Tampa Bay Water Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013

Transcription

1 Tampa Bay Water Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013 December 2013

2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ES-1 A. Section 1- Introduction and Overview ES-1 B. Section 2-Existing Facilities Inventory ES-2 C. Section 3- Capital and Systems Programs ES-4 D. Section 4- Staffing ES-7 E. Section 5-Customers and Water Demands ES-9 F. Section 6-System Analysis ES-11 G. Section 7-Regulatory Review ES-13 H. Section 8-Source Water Protection Program ES-15 I. Section 9-Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change ES-16 J. Section 10-Demand Management ES-17 K. Section 11- Potential Future Water Supply Sources ES-18 L. Section 12- System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs ES-25 Section 1- Introduction and Overview 1-1 A. Background 1-1 B. Objectives of Long-Term Master Water Plan C. Review of Agreements 1-5 D. Conclusion 1-7 Section 2- Existing Facilities Inventory 2-1 A. Introduction 2-1 B. General Description of Facilities 2-3 Section 3- Capital and Systems Programs 3-1 A. Capital Improvement Program 3-1 B. Renewal and Replacement Program 3-3 C. Energy Management Program 3-6 Section 4- Staffing 4-1 Section 5- Customers and Water Demands 5-1 A. Introduction 5-1 B. Meeting Member Government Water Demands 5-2 C. Demand Forecasting System 5-5 D. Demand Forecasting System Results ( ) 5-7 E. Interlocal Agreement Requirements and Recommendations 5-10 Section 6 Systems Analysis 6-1

3 A. Systems Analysis Tool 6-1 B. Previous Hydraulic and System Analyses 6-2 C. Current and Future Systems Analyses 6-5 D. Summary of System Analysis Recommendations 6-10 Section 7- Regulatory Review 7-1 A. Introduction 7-1 B. Federal Rules and Regulations 7-2 C. Water Management District Permits 7-5 D. Existing Tampa Bay Water Permitted Sources and Facilities Permits 7-7 E. Regulatory Effect on Operations and Water Supply Development 7-10 Source Water Protection Program 8-1 A. Introduction 8-1 B. Tampa Bay Water s Source Water Protection Program 8-1 C. Source Water Protection Program Implementation 8-9 Section 9- Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change 9-1 A. Overview 9-1 B. Potential Effects on Tampa Bay Water 9-3 C. Risk Assessment and Adaptive Management Strategies 9-5 D. Adaptive Strategies 9-7 E. National Climate Assessment 9-9 F. Key Messages 9-10 Section 10- Demand Management 10-1 A. Introduction 10-1 B. Components of Tampa Bay Water s Demand Management Plan 10-2 C. Profile of Regional Water Demand 10-2 D. Evaluation of Water Efficiency Alternatives 10-6 E. Economic Analysis of Alternative Demand Management Strategies F. Board Approved Demand Management Plan Directives Section 11- Potential Future Water Supply Sources 11-1 A. Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis- Pinellas County 11-2 B. Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion 11-4 C. Gulf Coast (Anclote) Seawater Desalination Plant 11-6 D. Additional Potable Groundwater From Existing Northern Wellfields 11-8 E. Thonotosassa Wells F. Surface Water Expansion G. Aquifer Recharge 11-32

4 Section 12- System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs 12-1 A. Interlocal Agreement Requirements for Water Supply Planning 12-1 B. Introduction 12-2 C. Regional System Performance Evaluation Measures 12-3 D. Regional System Performance Evaluation 12-15

5 Executive Summary Executive Summary Tampa Bay Water is a regional water supply authority that provides wholesale water for its six Member governments: Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas counties, and the cities of New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa. The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement (referred to as the Interlocal Agreement) requires that the Master Water Plan be updated every five years. Tampa Bay Water was formed in 1998, the first revision to the Master Water Plan was approved by the board of directors in 2003, the second was approved by the Board in 2008, and the third revision is required to be completed by the end of This document, entitled Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013, has been developed to meet this requirement and to ensure that Tampa Bay Water meets the unequivocal obligation to provide quality water to the member governments now and in the future. A. Section 1 Introduction and Overview Tampa Bay Water owns and operates a diversified water supply system. The Agency s Long-Term Master Water Plan documents how Tampa Bay Water meets its unequivocal obligation to provide quality water to the member governments now and in the future. The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement requires that the Long-Term Master Water Plan be updated every five years. Since its creation in 1998, the Agency has completed three revisions of the Plan. This document, entitled Long- Term Master Water Plan 2013, is the latest revision. The objectives of this update are to meet the requirements set forth in the Interlocal Agreement. According to the Agreement, the five-year update shall, to the extent deemed necessary or advisable by the board: Identify current customers, projects and future customers Review and generally inventory existing Tampa Bay Water facilities Identify a Capital Improvement Program Review current Tampa Bay Water permits along with existing and projected regulations Identify proposed new water supply facilities Evaluate staffing Provide hydraulic analysis of both existing and proposed systems Evaluate present and future sources and treatment requirements in terms of capacity, reliability and economy Update the list of water supply facilities required to meet the anticipated water quality needs of the member governments for the next twenty years Tampa Bay Water Page ES-1

