Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Water Resources Advisory Committee - 04/24/2003 4:02.13 74 MINUTES JUS NO3 Water Resources Advisory Committee RECEIVED iv 11:30 a.m. -April 24, 2003 N CIS SECIi i!',ItY'S Water Department Conference Room OFFICE A) • Members present included: Lena Coleman, Capt. Paula Hinger, Herman R. Johnson, Jon Kiggans, Carola Serrato, Dr. Jane Stanford, and Kimberly Stockseth. Members absent included John Kent and Dr. Karen G. Rue. Staff Present: Eduardo Garana, Water Director Saundra K. Thaxton, Finance & Resource Management Superintendent Yolanda R. Marruffo, Public Education and Marketing Coordinator Rosie Cortez, Recording Secretary Chairperson Carola Serrato called meeting to order at 11:50 a.m. A quorum was present. Approval of January 23, 2003 Committee Minutes Capt. Hinger made a motion to approve the minutes with certain corrections/revisions. The motion was seconded by Kimberly Stockseth and approved unanimously. Review of Water Reservoir Supply Ed Garana stated that the combined reservoir system capacity was at approximately 99.9%. He stated that Lake Texana was down from 44 feet to 43.5 feet. Mrs. Serrato stated that the report she received from the Drought Council (Texas) showed that in addition to filled reservoirs, the moisture in the soil was a little higher than most farmers would like it to be. Presentation on Padre Island Desalination Plant Feasibility Analysis and Siting Plan Mr. Garana stated that this was the presentation that was made to the Council on Tuesday, April 22. He stated that the engineering firm is Carollo Engineers with the following partners: ASR, Smith, Russo & Co., Olivarri & Associates (public outreach), Shiner Mosely &Associates (environmental assessment). Project Objectives • Improve reliability of water supplies to Padre and Mustang Islands • Provide additional capacity to the Islands • Provide cost-effective solutions • Meet City's schedule for improvements Agenda • Review of status on task-by-task basis • Discussion of project components - • Identify potential issues • Work remaining scANNED• Review project schedule • Questions 1 t 1 v 4 Tasks • Hydrogeology and Source Water Options • Reverse Osmosis (RO) Treatability • By-Product Disposal • Regulatory and Permitting Assessment • By-Product Disposal • Regulatory and Permitting Assessment • Storage as a System Optimizer • Facilities Siting • Transmission System Assessment • Public Involvement • Project Funding and Delivery Hydrology & Source Water Options • Evaluated source water qualities and quantities -Chicot Aquifer (40 - 1,200 ft) • Shallow brackish water aquifer -Evangeline Aquifer (1,200 - 3,400 ft) • Deeper, more saline aquifer with elevated temperature -Gulf of Mexico • Highest salinity • All 3 sources can sustain RO production rates up to 5 MGD Mr. Garana stated that there is another area, but it is fairly deep that the City is not even looking at it. All of these have the capacity rate to produce up to 5 million gallons per day (MGD). Groundwater Extraction Alternatives • Identified preliminary well field options to provide adequate supply and limit subsidence Conventional Vertical Wells Used for Evangeline Aquifer Horizontal Wells More economical than vertical wells for Chicot Aquifer Mr. Garana stated that in all likelihood, the City would not be using conventional wells, which could result in possible subsidence on the island. The consultants and staff are leaning towards the use of horizontal wells. It adds a lot of dollars when you put in a conventional well. Seawater Intake Alternatives • Beach Wells -Conventional shallow vertical wells -HDD or Collector-type wells • Direct Intake He stated that you could also drill several wells out of one location. 2 He stated that you could also drill several wells out of one location. Mrs. Serrato questioned Mr. Garana's reference on the impact only to the bay bottom and _- the prior experience of the consultants. Mr. Garana stated that is why the City selected Carollo Engineers because of the strength of Carollo and their consultants. RO Treatable and Process Alternatives • With the available data, RO will treat all 3 sources • Chicot Aquifer: -Highest recovery with smallest facility footprint • Evangeline Aquifer: -Lower recovery and larger facility footprint -Requires cooling pretreatment • Gulf Seawater: -Largest facility but similar cost and recovery to Evangeline -Requires antimicrobial pretreatment Mr. Garana stated that the Evangeline Aquifer and Gulf Seawater alternatives were almost similar in cost or production