SJRA AND THE CATAHOULANovember 7, 2011

Table of Contents• SJRA GRP Plan (2 slides)• What is known or needs to be known about the Catahoula?

(12 slides)• How are questions about the Catahoula answered? (11

slides)• How is the feasibility of Catahoula water different from the

use of brackish water in other areas of the state? (4 slides)• How is the feasibility of Catahoula water different between an

individual water system operator and a regional water system operator? (2 slides)

• Conclusions (4 slides)• Questions?

SJRA GRP Plan• Objective

• Develop and implement the most cost-effective regional strategy to reliably provide quality drinking water in meeting regulatory compliance for all GRP Participants while also developing additional water supplies to supplement and extend existing surface water all in a manner which appropriately and professionally manages risks and protects the health and welfare of all consumers.

• Results • LSGCD approval of largest Joint GRP.• Executed contracts with 84 LVGUs representing more that 80% by

volume of demand of Montgomery County.• Established active/engaged GRP Review Committee to review all

activities.• Design, land acquisition, permitting underway.

SJRA GRP Plan• Use of existing known, sustainable, renewable and reliable

surface water supply in Phase 1 • Meet LSGCD regulatory requirements• Phase 1 Surface Water Facilities - $1.41/1000 gallons

• Raw water intake and pump station• Water treatment plant (30 mgd) with robust process• Finished water storage

• Phase 1 Delivery System - $1.04/1000 gallons• Finished water pump station• Extensive transmission (57 miles) and delivery network (18 plants)

• Thoroughly evaluate alternative strategies for future use• Brackish groundwater (Catahoula Aquifer)• Wastewater reuse• Additional surface water • Conservation• Drought Management

What is known or needs to be known about the Catahoula?

TWDB Report on Brackish Groundwater• “..almost 2.7 billion acre-feet of brackish groundwater that may be

available for use in the state.”• Region H

• TDS - 1000 to 3000 mg/L = 60,814,000 acre-feet• TDS – 3000 to 10,000 mg/L = 25,018,000 acre-feet• Productivity “High”• Production Costs “Low to Moderate”

• “To be usable, brackish groundwater needs to be treated (desalinated).” Without treatment, brackish water can cause scaling and corrosion problems in water wells and piping..”

• “Conclusions ..There are, however difficulties associated with implementing such projects that can be particularly challenging for smaller communities. Chief among them are managing the desalination waste and predicting the long-term performance of brackish groundwater aquifers.”

Report 365: Aquifers on the Gulf Coast of Texas, Texas Water Development Board (February 2006)

Location• Proximity to supply, treatment, storage, disposal,

distribution and demand• Impacts from above and

below ground interferences• Impacts to environmentally

sensitive areas• Community impact

necessity and mitigation

Conventional Water Plant

Well(Evangeline or Jasper)

Storage Booster Pump

Distribution System

Depth• Impacts cost of drilling and energy to produce water• Contributes to quality and temperature of water

$ TXLIHU &KLFRW

$ SSUR[ LP DWH/ DQG6XUIDFH

$

0 4 8 12 16 MILES

' DWXP LV6HD/ HYHO

400 0

-400 -800 -1200 -1600 -2000 -2400 -2800 -3200 -3600 -4000 -4400 -4800 -5200 -5600 -6000

(feet) 400 0

-400 -800

-1200 -1600 -2000 -2400 -2800 -3200 -3600 -4000 -4400 -4800 -5200 -5600 -6000

(feet)

Quantity• Unknown long-term consequences• Impacted by pumpage over prolonged period of time• Impacted by ability of aquifer to recharge/replenish• Impacted by number and location of adjacent wells

Quality• Unknown long-term consequences• Impacted by pumpage over prolonged period of time• Impacted by contaminants in sands• May degrade over time• Required to meet Federal and State requirements

• Inorganics (arsenic, barium, etc.)• Organics• Radionuclides (Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Radium 226, Radium

228, Uranium, Radon 222, etc.)• Secondary Constituents (aluminum, chlorides, iron, manganese,

Total Dissolved Solids, taste, odor, etc.)

• Possible risks to consumers (high blood

pressure, health conditions)• Requires effective treatment

Disposal of Wastes• Deep well injection• Surface water disposal• Hauling to disposal facility• Environmental, permitting, and cost issues

Temperature• Potentially > 110OF• Preferable by customers = 68OF• Require cooling towers

for reduction to ambient

temperature• Additional cooling may

be required

Reliability• Unknown long-term• Adversely affected by extensive pumpage• Dependent on no deterioration of water quality• Dependent on no deterioration of water quantity• Impacted by interconnectivity of sand layers

Regulatory - LSGCD• Protect sustainability of Evangeline and Jasper Aquifers• Currently only 30% reduction by January 1, 2016• Future increased reduction requirement may impact

feasibility• Potential restrictions on water withdrawals, well spacing• Possible pumpage fees on withdrawal • State law may force regulation if pumpage impacts

neighboring counties

Costs• Impacted significantly by facility &

infrastructure requirements• Production wells (depth drives pumps/motors, power usage)• Well collection lines (geographical dispersion drives needs)• Water treatment (contaminants and drinking water standards drive

process)• Storage (required if blending other water supplies)• Cooling systems (temperature of groundwater drives needs)• Waste disposal (type of waste, environmental constraints and

accessibility of disposal sites drives methods)• Transmission/distribution lines (geographical

location of end users drives needs)

Funding/Financial Stability• Impacted by unproven sources of water supply• Impacted by unknown long-term reliability• Impacted by failed or underutilized system that requires

replacement or supplement by proven water source

How are the questions concerning Catahoula water answered?