6 Executive Summary During the 2008 update, the comprehensive project list was updated and approximately 300 potential water supply projects were evaluated based on public input and with the advice of the Planning Advisory Committee. The Tampa Bay Water board approved the update to the Plan in December As the result of the update, the Board directed that seven project concepts and three policy planning areas be further studied. The seven project concepts are: Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis-Pinellas County; Gulf Coast Seawater Desalination Plant; Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion; Thonotosassa Wells; Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Wells; Surface Water Expansion Project; and Aquifer Recharge Project. The three policy planning areas were: Source Water Protection Program; Regional Reclaimed Water Planning Assistance; Demand Management and Water Use Efficiency. The studies for all three of the policy planning areas have been completed. Tampa Bay Water s existing supply should meet the region s demands for the next decade and the Long- Term Master Water Plan includes projects to meet the agency s 20-year planning horizon needs. For the 2013 update, no new water supply facilities are recommended for selection and implementation in the next five years due to lower regional demand projections. For planning purposes, future project(s) selection and preparation of water use permits should be based on the supply capacity under average hydrologic conditions since these projects are in development to meet long-term water supply needs. The project concepts approved by the board in the 2008 plan update should be studied further over the next few years to provide information for the board to select the next water supply project(s) for construction when needed. Tampa Bay Water will continue to implement and enhance its planning and management activities to address seasonal and severe drought events and long-term future supply needs. These activities will be conducted along with study of the project concepts in the Long-Term Master Water Plan to ensure that Tampa Bay Water continues to meet its unequivocal obligation to provide quality water to the member governments. B. Section 2 - Existing Facilities Inventory Tampa Bay Water constructed a regional water delivery system that is comprised of groundwater and surface water sources, an off-stream storage reservoir, a seawater desalination plant and a collection of pipes and pumps that distribute quality drinking water to the six member governments. The regional system facilities currently in service are summarized below: Distribution: 3 booster pumping stations 21 points of connection ~115 miles of raw water pipeline ~156 miles of finished water pipeline 2 alkalinity adjustment Groundwater Facilities: 13 wellfields 177 wells 5 individual wellfields 6 groundwater treatment facilities 2 groundwater Surface Water Facilities: 2 river withdrawal points; 1 desalination withdrawal point 1 re-pump station 1 15-billion gallon surface water storage reservoir 1 surface water treatment plant 1 seawater desalination plant Tampa Bay Water Page ES-2

7 Executive Summary facilities 4 interconnections where the Agency can purchase water from member governments hydrogen sulfide removal facilities 1 booster pump station 1 reservoir pump station 1 augmentation pump station (Harney Canal) The location of these facilities is shown in figure ES-1. Figure ES-1 Tampa Bay Water Regional Water Supply and Delivery System Tampa Bay Water Page ES-3

8 Executive Summary Tampa Bay Water has completed adding additional water treatment facilities, an expanded surface water system, piping and pumping to form a flexible and adaptable water supply system. These sources are sufficient to meet the region s drinking water demands over the next decade. Due to slowed regional demands for drinking water, Tampa Bay Water does not need to select new supply projects during this update cycle. All potential new water supply projects will be carried into the Master Water Plan feasibility program and will be evaluated over the next 3-4 years. C. Section 3 Capital and Systems Programs Tampa Bay Water s Capital and System Programs includes the Capital Improvement Program, Renewal and Replacement Program, and Energy Management Program. A. Capital Improvement Program Tampa Bay Water s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a comprehensive five-year plan of approved and proposed capital projects. The CIP is updated annually, as the need and timing for specific projects change. Figure ES-2 shows the process followed for developing the annual update to the Capital Improvement Program Plan: Figure ES-2 Capital Improvement Program Annual Update Process Tampa Bay Water Page ES-4

9 Executive Summary A capital project is defined as planned activities that result in a distinct capital asset owned by the Agency and/or a major repair, improvement, renovation or expansion that extends an existing asset s useful life. Table ES-1 outlines the criteria a project has to meet in order to be considered a capital improvement project: Table ES-1 Capital Improvement Project Criteria Criterion Definition Compliance Level of Service Contractual Obligations Security and Safety Outside Funding Project needed to meet: Legal settlement Regulatory agency action (e.g., consent order, administrative order) Permit requirements Project is critical to the existing level of service (i.e., existing operating conditions) Project improves the reliability of the regional system components or extends the components useful life (e.g., pressure, flow, metering equipment) Project needed to meet one or more of the following: Memorandum of understanding Joint project Agreement The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement production failure requirements Future water demands; and has been identified in the Master Water Plan Exhibit C & D of the Master Water Supply Contract The project is critical to the facility security The project is recommended by the vulnerability assessment The project addresses a hazard or safety issue to the workforce, public, or water supplies The project addresses State & Federal safety regulations Outside Funding possible such as: State & Federal grants Co-funding agreements Member government contributions Existing Funding agreement in place such as: Co-funding agreement State & Federal grants Member government contributions Annual O&M Effects to Operating (i.e., chemicals & power) and/or Maintenance Costs) B. Renewal and Replacement Program Tampa Bay Water s Renewal and Replacement Program is intended to maintain a sustainable infrastructure. This program helps Tampa Bay Water manage its assets in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that the agency meets its goals of delivering safe and reliable drinking water. The Renewal and Replacement Program development process is shown in Figure ES-3. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-5

10 Executive Summary Figure ES-3 Renewal and Replacement Program Annual Update Process C. Energy Management Program Tampa Bay Water s Energy Management Program includes energy efficiency, conservation and alternative/renewable energy capital project ideas for our water supply system. This program follows an Energy Roadmap, which was developed to provide a 10-year look at the issues related to energy consumption at our facilities. The Energy Roadmap provides an action plan that sets expectations and principles along with measurable targets; it identifies the elements of technology and energy infrastructure to enhance financial stability and sustainability; and it provides a basis to analyze the relationship between decisions that affect annual operations and maintenance capital budgeting. Figure ES-4 shows the Energy Roadmap. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-6