even though they have different requirements. Currently, the focus is on the Chicot Aquifer as a source. By-Product Disposal Alternatives • A challenging aspect of the project • Preferred Methods: -Ocean Outfall (2-3 miles offshore) -Deep Well Injection (3,500 to more than 5,000 ft deep) • Other Considered Methods: -Thermal Distillation -Freeze Concentration -Evaporation Ponds • Issues -Working with local experts to avoid impacts on wildlife and wetlands -Permitting leadtime (13-15 mo.) Mr. Garana stated that the environmental impact must be addressed and that the lead-time for a permit is fairly lengthy. At this time, deep well injection is the type of process being considered for disposing of the by-product. It is an accepted and well-used method of disposal. Dr. Stanford asked what were the volume limitations. Mr. Garana stated that the limit was "infinite" and that wells would be drilled to store the amount of by-product we are producing. Regulatory & Permitting Assessment • Identified and met with key regulatory agencies and environmental experts _ • A properly designed, constructed, and operated facility can be permitted. ( • Assembled regulatory packet with all necessary permit applications -- • Permitting schedule: 13-15 months probable 3 • • Permitting process is dependent on site location and final design of system components Mr. Garana stated that the consultants have met with key regulatory and environmental experts. Storage as a System Optimizer • Store treated water during times of low demand, generating a "bubble" within existing aquifer • Appears locally feasible based on hydrogeologic evaluation and has been used successfully elsewhere • Could reduce initial design capacity of RO facilities by half, and still meet peak demands • Next Steps: -Develop test holes to define local hydrogeology -Construction and testing of one or more ASR wells -Development of buffer zone within first well Mr. Garana stated that originally a desalination stand-alone project was the plan; but it is very expensive. He stated that there were concerns about addressing the most expensive part of the project. With ASR, an underground storage tank or a fresh water aquifer is created. Drinking water is injected to create a bubble. The bubble allows us to decrease the amount of water pumped. The anticipated ASR storage is 500 million gallons. He stated that there were other issues. Dr. Stanford asked if the water would have to be retreated. Mr. Garana responded that the water would have to be retreated with disinfectants. Mr. Garana stated that a ground water utility district could be created and the City could adopt ordinances to protect the water. Mr. Garana stated that according to our British consultant, an ASR appeared locally feasible. Mrs. Serrato asked if it would use Chicot supplies on the ASR. Mr. Garana stated water from the O.N. Stevens Water Plant would be used. Mr. Garana stated that test holes needed to be drilled to collect first-hand data. If ASR is a viable project, the City could actually start with an ASR project and start bringing dredged water. He stated that ASR is not dependent on the RO process. He stated that ASR could start immediately and also be working on the RO process. Mrs. Serrato asked if the City planned to move forward in getting a new line permitted anyway. Mr. Garana stated that the City should go ahead and get a line permitted within permit regulations. Mrs. Coleman asked if this had been done in any other areas. Mr. Garana stated that it has been done. He stated that there was one in El Paso and in Florida, New Jersey, California and stated that New Jersey is closer to our area's characteristics. Dr. Stanford asked if Tampa Bay had an ASR. Mr. Garana stated that Tampa Bay did not have an ASR. Mrs. Serrato asked how long it would take to develop the 500 MGs of ASR water. Mr. Garana responded that it would take about six months. Mr. Garana explained the method of pulling out the water and creating a bubble. 