College Station Water Supply
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

College Station Water Supply

on

  • 480 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
480
Views on SlideShare
214
Embed Views
266

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

3 Embeds 266

http://blog.cstx.gov 186
http://cityofcs.wordpress.com 79
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

College Station Water Supply College Station Water Supply Presentation Transcript

  • 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
  • Where Our Water Comes From Robertson County Brazos County
  • 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: • • • • Alternate Water Sources – – – – • Density of development and water usage (peak day and annual) Availability of water permitted supply State Legislative Initiatives and Judicial Decisions 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 CS Water Annual Demand - Jan 2014 - Assumes 2.5% Growth Rate 24,000 Total Permits 22,000 Estimated Demand Build-out of Water CCN Acre-Feet per Year 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Year 2030 2035 2040
  • Peak Day Demand vs. Capacity CS Peak-Day Water Demand - Jan 2014 38 - Assumes 2.5% Growth Rate Production Capacity Well 10 36 34 Cooling Towers 32 Status Quo Demand Well 9 w/ Cons'n & Reuse 30 MGD Well 8 28 26 w/Cons & Reuse 24 Peak Day 22 Prod'n Capacity 20 18 16 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Year 2030 2035 2040
  • 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