11 Executive Summary Figure ES-4 Energy Program Roadmap D. Section 4 Staffing Tampa Bay Water reviews staffing periodically through formal audits and pay plan and benefit package reviews. The board approved the latest pay and classification plan for the Agency in April The Agency maintains a lean staff of 132 full-time equivalent positions to fulfill the Agency s mission while maintaining a fiscally responsible program to serve its member governments. In April 2011, the board approved an Agency Strategic Plan, which consists of four main goals intended to guide the Agency in fulfilling the mission of providing clean, safe and reliable water. During 2012, the Tampa Bay Water Page ES-7

12 Executive Summary Agency underwent a reorganization process in order to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan. Tampa Bay Water is shifting its focus from building new supplies to maintaining its existing supplies and facilities. As such, the Agency has reorganized to better reflect the new focus and be more efficient in its organizational structure. Figure ES-5 shows current organizational structure. Figure ES-5 Tampa Bay Water Organizational Structure Tampa Bay Water Page ES-8

13 Executive Summary E. Section 5 - Customers and Water Demands Tampa Bay Water has the unequivocal obligation to meet the water demands of its six member governments. A major component in developing new potable water supplies is the ability to accurately determine future demands so that new projects can be implemented when needed, avoiding the risk of under-or over-estimating when supply is needed. As stated by the American Water Works Association s Manual of Water Supply Practices M 50 (2007), a sound water demand forecast allows utilities and regional suppliers to provide the following: Adequacy of supply Optimum facility location and size Sound transmission and distribution design Tampa Bay Water provides regional water demand forecasts for its member governments specifically to project the amount of water supply needed within Tampa Bay Water s service area. The regional demand forecasts include the total water demand for the City of Tampa. The Agency s Long-term Demand Forecasting models are designed primarily for the purpose of longer-term planning and forecasting over year time horizons. The models provide monthly and annual water demand forecasts for the seven water demand planning areas (WDPAs) of the six member governments through the 2035 planning horizon. This demand planning ensures that adequate supply will be made available to member governments in the future and that supplies are added in such a way as to minimize member government wholesale water rate impacts. Seven water demand planning areas are established which reflect the current service area boundaries for the six member governments. These areas are illustrated in figure ES-6. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-9

14 Executive Summary Figure ES-6- Tampa Bay Water Member Government Water Demand Planning Areas Tampa Bay Water updated its Long-Term Demand Forecasting models and developed two long-term water demand forecasts through Each model generates demand forecasts based on water demand planning area specific weather and socioeconomic projections. Annual water demands within Tampa Bay Water s service area have been impacted by the economic recession since Figure ES-7 shows Tampa Bay Water demand projections by water demand planning area through Tampa Bay Water Page ES-10

15 Executive Summary Figure ES-7- Tampa Bay Water Demand Projections by Water Demand Planning Area Tampa Bay Water will continue to update its demand projections annually to ensure that our commitment to provide clean, safe and reliable supply to our member governments is met. F. Section 6 - System Analysis Tampa Bay Water regularly performs hydraulic analyses for its regional supply and transmission system to study current system operating conditions and to evaluate plans for projected future operating conditions. Tampa Bay Water uses a number of tools to perform modeling and analysis. A detailed description of these models can be found in Section 6 of the Long-Term Master Water Plan. In 2006, Tampa Bay Water s system engineer completed the System Analysis Update document, which was performed to determine regional transmission system improvements. As a result of this analysis, 25 recommendations were made to Tampa Bay Water on overall system improvement. Most of the 25 recommendations have been completed. The future water supply options identified in the 2008 Long-Term Water Supply Plan were evaluated in a hydraulic model for the demands projected for the year The results showed certain hydraulic Tampa Bay Water Page ES-11

16 Executive Summary limitations in the Morris Bridge Transmission Main, Cypress Bridge Transmission Main, Brandon Transmission Main and Brandon South Central Connection. The analysis also determined that the hydraulic limitations would be improved by the addition of new supply capacities downstream of the Cypress Creek Pump Station at the Lithia Water Treatment Facility. The addition of new supply could require parallel or increased diameter piping to be installed. As the decision regarding which long-term water supply projects will be considered for further evaluation and eventual implementation, additional analyses should be completed to evaluate the need for additional operational flexibility and potential system operating restrictions. Tampa Bay Water will update the Tampa Bay Water 2025 System Analysis document completed by Black & Veatch in 2006, based on the expanded surface water system infrastructure and projected future demands. The improvements that were recommended from the last analysis that have not been completed will also be re-evaluated to determine if they are still necessary. The summary of current System Analysis Recommendations is: Regional System and Enhanced Surface Water System Surge Models o Complete the database of system surge features. o Field verify the equipment and settings. o Update and run the system surge models to verify that the system has adequate surge protection. o Update the surge analysis for any major changes to the system. Regional Supply and Transmission System and Enhanced Surface Water System Hydraulic Models o Evaluate system improvements at the Odessa and US 41 Pump Stations resulting from an increase in system pressure from Cypress Creek. o Evaluate options for lowering system pressures in the transmission main between the High Service pump Station and the Cypress Creek Pump Station. o Evaluate the benefits of adding finished water storage. o Update the 2025 Analysis and determine if the previously recommended projects are still necessary. o Evaluate long-term water supply options. Hydraulic Grade Tools (with chemical and electrical cost estimates) Tampa Bay Water Page ES-12