Research

“Much of the engineering feasibility is dependent on the quality, quantity and reliability of groundwater available for project implementation. Thus the collection, review, and preliminary analysis of existing data are critical.”

“One of the most important aspects of planning a brackish groundwater desalination facility is that of accurately characterizing the groundwater source to be used….Even so, the location, quantity and quality of the brackish groundwater resources in Texas vary widely and must be evaluated individually.”

Guidance Manual for Brackish Groundwater Desalination in Texas, (TWDB, April 2008)

Phased Approach

“Due to limited availability of data on brackish groundwater in Texas, a phased approach to evaluating the feasibility of brackish groundwater development provides the greatest chance of ultimate success. This process allows the project to move forward incrementally so that potential risks and fatal flaws can be identified at the earliest possible time and with minimal amount of capital investment. As new information is developed, the scope of additional work can be tailored to address project needs and minimize risk.”

Guidance Manual for Brackish Groundwater Desalination in Texas, (TWDB, April 2008)

Commitment to Public Health & Welfare

“Engineers shall be entrusted to protect the health, safety, property, and welfare of the public in the practice of their profession.”

“Engineers shall not perform any engineering function which, when measured by generally accepted engineering standards or procedures, is reasonably likely to result in the endangerment of lives, health, safety, property, or welfare of the public.”

Texas Engineering Practice Act and Rules Concerning The Practice of Engineering and Professional Engineering Licensure, Texas Board of Professional Engineers, September 13, 2011

SJRA GRP Contract• Allows Participants to explore for alternative water

supplies• No pumpage fees on alternative water supplies• No restrictions on alternative water supplies• If applicable, GRP Participant must take planned amount

of surface water

SJRA GRP Participation• City of Willis

• Two wells in Catahoula• Awaiting Texas Water Development Board Approval

• Montgomery County UD 2• One well in Catahoula• On hold – waiting on results of other Catahoula projects

Industrial Water Use Prospect• Feasibility Study due December 2011• Potential demonstration well – Spring 2012• Interim Progress

• Constituents of Concern from area pilot/test data (April Sound)• Aluminum – 0.546 to 3.360 mg/L – NDWSS recommends 0.05 to 0.20 mg/L• Chlorides – range of 90 to 330 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 250 mg/L &

Texas Secondary Standard is 300 mg/L (max)• Corrosivity – Langelier Index - 0.30 to – 0.70 – Non-corrosive >0

Ryzner Index ranges from 18.5 to 19.5 – Non-corrosive between 5.0 and 7.0• Iron – 0.434 to 2.10 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 0.3 mg/L• Manganese – 0.040 to 0.076 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 0.05 mg/L• Total Dissolved Solids – 584 to 1000 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 500

mg/L, Texas secondary standard limit is 1000 mg/l• Radionuclides – Radium 226 and 228 – 1.3 to 4.3 pCi/L – Primary Drinking

Water Standard limit is 5 pCi/L

Industrial Water Use Prospect• Interim Progress

• Constituents of Concern from area pilot/test data (Bentwater)• Aluminum – 0.404 to 0.704 mg/L – NDWSS recommends 0.05 to 0.20 mg/L• Corrosivity – Langelier Index - 0.34 to – 0.73 – Non-corrosive >0

Ryzner Index ranges from 18.5 to 19.5 – Non-corrosive between 5.0 and 7.0• Iron – 0.355 to o.383 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 0.3 mg/L• Total Dissolved Solids – 364 to 504 mg/L – EPA recommends limit of 500 mg/L,

Texas secondary standard limit is 1000 mg/l

• Facilities – if Drinking Water Quality is desired• Production wells from Catahoula Sandstone• Conventional treatment• Reverse Osmosis• Cooling towers• Deep well disposal of RO waste stream

Facilities Meeting Drinking Water Standards• Conventional Treatment

• Removal of aluminum, barium, chlorides, iron, manganese and turbidity to reduce membrane fouling

• Reverse Osmosis• Remove high levels of sodium, chlorides and total dissolved solids• 50% of plant throughput

Facilities Meeting Drinking Water Standards

• Capital Cost $83,479,000

• Annual O & M Cost $ 9,236,000

• Annualized Capital Cost $1.99/1000 gallons• Annualized O & M Cost $2.53/1000 gallons• Total Annualized Cost $4.52/1000 gallons

Woodlands Water Well 39

Woodlands Water Well 39• Production well from Jasper Aquifer

• Drill pilot test well below Jasper Aquifer into Catahoula• Additional 2200 feet• Pump water for 8 hours and obtain water samples• Store pumped water• Dispose of pumped brackish water• Total Additional Cost = $495,000

• Analyze laboratory results

How is the feasibility of Catahoula water different from the use of brackish

water in other areas of the state?