4 • Mr. Garana stated that during the high demand season, the water would be pumped out. Mrs. Serrato asked why build a desalination plant if ASR is from the O. N. Steven's Plant. Mr. Garana stated that we only have one line - 15,000 linear feet — across the Laguna —' Madre and when that line goes, we will have to build a parallel line or a desal plant. Mrs. Serrato stated if the City does ASR, a water line will be needed regardless of the desalination project if the ASR water is from the Stevens Plant. Mrs. Serrato said she had understood that in order to make the desalination plant and RO cost effective, the line would be needed. Mr. Garana stated that we would have to evaluate which is the least expensive route. Mrs. Stockseth asked what would happen if the desalination plant went down during hurricane conditions. Mr. Garana stated that everything is built to meet hurricane standards. The ASR would be inoperable because of loss of electricity to the Island. Mr. Garana stated that we would have to look at a lot of issues. He stated that normally the line to Padre Island is shut off when a hurricane is expected to hit. He stated that during the freeze in the 1980's, the demand for water almost emptied out the cities water distribution system. The Stevens Plant was pumping more water than during summer conditions. The water in homes was being run continuously to keep water lines from freezing. Mrs. Serrato stated that in the event of a hurricane the pipeline would be needed. Mr. Garana stated that we are always aware of a possible hurricane. If a Category 5 hurricane were to occur, island residents would be asked to evacuate. More than likely, most homes and their plumbing system would be wiped out. The City would just try to keep a small amount of water flow to prevent contamination. Facilities Siting • Evaluated potential facility sites on Padre and Mustang Islands • Final site selection determined by: -Environmental issues -Existing distribution system -Land availability and cost -Public acceptance Facility and Well Site Alternatives •. Padre Island Pumping Station/County Park • Nueces County Packery Channel Park • Padre Island Pumping Station • Whitecap VW TP • In the vicinity of NCWCD#4 Pumping Station and Mustang Island State Park • City-leased General Land Office Parcel • Padre Island Beach/Bob Hall Pier Mr. Garana stated that the City will be conscious of the quality of life issues to island residents. We have to be extremely aware that anything has to blend into the neighborhood. We have to look at noise, lighting, and aesthetic issues, etc. Dr. Stanford asked how much land the City would need for the plant facility. Mr. Garana stated that we would need land for the plant and land scattered out for the source and that we were envisioning little blocks of land. Mr. Garana stated that some alternative sites are: Padre Island Pump Station, Nueces County Packery Channel Park, Whitecap Wastewater 5 Treatment Plant, Padre Island NCWCD and Mustang Island State Park. Whitecap Wastewater Treatment Plant and Padre Island Bob Hall Pier areas have been ruled out. What is left is the Pump Station/Mustang Island, close to where the fire station is being built and GLO parcels. Finished Water Transmission Alternatives • Developed preliminary model of the existing distribution system • Ongoing additional modeling to refine transmission system considering well and facility site locations • Final transmission system will depend on feed water source and facility siting Public Involvement • Completed initial interviews with more than 20 community members and groups • Key Issues thus far include: - -Distinguishing between Padre Island and State Projects -Property and environmental/siting/quality of life impacts -Water availability for growth and pressure -Project cost -Groundwater availability and impact on groundwater supply • Upcoming Work: -Meet with business owners association -One or two public forums -Continue to develop a long-term public outreach plan Mr. Garana stated that there aretwo projects: the desalination project in Padre Island and the Governor's project located near the Barney Davis plant site. Dr. Stanford asked if this project were successful would it serve as an incentive to promote the governor's project. Mr. Garana stated that even if this project does not go ahead, it is very good experience and will provide very good knowledge and experience. Mr. Garana stated that desalination is a no brainer. It is easily done. The problem is not the desalination, but how to drive the unit cost down. Mrs. Coleman stated that she has traveled to places where they have desalination and does not like the taste of the water. She asked what would be done to improve the taste of the desalinated water. She stated that the citizens would be concerned about this. Mr. Garana stated that taste is a problem even -in our own water. He stated that the water would be blended similar to what is done in Kingsville. Mrs. Serrato stated that the City of Kingsville blends their ground water with 22% of the water coming from City of Corpus Christi O. N. Stevens Plant. Funding and Project Delivery