17 Executive Summary o Project monthly chemical and electrical costs for annual budgeting. Enhanced Surface Water System Operational Model o Project supply availability based on projected regional rainfall forecasts. o Evaluate future surface water system expansion options. Regional System Performance Model o Update the analysis of system reliability in the Regional System Performance Model whenever any changes to supply sources and/or changes demand projections. o Evaluate the improved system reliability with each of the long-term water supply options. G. Section 7 - Regulatory Review As a part of planning to meet the water needs of the member governments, it is important for Tampa Bay Water to consider existing and proposed regulations at the State and Federal levels. Drinking water standards are established at the Federal and State levels to protect human health. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection typically adopts drinking water standards as mandated at the federal level; however, State standards may be more stringent than the Federal standards. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is also responsible for permitting water treatment facilities and distribution systems. Tampa Bay Water is required to provide water that meets all State and Federal drinking water standards as well as Exhibit D Standards, which are established in the Master Water Supply Contract to further refine the definition of a Quality Water to be provided to the member governments. Table ES-2 summarizes major water-related regulations under development at the Environmental Protection Agency. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-13

18 Executive Summary Table ES-2 Projected Environmental Protection Agency Regulations Regulation Proposal Final Notes Bisphenol A (BPA) TBD TBD Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July 26, EPA is considering environmental testing for BPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), including potential testing of drinking water and its sources. On February 2, 2011, EPA announced plans to develop a single National Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) Carcinogenic Volatile 2014 June 2015 covering up to 16 carcinogenic VOCs. EPA is conducting Organic Compounds (VOCs) (projected) (projected) evaluations and developing supporting materials for proposal. The Clean Water Protection Rule would codify requirements currently set forth in the EPA/Army Corps Clean Water Protection Rule TBD TBD of Engineers Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act. The guidance was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review on February 21, Lead and Copper Rule (LCR): Regulatory Revisions Perchlorate Radon Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR) RTCR - Finished Water Storage Facility Inspection Requirements Effluent Guidelines and Standards for Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction Including Coalbed Methane and Shale Gas Extraction 2014 (projected) 2014 (projected) November 2, 1999 June 17, 2010 May 2014 (projected) August 2014 (statutory deadline) TBD February 13, 2013 EPA has announced its intention to engage in a series of public meetings/workshops to discuss potential rule revisions. EPA is awaiting the final Science Advisory Board report on setting a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) and continues to evaluate revised modeling approaches to set an MCLG. Long-term prospects for a radon rulemaking are uncertain. EPA's Spring 2011 Regulatory Agenda lists final action for this rule as "to be determined." However, it is not listed at all in the Fall 2012 Regulatory Agenda. The final RTCR was published in the Federal Register on February 13, Compliance begins on April 1, TBD TBD EPA is evaluating options for a potential regulation. October 2014 (projected) February 2016 (projected) Fluoride TBD TBD EPA has completed and peer-reviewed a quantitative dose-response assessment based on the available data for severe dental fluorosis as recommended by National Research Council (NRC). EPA has also completed and peer-reviewed a document on environmental exposure to fluoride and the relative source contribution (RSC) for water. The RSC is needed in order to derive the Maximum Contaminate Level Goal (MCLG) from the dose-response assessment. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-14

19 Executive Summary In operating its facilities and planning for future supply sources, Tampa Bay Water should continue to participate in Federal and State regulatory policy initiatives in order to understand their effect on operations and future water supply development options. At the State level, Tampa Bay Water can provide constructive input on initiatives such as the Florida Department of Environmental Protection s Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency effort to help improve the permitting process. At the Federal level, things such as source water quality based upon established Maximum Contaminant Levels and Maximum Contaminant Guidance Levels, as well as potential emerging contaminants and Contaminant Candidate List constituents that might become regulated in the future will need to be followed. The research being performed on such constituents, their potential effects on public health, the environment, and related treatment aspects will continue to provide new information and a better understanding on how they might affect water supply. The research process is expected to occur over a long time span and thus will allow Tampa Bay Water time to adapt should any new regulatory limits be set. In the meantime, Tampa Bay Water can continue to participate in the regulatory development process to ensure that any proposed legislation is supportive of Tampa Bay Water s goal to provide safe clean drinking water. H. Section 8 - Source Water Protection Protecting the sources of drinking water supply in our region is essential to protecting the public health and maintaining a sustainable water supply in the future. Protecting the sources of the region s drinking water supplies also protects the water supply investment made by the board. Source water protection is the first step in a multi-barrier approach to drinking water protection. Tampa Bay Water has a diversified water supply portfolio, consisting of groundwater, surface water and desalinated water. The Agency relies on 13 consolidated wellfields, 2 isolated wells, the Hillsborough River, Alafia River, Tampa Bypass Canal, Regional Reservoir and the Seawater Desalination Plant to meet the daily demand for quality drinking water. During the 2008 Long-Term Master Water Plan update, the board approved the creation of a source water protection program. In , the agency undertook this effort and developed an Integrated Source Water Protection Program which was approved by the board in This Program contains several source water protection options. Detailed information regarding each of those options can be found in Appendix B. Tampa Bay Water s Integrated Source Water Protection Program employs a range of initiatives to prevent and reduce source water pollution, such as education and outreach programs, participation in regulatory initiatives as well as partnerships and monitoring programs. As a wholesale water provider, Tampa Bay Water does not have regulatory purview over the land areas that influence the sources of Tampa Bay Water Page ES-15