San Antonio Water System• Existing, reliable, sustainable, and renewable surface

water supply not available• Capacity = 10.5 mgd• Production wells = 1000 feet deep• Salinity = 1500 ppm TDS• Monitoring wells• Well collection system• Treatment facility• Onsite waste injection well• Existing distribution• Capital cost = $121,000,000• Unit cost = $4.77/1000 gallons

City of El Paso• Existing, reliable, sustainable, and renewable surface

water supply not available• Capacity = 27.5 mgd• Rehab/Repair 17 existing production wells• 17 new production wells screened at 400 to 900 feet deep• Salinity = 900 to 1800 ppm TDS• 15.5 mgd treatment facility• Off site waste injection wells• Pipelines (<0.25 mile transmission) • Capital cost = $93,000,000• Unit cost = $2.56/1000 gallons

Aqua Water Supply• Capacity = 2 mgd• Salinity = 1400 ppm TDS• Treatment facility• Injection well or surface disposal• Capital cost = $14,000,000• Unit cost = $3.08/1000 gallon deep well injection or

$2.59/1000 for surface discharge

Region H – MUD 8 & 9 Brackish Plan• Capacity = 2.0 mgd• Salinity = 1,000 to 5,000 mg/L• Depth of well = 1700 to 2800 feet• Treatment facility• Total capital cost = $12,000,000• Unit Cost = $2.66/1000 gallons

Region H Water Management Strategy Analysis, Technical Memorandum (TWDB, December 14, 2009)

SummaryProject / Description Capacity Water Depth Salinity Disposal

MethodTreatment Cost (per 1000 gal)

Delivery Cost (per 1000 gal)

Total Cost (per 1000

gal)

San Antonio Water System – brackish desalination study

10.5 MGD

1000 feet 1500 ppm Deep well injection

$4.10 $0.67; Integration to existing distribution

$4.77

El Paso Water Utility – brackish desalination project; project blends fresh water with desalinated water

27.5 MGD

400 to 900 feet

900 to 1800 ppm

Deep well injection

$2.56 Assuming no cost of integration to

existing distribution

system

$2.56

Aqua WSC, Bastrop – brackish desalination study

2 MGD   1400 ppm Deep well injection

$3.08 Assuming no cost of integration to

existing distribution

system

$3.08

Montgomery Co MUD 8&9 – Region H Technical Memo summarizing 2009 brackish desalination study

2 MGD 1700 to 2800 feet

(estimated)

1000 to 5000 ppm (estimated)

Not stated in Tech Memo

$2.66 Assuming no cost of integration to

existing distribution

system

$2.66

SJRA preliminary cost analysis for brackish desalination project based on recent Catahoula samples

10 MGD 3000 feet 1000 ppm Deep well injection

$4.52 $1.00; Assume similar to GRP

distribution

$5.52  

SJRA Phase 1 GRP Project (surface water)

30 MGD N/A N/A N/A $1.41 $1.04 $2.45

How is the feasibility of Catahoula water different between an individual water system operator and a regional

water system operator?

Risk – Individual System• Possible unacceptable, unaffordable, unreliable water

supply contained locally• Affect on public health and welfare• Moderate investment• Limited with no well collection system required for single

site• Limited with use of existing distribution system or no

distribution system

Risk – Regional System• Possible unacceptable, unaffordable, unreliable water

supply contained locally • Affect on public health and welfare• Large investment• Extensive network for water well collection• Extensive network for transmission and distribution

Conclusions

SJRA has done its homework!

SJRA GRP Plan• Use of existing known, sustainable, renewable and reliable

surface water supply in Phase 1 • Meet LSGCD regulatory requirements• Phase 1 Surface Water Facilities - $1.41/1000 gallons

• Raw water intake and pump station• Water treatment plant (30 mgd) with robust process• Finished water storage

• Phase 1 Delivery System - $1.04/1000 gallons• Finished water pump station• Extensive transmission (57 miles) and delivery network (18 plants)

• Thoroughly evaluate alternative strategies for future use• Brackish groundwater (Catahoula Aquifer)• Wastewater reuse• Additional surface water • Conservation• Drought Management

Timeline

2012

2016

2013

2015

2014

2017

2018

2021

2020

2019

2023

2022

2024

2025

2027

2026

2028

2029

2030

Phase 1 GRP

Deliver Surface Water

Luce Bayou

In Service

Phase 2 In ServiceWith No

AlternativeWater

Phase 2 Delayed

WithAlternative

Water

Research, Select & Implement Alternative Water

Strategies

Phase 1 Const.Begins

SJRA GRP Plan

The most cost-effective regional strategy to reliably provide quality drinking water in meeting regulatory

compliance for all GRP Participants while also developing additional water supplies to supplement and

extend existing surface water all in a manner which appropriately and professionally manages risks and

protects the health and welfare of all consumers.

Questions?