs. Capacity

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 204016

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

CS Peak-Day Water Demand - Jan 2014

w/Cons & Reuse

Peak Day

Prod'n Capacity

Year

MG

D

Production Capacity

- Assumes 2.5% Growth Rate

Status Quo Demand

w/ Cons'n & Reuse

Well 9

Well 10

Cooling Towers

Well 8

State Water Planning Process• State broken into 16 Regional Water Planning Groups

• College Station is in Brazos Region G, meets in Waco• Stretches from Sweetwater to Navasota, follows Brazos River• Each Region evaluates Water Needs, Supplies, and Deficits• Regional plan identifies Water Supply strategies for State Plan

• The 2011 Brazos G Regional Water Plan• Includes TAMU in College Station’s numbers, and ignores CCN boundaries• Skews results in 2011 Plan (TAMU will be separate in the 2016 Plan)• Recommends the following to meet the projected shortage:

• Conservation: $650,000 by 2040• Wastewater Reuse: $4.6 million by 2040• Additional Simsboro Aquifer Development: $28 million for all Brazos County• BRA System Operation (for Surface Water): $24 million for treatment plant

• Texas Water Development Board (TWDB)• Assembles the 16 Regional Plans into the State Water Plan• Summarizes overall data and Water Supply strategies• 2012 SWP identifies water needs of Brazos County area – not city specific

Proposition 6 and the SWIFT

• House Bill 4 set up Proposition 6• Voters approved overwhelmingly• Completely changed Board composition at TWDB (3 full-time now)• Transfers $2 billion RDF to create the SWIFT fund• SWIFT is collateral to sell bonds, then use bond revenue for low-interest loans

• 10% set aside for rural water conservation projects• 20% set aside for water conservation and reuse projects

• Sets up process to prioritize water projects

• Regional Water Planning Groups must prioritize projects• State Water Planning process was NOT set up for this• “Projects” in SWP are often not separate, unique projects• Draft Priority lists are due 1 June 2014• Final Priority lists are due 1 September 2014• Stakeholder Committee is establishing standards for prioritization of projects• Criteria include: Decade of Need; Feasibility; Viability; Sustainability; and Cost

Effectiveness

Summary

• Permitted Water Supply adequate for future– Keep eye on Development, Law, and BVGCD

• Will update Water Master Plan this year• Will be engaged in Regional Water Planning• Will be engaged in prioritization of projects• Will pursue SWIFT loans if advantageous