20 Executive Summary supply. Collaboration with member governments, regulatory agencies and stakeholders are important components of a successful source water protection program for Tampa Bay Water. Tampa Bay Water staff will continue to examine the Agency s source water protection needs and recommend to the board an annual budget for source water protection activities. This will help ensure that the efforts most beneficial to the Agency s program are funded and implemented each year. I. Section 9 - Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Use of surface water supplies imposes a new level of uncertainty in our water supply system and makes the region more susceptible to extremes of weather and climate. Because Tampa Bay Water has become more reliant on surface water sources, it is important to examine the relationship between climate change and water quality and quantity issues. Important effects of climate change that will potentially affect Tampa Bay Water include: Impacts of increasing temperature on evapotranspiration and seasonal rainfall patterns; Increasing rainfall variability and frequency of extreme events (e.g. more hurricanes, more droughts); Source water quality changes due to temperature changes or increased runoff; and Changes in rainfall patterns and temperatures affecting water use patterns and future water needs. Risk-based decision making is one approach that can be used to balance risks and costs and incorporate the uncertainties associated with climate change. Risk assessment includes evaluating the likelihood of a climate change impact occurring. Adaptive management supports action in the face of uncertainty and limited scientific knowledge. Tampa Bay Water s current mix of supplies is diverse. This diversity offers opportunities for adaptive planning and adaptive management which can offset some of the effects associated with climate uncertainties. Tampa Bay Water s board has approved the incorporation of adaptive management into long-range planning activities. The key components of adaptive management are defined as follows: Implementation- water supply planning, construction programs and operations feedback Feedback- monitoring and review of economic and environmental outcomes of management actions Re-evaluation- conceive new strategies (planning and operational) as information accumulates and understanding improves Tampa Bay Water Page ES-16

21 Executive Summary Repeat Loop- continuous improvement process Tampa Bay Water is moving forward with its risk assessments to understand the uncertainties associated with climate change and variability and how this may affect long-term water supply planning activities and implementation of adaptive management strategies. J. Section 10 - Demand Management Through the six member governments, Tampa Bay Water meets the drinking water demands of more than 2.3 million people. According to member governments actual and projected 5-year water conservation plans, it is estimated that the member governments collectively saved approximately 26 million gallons per day (mgd) of potable water by the end of the water year 2011, and will save up to approximately 30 million gallons per day (mgd) by the end of water year The Demand Management Plan investigates the benefits and costs of water demand management as a quantifiable, alternative water supply source. The Demand Management Plan is one way to further the Agency s strategic goals to achieve reliability of its water supply and delivery system to its member governments. Demand Management Plan efforts are intended to serve as a complement to the traditional water supply planning process in meeting current and future water demands. Demand management encompasses a set of activities designed to: Provide a better understanding of how and why water is used Forecast human demands for water supplies Develop prospective water-using efficiency (demand reduction) measures Identify programmatic and project goals, evaluation criteria, performance measures and monitoring mechanisms Define and evaluate program effectiveness and goal achievement Evaluate the benefits and costs of efficiency measures as an alternative or a complement to supply development The demand management effort includes an analysis of past and present water savings, as well as an analysis of avoided supply costs related to improved water use efficiency. The Demand Management Plan examines things such as distribution of water use, an evaluation of achieved water savings from existing member governments programs, and the analysis of new and upcoming water technologies designated to lower water use. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-17

22 Executive Summary In February 2013, the Board adopted a Water Efficiency resolution, which gives Tampa Bay Water a direction on activities that need to be included in the Demand Management planning efforts. The Water Use Efficiency resolution incorporates water use efficiency evaluation efforts into the Agency long-term planning process. The resolution is based on the following findings: Develop and implement data collection, management and analysis protocols and procedures for the continued assessment of passive water use efficiency within Tampa Bay Water service area Integrate passive water-use efficiency into the Agency s Long-Term Demand Forecast and Future Needs Analysis Include the Water Use Efficiency Evaluation as an element of the Long-Term Master Water Plan Include an updated evaluation of potential active measures for implementing efficient water-use products as part of future options for the next Long-Term Master Water Plan update Incorporation of the effects of increased water-use efficiency into the Agency s long-term planning process provides the board with more supply policy options, affords Tampa Bay Water and its member governments a supply buffer, and allows Tampa Bay Water to prepare and plan for the effects due to changes in water use efficiency. K. Section 11 - Potential Future Water Supply Sources As required by the Interlocal Agreement, Tampa Bay Water must update its Long-Term Master Water Plan every five years to ensure that the Agency has adequate supply to meet the region s demand for quality drinking water. During the 2008 Long-Term Master Water Plan, Tampa Bay Water looked at approximately 300 potential water supply projects. The board approved seven project concepts for the Master Water Plan. Current demand projections show that the existing water supply facilities are sufficient to meet the demand for quality drinking water over the next decade. Due to the slow regional demand growth, no project has to be chosen from the Master Water Plan list for implementation during this plan update. The seven project concepts can be carried into the 2013 Long-Term Master Water Plan and included in a planning-feasibility program over the next five years. The seven project concepts approved by the board are: Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plant Expansion Gulf Coast Desalination Plant Tampa Bay Water Page ES-18

23 Executive Summary Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Wellfields Thonotosassa Wells Surface Water Expansion Aquifer Recharge The board s goals for Master Water Plan projects include: environmental stewardship, cost and reliability. These are described as follows: Environmental Stewardship: Tampa Bay Water delivers high quality drinking water in an environmentally responsible manner. The Partnership Plan and the Interlocal Agreement that drove the creation of Tampa Bay Water had environmental stewardship as one core motivation. Tampa Bay Water continues to monitor and optimize its operations to ensure that its water production operations incorporates the responsibility to develop and implement future sustainable water supplies, minimizing electrical power consumption, greenhouse gas production, chemical usage, and other factors involving environmental consequences. Cost: Balancing fiscal responsibility with reliability and environmental stewardship is also important in Tampa Bay Water s water supply approach. Minimizing the cost of all operations, from source to tap, helps minimize rate impacts, consistent with meeting reliability and environmental stewardship goals. This focus on efficiency helps fulfill Tampa Bay Water s mission of public service, ensuring the region s water needs are met in the most economical manner. Reliability: Because Tampa Bay Water is unequivocally committed to meeting the needs of its member governments continuously, reliability of its supply sources is of primary importance. Water supply source reliability addresses the challenges Tampa Bay Water faces in accomplishing its mission, including source water protection, drought resistance, diversification, adequate supply, source optimization, storage, and transmission flexibility. Furthermore, the potential impacts of future climate effects, particularly increased climatic variability, can affect source water quantity and quality. System reliability is also critical to ensure that the public health responsibility of water supply is continuously maintained, as well as providing the flexibility to maintain environmental stewardship. Figure ES-8 shows the location of the 7 project concepts: Tampa Bay Water Page ES-19

