Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Water Resources Advisory Committee - 10/23/2003 / r 1 MINUTES Water Resources Advisory Committee 11:30 a.m. — October 23, 2003 Water Department Conference Room Members present: Capt. Paula Hinger, Herman R. Johnson, Bob Kent, Dr. Karen G. Rue, Carola Serrato, and Dr. Jane Stanford. Members absent: Lena Coleman, Jon Kiggans, and Kimberly Stockseth Staff Present: Danny Ybarra, Assistant Water Director Yolanda R. Marruffo, Public Education and Marketing Coordinator Rosie Cortez, Recording Secretary Chairperson Carola Serrato called meeting to order at 11:55 a.m. A quorum was present. Approval of August 14, 2003 Minutes John Kent stated that he was present at the last meeting and asked that the minutes show the correction. Capt. Hinger made a motion to approve the minutes with the correction. The motion was seconded by Herman Johnson and approved unanimously. Update of Information on City of Corpus Christi Padre Island Desalination Project Ms. Serrato stated that she was asked to make a brief presentation to the City Council with regard to the Committee's recommendations and concerns on the Padre Island Desalination Feasibility and Siting Project. The letter approved by the Committee identifying the recommendations, suggestions and concerns was read of the City Council (attachment to the minutes). She stated that she was asked whether the Committee was anti-growth. Council Member Scott asked how the Committee had come to their conclusions. She informed Mr. Scott that the Committee was concerned about future resources and keeping the cost affordable. Further, she informed the Council that high rates could impact economic growth. She explained to the Council that the project was not a response to the public's concern to build a desalination plant with a seemingly endless supply from the bay and that the public should be aware of the matter. The Mayor indicated that he was tired of not being able to tell the public in no uncertain terms that a study had been conducted and that it was not economically feasible to treat seawater. He stated that until this was done, the City was never going to put this issue to rest. Following that statement, they voted to authorize an additional $3.5 million to identify the most feasible method of building a desalination plant utilizing seawater or brackish water. The Mayor reported that the consultant would provide periodic reports if the project does not appear feasible. If that is determined the.Mayor reported that they would not continue the project any further. It was reiterated that the most expensive part of the study would be to conduct test holes to determine the feasibility of deep well injection, identifying the feasibility of aquifer storage and recovery and studying the Chicot Aquifer to determine the volume for producing available brackish water. She stated that the test holes are very SCANNED expensive. Mr. Kent stated that the City is going to spend nearly $5 million to upgrade a $22 million project in order to determine if it is economically feasible to go forward. Mr. Ybarra stated that the $5 million was in addition to the $23 million. He stated that there was some concern with the amount of money being spent on consultants to review the feasibility of the plant. He reported that the staff assured the City Council that there was a point where they could stop and not continue. He stated that the milestones were set in the contract to allow the City from preceding any further in the project. Dr. Rue asked if there was a point in which the City would not need a pipeline. Mr. Ybarra stated that it would not be money, but whether the pipeline was needed or not. Mr. Kent asked if the City knew how much it would cost to build a pipeline. Mr. Ybarra stated that it would cost between $11-$14 million to build a pipeline. The City's Master Plan identifies a pipeline to reach Padre Island. Dr. Stanford asked about the timeframe to build a pipeline to Padre Island. Mr. Ybarra stated if the project had a high priority, it could be completed within 5 to 7 years. Mr. Kent asked who would make the decision to pursue the pipeline project ($14 million) or the Island Desalination Project ($23 million). Mr. Ybarra stated that the Council would make that decision. Mr. Kent stated that $28 million was a lot to put into a plant. Mr. Kent stated that if the consultant came back with those two figures, and the City Council supported the construction of the pipeline at $14 million, then what was the purpose of spending the money. Mr. Ybarra reiterated that for years citizens of the community have asked the City to pursue desalination. The study would provide those answers to the City Council. Dr. Rue asked for an explanation on the advantage of building a desalination plant. Ms. Serrato stated that for years citizens of the community have asked the City to purse desalination. Ms. Serrato stated that if you listened to the consultant, they are talking about brackish water. The Chicot Aquifer is a different project from the State- sponsored desalination project. The State sponsored desalination project addresses larger volumes of water and possibly takes care of larger segment of the community than just the Islands. Ms. Serrato stated that the Chicot Aquifer is not going to produce a limitless supply of water, as most people may believe. You also need to compare the life of the facility to9 the life and operational costs of a pipeline. Hopefully, a pipeline would not be breaking on a frequent basis; but a desalination plant requires major operating costs. Dr. Stanford stated that she had read about the Governor's desalination project and that it seemed to be the wave of the future. Mr. Ybarra stated that the $500,000 grant from the Texas Water Development Board was for a study. He stated that they are looking at the Barney Davis plant. Dr. Stanford asked if these studies should be in conjunction with each other to avoid duplication. Mr. Ybarra stated that the City cited in its application to the Texas Water Development Board that it would utilize information gathered from the other study. Dr. Stanford asked how we could best make use of the information. Mr. Kent stated that the costs of desalinated water was $4.50 per gallon, so we know that constructing the pipeline would be cheaper than desalination. Mr. 2 Ybarra stated that the Mayor wants to be able