Alternatives: • Funding Investigation: -Grants and "in-kind" opportunities -USBR opportunities for demonstration project -Potential research funding • Project Delivery: -Traditional Design-Bid-Build -Design-Build • Promotes fast-track schedule -Public-Private Partnerships 6 o • Implementation: _ -Phased, incremental execution to met demand Mr. Garana stated that we would be looking for grants. Mr. Garana stated that the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation has some monies, in the amount of$1 million; unfortunately, it is to be used throughout the states. Mr. Garana stated that there is some money potential. Dr. Stanford asked how much money we were looking for. Mr. Garana stated that it is too premature to have good numbers at this time. Mr. Garana stated that we could have design build, but this is not allowed in Texas. He stated that we are looking for public- private partnerships. Everything is geared around to the cost. Mrs. Stockseth asked if there was a possibility that developers pay for it. Mr. Garana stated that is a possibility as part of a public-private partnership. Mr. Garana also stated that the Water Department provides fire protection. Project Schedule • June 24, 2003 — Finalize preliminary assessment and deliver recommendations to Council • July 2003 —Begin demonstration phase • Dec. 2005 — Demonstration phase complete and initial production • Dec. 2006— Project completion and full production Mr. Garana stated that this was a very preliminary presentation to the Council. On June 24, a finalized preliminary assessment will be presented to the Council, which will include costs. The City hopes to begin the initial phase in June of 2004 at 1 MGD, coupled with ASR. By December 2006, the City should have a full 5 million gallons a day capacity coupled with an ASR. Mrs. Serrato stated that it was her understanding that someone from San Patricio Water Municipal District was at the City Council meeting and that the Council asked Ron Massey how the project would be paid and the answer was "raw water". Mr. Garana stated that the Mayor had asked whether the entire project was going to be paid through water rates. He stated that there would be a raw water cost to it. However, he could not say which customers would be impacted. Mrs. Serrato asked what type of numbers the consultants would give to the City Council that would determine whether to proceed with the next phase. Mr. Garana stated that we would look at revisions. He stated that the consultants had relied on previous studies. He stated that the project and RO was not a cheap process. Mrs. Coleman stated if any of the recommendations from this committee had an influence on the decisions made by the City Council. Mr. Garana stated that the City welcomed the committee's input. He stated that we have met and looked at the engineer's projects. Mrs. Coleman stated that many good questions were being asked and that the City Council and consultant engineers needed to know the committee's concerns. Mr. Garana stated that the City needed to have input and that we would look at all points of view. That is why it is good to have local public input. Mrs. Serrato stated that the wave of the future is ASRs. If ASRs are feasible, the City can address them by creating ground water districts to protect the waters. She indicated that the Coastal Bend Regional Water Planning Group's plan included ASR, as a way to address future water needs - although not at a Padre Island location. 7 Water Department's Cathodic Protection Study Mr. Garana stated that the Mary Rhodes Pipeline is a concrete steel re-inforced line wrapped with plastic that extends 101-miles to transport water from Lake Texana to the O.N. Stevens plant and has a Cathodic Protection Program in place. He stated that a $300,000+ contract with King Isles Construction of Corpus Christi resulted in the installation of 14 additional test locations. Mr. Garana stated that the same protection exists for the transmission lines on the Laguna Madre crossing. He stated that the one capital improvement project had just been completed and another project was being started. Dr. Stanford asked if we could continuously monitor the pipeline. Mr. Garana stated that we could monitor certain sites of the pipeline. Mrs. Stockseth inquired if plastic piping could be used due to increased technology in plastics. Mr. Garana stated that you couldn't find the high density pipes in plastic and that when you bid a-project_you have to-use what is available in the market place and that which gives the