24 Executive Summary Figure ES-8 Project Concept Location Map Tampa Bay Water Page ES-20

25 Executive Summary Table ES-3 summarizes the seven project concept costs and yield information. Source Type Project Potential Annual Average Yield (million gallons per day) Capital Cost ($ million) Unit Cost ($ per 1,000 gallons) Brackish Groundwater Seawater ¹Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis- Pinellas County Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion To be monitored To be monitored To be monitored 10 mgd $216,100,000 $8.11 Seawater Gulf Coast (Anclote) Seawater Desalination Plant 25mgd/9mgd(phase I)/21 mgd(phase II) $551,100,000/$262,000,000/ $252,200,000 $7.00/ $9.00/ $7.00 Fresh Groundwater Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Tampa Bay Wellfields 10mgd/15 mgd $21,784,000/$28,011,000 $0.58/ $0.52 Fresh Groundwater Surface Water Thonotosassa Wells 10 mgd $44,674,000 $0.98 ²Surface Water Expansion ³7.7 mgd-17.3 mgd $27,510,000-$222,305,000 $3.93- $12.85 Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge 22 mgd $117,635,702-rapid infiltration basin/ $2.41/ $5.58 $211,827,854-direct recharge wells ¹Tampa Bay Water will continue to monitor the efforts of the City of Clearwater as they expand their Brackish reverse osmosis plant. The City of Oldsmar has constructed the plant, which is operational and the City if Tarpon Springs is currently in construction; therefore, the costs and yields of the projects are not applicable at this time. ²This project was formerly known as the Alafia Expansion Project. ³ This project concept consists of 7 potential configurations Tampa Bay Water Page ES-21

26 Executive Summary For a detailed description and cost of each of the seven projects, please see Section 11. The following next steps are recommended for each project: Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis Pinellas County o Continue monitoring the Tarpon Springs reverse osmosis project through completion of construction o Monitor the City of Clearwater s reverse osmosis project Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion o Continue implementation of the Seawater Desalination Plant Reliability Program o Explore technological advances in seawater desalination treatment o Investigate and evaluate any potential technologies that may reduce seawater desalination treatment energy consumption, energy recovery technologies, and alternative or renewable energy options Gulf Coast Seawater Desalination Plant o Further evaluate the potential point of connection options; the transmission main corridor, and intake and high service pump station requirements. o Coordinate with pertinent entities regarding property requirements for the desalination facility, point of connection and the transmission main corridor (e.g. Duke Energy and Pinellas County) o Explore technological advances in seawater desalination treatment o Investigate and evaluate proven and potential technologies that may reduce seawater desalination treatment energy consumption, energy recovery technologies, and alternative or renewable energy options o Further evaluate and address environmental and permitting requirements Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Tampa Bay Wellfields o Continue data collection and analysis for existing wellfield usage o Evaluate information to understand long-term environmental conditions o Determine any additional mitigation and monitoring required to increase the permitted quantity Tampa Bay Water Page ES-22

27 Executive Summary o Consider quantity increase for 2020 at the earliest, or in subsequent water use permit renewals, depending on when additional supply is required Thonotosassa Wells o Coordinate further with the City of Tampa to understand their interest within the potential timeframe of the project o Annual or periodic sampling of the existing Avon Park Formation test well located at the site o Conduct a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment with sampling at the four identified locations that had recognized environmental conditions o Perform hydrologic modeling to determine if there are impacts to the Minimum Aquifer Protection Level Zone, existing users, natural systems and the Hillsborough River or its tributaries o Perform hydraulic modeling to determine the range of system pressures necessary for the finished water pumping station o Perform a route study to determine the best pipeline route for connection to the Regional System Surface Water Expansion o Further evaluate the seven potential project configurations to determine the optimal one for implementation. This should include an evaluation and optimization of potential yield versus reservoir reliability o Continue coordination with the City of Tampa regarding feasibility of expanding the potential treatment at the David L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility o Perform further reservoir siting evaluations to determine the top site for a potential second regional reservoir o Monitor any regulatory rule making that would affect the regulated level of fluoride allowed in drinking water and evaluate if additional treatment might be required o Evaluate current permitting requirements and potential feasibility versus need for downstream augmentation Tampa Bay Water Page ES-23