to answer those questions about desalination with factual information. Mr. Johnson asked how much of the $23 million is for construction verses operations. Mr. Ybarra stated that the money would be for the cost of a plant and its construction, but not for operating costs. Dr. Stanford asked about the test wells. Mr. Ybarra stated that the consultants were conducting tests on the wells, aquifers, and storage areas. Dr. Stanford asked if there would be storage problems once the water was drawn from the aquifer. Capt. Hinger stated they had just replaced pipes and that they had no problem when they had a water line break at the Naval Air Station. Mr. Kent asked when the next milestone would be taken to the City Council. Mr. Ybarra stated that it would likely occur in March 2004; the City would make some decisions on what they would present to the City Council. He stated that the consultant was conducting three test wells. One of them would be monitoring a well and would be completed in December 2003. Mr. Ybarra stated that there would be different sites on the Island. Capt. Hinger asked if they would be doing core samples. Mr. Ybarra stated that they were. Ms. Serrato asked if the Committee could review the status of the previous task and if City staff would take all of them, along with the Committee's interest to provide a broader assessment of water supply options, including pipeline, and pipeline/ASR. Ms. Serrato stated that it showed the task master plan update has been completed and the consultant had made progress. Mr. Ybarra stated that we already have a study going on with Carrollo Engineering. They had begun accumulating information to get basic information including elevation levels from Calallen to Padre Island. The projects and improvements will identify water demand then the figures would be applied. Dr. Stanford asked why we had waited so long to get this study completed. Mr. Ybarra stated that a study was completed in 1997; however, the growth in the Southside distribution along with industrial use. The computer software and database was outdated in that it was difficult to reconfigure new additions in the distribution system. Mr. Ybarra reminded the Committee that City Council agendas are posted on the City web site at www.cctexas.com. City of Austin Wastewater Reuse and Impact on the City's Water Rights Purchased from Garwood Irrigation Company Mr. Ybarra stated that the Lower Colorado River Authority in Austin had submitted a request to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to take water back upstream. He stated that if the TCEQ approved the request, they would set a dangerous precedence. Ms. Marruffo stated that it was very unlikely that anything would happen. Mr. Ybarra stated in addition to Corpus Christi's interest in the matter, the Lavaca Navidad River Authority (LNRA) is also likely to become involved. Ms. Serrato asked if the City was looking for other interested parties to help oppose their action. Mr. Ybarra stated that Tim Brown, the City's legal representative, was working on the issue. Ms. Serrato stated that if this item continues to be an issue and the committee can support the Council, the Committee would be willing to do so. Update on the Governor's Desalination Project and the Texas Water Development 3 Board $500,000 Grant Mr. Ybarra reported that the City Council would consider an agenda item to accept the grant from the Texas Water Development Board the following week. Mr. Ybarra stated that the City is still focused on the Barney Davis Plant site and that the consultant, Turner, Collier& Braden would be helping the City on this item. Ms. Serrato made a request that staff keep the Committee posted on developments on this item. Dr. Stanford made a recommendation that the study have an ongoing communication/relationship to share so that there is no duplicity of information. Mr. Ybarra stated that the City will own the information and that there is no proprietary ownership of the information. New or Old Business Yolanda Marruffo reported that Senate Bill 1094 as approved by the State Legislature created a Water Conservation Implementation Task Force consisting of 32 members. The task force is charged with evaluating water conservation matters in the state, specifically with development of best management practices for water conservation plans. Representatives were selected from the following agencies. (1)Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; (2) Department of Agriculture; (3) Parks and Wildlife Department; (4) State Soil and Water Conservation Board; (5) Texas Water Development Board; (6) regional water planning groups; (7) federal agencies; (8) municipalities; (9) groundwater conservation districts; (10) river authorities; (11) environmental groups; (12) irrigation districts; (13) industries; (14) institutional water users; (15) professional organizations focused on water conservation;and (16) higher education. The Task Force is responsible for (1) identifying, evaluating, and selecting best management practices for municipal, industrial, and agricultural water uses and evaluating the costs and benefits for the selected best management practices; (2) evaluating the implementation of water conservation strategies recommended in regional and state water plans; (3) considering the need to establish and maintain a statewide public awareness program for water conservation; (4) evaluating the proper role, if any, for state funding of incentive programs that may facilitate the implementation of best management practices and water conservation strategies; (5) advising the Texas Water Development Board and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on standardized methodology for reporting and using per capita water use data; establishing per capita water use targets and goals, accounting for such local effects as climate and demographics; and other possible uses as appropriate; and (6) evaluating the appropriate state oversight and support of any conservation initiatives adopted by the legislature. 4 Ms. Serrato stated that the Regional Planning Committee submitted 5 names for consideration to serve on the Task Force. Of those names, Ray Carter was selected to serve. The Task Force must submit a final report to the TCEQ by November 1, 2004. Adjourn The next Committee meeting was set for January 15, 2004. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 5