lowest cost. He stated that 24" diameter pipes have the highest density that he is aware of. Mrs. Serrato stated that in Canada, PVC pipe is available in 60" density. Dr. Stanford asked if weight had any bearing on plastic. Mr. Garana stated that plastic is more susceptible to high dollar corrosives. Mrs. Serrato asked about the story in the news recently. Mr. Garana assured the Committee that there were no leaks in the Mary Rhodes pipeline, that the news story had to do with a $73,000 contract to continue to look at corrosion. Mr. Garana stated that maintenance is an on- going process and stated that no amount of maintenance will stop deterioration, but will only slow it down. Capt. Hinger stated that all the pipes at NAS are plastic and they were installed in the 1940's and that they are in the process of contracting with Bath Engineering to replace all utility lines, including gas. New or Old Business Regarding the progress of the landscape ordinance, Mrs. Marruffo stated that they would be meeting with the contractors and builders association in the near future and then it would be ready to present the ordinance for the City Planning Department for review by the Planning Committee. Mrs. Stockseth asked if anyone else was allowed to attend the meeting. Mrs. Marruffo stated that she would send out a notice to the committee about the date and time of the meeting. Mrs. Marruffo stated that some of the members were up for reappointment to the Committee, but that the Council was running behind in their appointments and they are looking at May 13 to place the reappointments. She stated that those members whose terms are up are the following: Carola Serrato, Kimberly Stockseth, Capt. Hinger, and J. Kiggans. She stated that she would provide a. copy of their attendance to the City Secretary's Office, and she advised those members whose memberships are up that there is a policy on absences; you are allowed two absences and to be sure to have the third absence excused. A notice needed to be sent to the committee asking that the absence be excused. Mrs. Serrato stated that she had submitted a letter to the Mayor stating her willingness to serve another term. Mrs. Stockseth stated that she had also expressed to the Mayor and Council her willingness to be reappointed. Mrs. Marruffo stated that the other members might also want to send a letter to the Mayor. Mrs. Marruffo handed out a copy of the current committee members. 8 Mrs. Serrato invited the committee to the next Coastal Bend Regional Water Planning Group meeting, which will be on May 8 at 1:30 at the Texas A&M Extension Service office ,---- on ''on Highway 44. Mrs. Serrato explained that the Committee was appointed by the (,__ Governor and was a grass roots group intended to allow local input for water resource planning. The group is charged with balancing demand with resources and recommending projects to address shortages. The TVVDB monitors and reviews the plan. It is part of the Water for Texas Program and is based on a 50-year planning period. Dr. Stanford stated that she had read an article about Stewart Title and property insurance for water rights and asked how that affected water. Dr. Stanford asked if this insurance applied to regular individuals. Mrs. Serrato stated that an individual could have water rights on his/her property. Mr. Garana stated that if you want to transport water of a district, there are all sorts of fees. Mrs. Serrato stated that underground water districts have the right to limit export of water out of the district. She stated because of those things, we have to have a way to protect our water and keep it here. Mrs. Marruffo stated that the City is sponsoring the 16th annual World of Water Celebration on Saturday, May 3 at the Corpus Christi Museum of Science and History. Mrs. Marruffo stated that the 2002 Annual Water Quality Report, which satisfies the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996, would be delivered to local water customers before the end of June 2003. Dr. Stanford asked about the status of the City's Water web site. Mrs. Marruffo stated that staff commitment to the AWWA Water conference had limited available staff to complete the project. The work on the City's web site is expected to resume. The web site would be accessible through www.cctexas.com; however, the City had acquired rights to the web - site name www.corpuschristiwater.com to allow for future personalization. Mrs. Serrato stated that the next meeting would be on Thursday, June 26 and 11:30 am. The meeting was adjourned at 1:08 pm. 9