28 Executive Summary o Perform more detailed evaluations of permit timing including the expansion of the Alafia water use permit withdrawal percentage from 10% above the minimum flow to 19% above the minimum flow Aquifer Recharge o Work further with the City of Tampa to understand the availability of reclaimed water and any agreement requirements for its use o Continue to track and monitor the legislative process for any new developments that relate to applying reclaimed water to aquifer recharge wells and the rapid infiltration basins, and the development of groundwater supply credits from aquifer recharge activities o Work with regulatory agencies to further define specific regulatory and treatment requirements for the project concepts o Monitor the progress of other municipalities that work to implement aquifer recharge, especially within Tampa Bay Water s service area to understand how their work might better define project requirements o Evaluate whether existing Tampa Bay Water infrastructure could be used for the groundwater benefit portion of the project, or verify that additional infrastructure is required. Evaluate site specific opportunities for additional infrastructure siting if determined to be necessary o Perform technical analyses including things such as effluent quality analysis, aquifer characterization, pilot treatment testing, refined modeling, and net benefit confirmation In addition to the project specific feasibility items, the following programmatic activities will be conducted: Public involvement activities with the general public and interested stakeholder groups Explore opportunities to obtain State and Federal grant funding These items and any others identified over the next 3-4 years will be included in a feasibility program. The information from the feasibility program can be used by the board to determine which project or projects should be included in System Configuration III. Tampa Bay Water Page ES-24

29 Executive Summary L. System-Wide Reliability Evaluation and Future Needs The ability of a water supply system to operate satisfactorily under a wide range of possible future demands and hydrologic conditions is an important system characteristic. Tampa Bay Water has developed a system-wide model which allows the entire regional supply and delivery system to be analyzed. Quantifying the performance of the regional system under varying demand and weather conditions is accomplished through the use of this simulation model. In evaluating water resource systems, three performance criteria have been widely adopted: Reliability, Resilience and Vulnerability. Each criterion assesses different aspects of a water resources system and complements the others: RELIABILITY: the probability of occurrence of satisfactory states (1 reliability = probability of experiencing unsatisfactory states). RESILIENCY: the probability of recovering from unsatisfactory states which includes the probable duration of unsatisfactory states (greater resiliency implies shorter expected durations of unsatisfactory conditions). VULNERABILITY: the consequences of underperformance during unsatisfactory situations. Vulnerability can be measured in several different ways including maximum extent or maximum duration for unsatisfactory periods and, for the most likely event, extent and duration of unsatisfactory periods. For the system-wide performance analyses additional work was performed to link the long-term demand projections with surface water availability simulations through common simulations of weather. The demand simulations are time series ensembles of demand by sector and water demand planning areas that reflect 300-year-long simulated daily weather conditions that were derived from analogous weather simulations driving surface water flow models, and 300-year-long repetition of projected econometric data for a given time slice year of the probabilistic demand forecast, with each 300-year simulated demand ensemble receiving econometric assumptions from a different ensemble realization of the forecast. This reliability-based evaluation is used to provide a framework for determining the timing and quantity of future water supply needs using the system-wide performance model. The framework includes two components, a Level of Service concept and the reliability of meeting this level of service, to determine the timing and quantity of future water supplies. The Level of Service is tied to the frequency of drought events that could trigger the Agency s water shortage mitigation plan and lead to water use Tampa Bay Water Page ES-25

30 Executive Summary restrictions being imposed or other adaptive water supply management options being employed. The benefit of a reliability-based approach is that it allows policy makers to evaluate use of adaptive water management strategies to handle the uncertainty of extreme event occurrences and develop supply in an incremental fashion. The analysis results show that the Agency has sufficient time to continue evaluating the regional water supply system before additional water supplies are needed to meet demands or trigger any of the Interlocal Agreement requirements. It is recommended for Board approval that over the next 12 to 24 months additional modeling and analysis be conducted to determine if there are improvements in reliable supplies that can be achieved through changes in operating protocols or implementing capital improvements to the existing system. This evaluation would better define the quantity of new supplies that the agency would need to consider for permitting and feasibility studies to meet future demands. Specifically this analysis would include a trade-off analysis to compare the cost of building new supplies with adaptation actions (e.g., mitigation actions, changes to operating protocols, adaptive supply management) and when new supplies should be available to meet reliability and service levels requirements. The results of this analysis can be used to determine the timing of the next water supply project(s). More information can be found in Section 12. In addition, the following comprehensive planning and management activities are recommended to the board to be implemented as required over the new five year planning period: Continue implementation of the agency s Water Shortage Mitigation Plan Implement the Water Use Efficiency activities approved by the Board February 2013, in Resolution , including re-development of the Agency s long term demand forecast models to integrate passive water use efficiency Continue annual updates of Long-term Demand Forecasts and Evaluation Conduct feasibility planning activities for Master Water Plan projects Participate in State water policy and regulatory discussions to further the understanding of surface water supply use; explore any potential beneficial initiatives that may be proposed Complete the Future Needs Analysis Tampa Bay Water Page ES-26

31 Section 1 Introduction and Overview Section 1 Introduction and Overview A. Background Tampa Bay Water is a regional water supply authority, created in 1998, that provides wholesale water for its six member governments: Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas Counties, and the Cities of New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates a diversified water supply system that includes: Distribution: 3 booster pumping stations 21 pointes of connection ~115 miles of raw water pipeline ~156 miles of finished water pipeline 2 alkalinity adjustment facilities 4 interconnections where we can purchase water from our members Groundwater Facilities: 13 wellfields 177 wells 5 individual wellfields 6 groundwater treatment facilities 2 groundwater hydrogen sulfide removal facilities Surface Water Facilities: 2 river withdrawal pump stations; 1 desalination withdrawal point 1 re-pump station billion gallon surface water storage reservoir 1 surface water treatment plant 1 seawater desalination plant 1 booster pump station 1 reservoir pump station 1 augmentation pump station (Harney Canal) Tampa Bay Water s Long-Term Master Water Plan documents how Tampa Bay Water meets its unequivocal obligation to provide quality water to the member governments now and in the long-term future. The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement (referred to as the Interlocal Agreement) requires that the Master Water Plan be updated every five years. Since 1998, Tampa Bay Water has completed three revisions of its Long-Term Master Water Plan. This document, entitled Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013, is the latest update. The original Master Water Plan included a phased approach to developing new water supplies in four separate configurations over a twenty-year horizon. In 1998, the Tampa Bay Water Board of Directors approved System Configuration I water supply projects for implementation. This configuration was driven by the agreement between Tampa Bay Water, its member governments and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (the District). The $680 million System Configuration I projects were co-funded by the District in the amount of $183 million, were completed in Tampa Bay Water Page1-1

32 Section 1 Introduction and Overview In 2007, the District and Tampa Bay Area Basin Boards approved a Cooperative Funding Agreement with Tampa Bay Water for System Configuration II, which included expanding the delivery capacity of Tampa Bay Water s Regional Surface Water Treatment plant, and pumping capacity and transmission capability enhancement of the Tampa Bay Water s C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir. The District and the Tampa Bay area Basin Boards funded $122 million of the program. System Configuration II projects were completed in December The existing Tampa Bay Water system through System Configuration I and II is presented in Figure 1-1. During the 2008 update, the comprehensive project list was updated and approximately 300 potential water supply projects were evaluated based on public input and with the advice of a Planning Advisory Committee. Out of the comprehensive list, the Tampa Bay Water Board approved seven Master Water Plan projects December The Board directed that the feasibility of the seven Master Water Plan projects and three policy planning areas be further studied. The three policy studies have been completed. Due to lower demands, the Board has not needed to choose a project from the Master Water Plan to meet future water supply needs. Most of the feasibility work on the Master Water Plan projects has also not needed to be conducted. The feasibility phase of work on the Master Water Plan projects is now planned to begin in Master Water Plan Projects: Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis Pinellas County Gulf Coast Seawater Desalination Plant Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion Thonotosassa Wells Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Wells Surface Water Expansion Project Aquifer Recharge Project Planning Studies: Source Water Protection Program Regional Reclaimed Water Planning Assistance Demand Management and Water Use Efficiency Tampa Bay Water Page1-2

33 Section 1 Introduction and Overview Figure 1-1 Tampa Bay Water System Tampa Bay Water Page1-3

34 Section 1 Introduction and Overview B. Objectives of Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013 The objectives of this Long-Term Master Water Plan 2013 are to meet the requirements set forth in the Interlocal Agreement. According to the Interlocal Agreement, Section 2.09 Master Water Plan, the fiveyear update shall, to the extent deemed necessary or advisable by the Board: Identify current customers, projects, and future customers; Review and generally inventory existing Tampa Bay Water Facilities; Identify a capital improvement program; Review current Tampa Bay Water permits along with existing and projected regulations; Identify proposed new water supply facilities; Evaluate staffing; Provide hydraulic analysis of both existing and proposed systems; Evaluate present and future sources and treatment requirements in terms of capacity, reliability and economy; and Update the list of water supply facilities required to meet the anticipated water quality needs of the Member Governments for the next twenty years. The above elements are included in this document as shown in Table 1-1 Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-1 Section Descriptions Requirement Location Identify current customers, projects, and future customers. Section 5 Review and generally inventory existing Tampa Bay Water Facilities. Section 2 Capital and Systems Program. Section 3 Review current Tampa Bay Water permits along with existing and projected regulations. Section 7 Identify proposed new water supply facilities. Section 3 Tampa Bay Water Page1-4

35 Section 1 Introduction and Overview Evaluate staffing. Section 4 Provide hydraulic analysis of both existing and proposed systems. Section 6 Evaluate potential future water supply sources Section 11 Update the list of water supply facilities required to meet the anticipated quality water needs of the Member Governments for the next twenty years. Section 3 Additionally, Section 8 focuses on the protection of Tampa Bay Water s existing source waters through the agency s Source Water Protection Program and Section 9 discusses climate variability and uncertainty regarding long-term climate change. In Section 10, the update approved by the Board for the Demand Management Plan is presented. C. Review of Agreements Two agreements between Tampa Bay Water and the member governments were established in 1998 to govern the operations of Tampa Bay Water: the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement and the Master Water Supply Contract. Tampa Bay Water follows the requirements established by these agreements in meeting its commitments to the member governments. C1. Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement was executed in May, The Interlocal Agreement outlines critical production requirements for Tampa Bay Water, such as the following: If the actual delivery of quality water by the Authority to the member governments during any twelve-month period exceeds 75% of the aggregate permitted capacity of the Authority s production facilities, the general manager shall report to the Board and recommend that the Authority initiate preparation of Primary Environmental Permit applications necessary to ensure an adequate supply. The Authority shall initiate any such applications expeditiously. If the actual delivery of quality water by the Authority to the member governments during any twelve-month period exceeds 85% of the aggregate permitted capacity of the Authority s production facilities, the general manager shall report to the Board and recommend that the Authority file Primary Environmental Permit applications to ensure adequate supply. The Authority shall file any such applications expeditiously. Meeting these production requirements are essential in Tampa Bay Water s decision making process, while planning for its future water supplies. Tampa Bay Water updated its Long-Term Demand Tampa Bay Water Page1-5

36 Section 1 Introduction and Overview Forecasting models in 2008, which shows the future demand across seven Water Demand Planning Regions of Tampa Bay Water s six member governments. The forecasting model uses specific weather and socioeconomic models that generate separate demand projections for each of the planning regions. The model accounts for events of extreme drought, as well as normal hydrological events. The results of the modeling show that Tampa Bay Water s existing supply should meet the region s demands for at least a decade. The projects in the Master Water Plan have more than sufficient capacity to meet the member government s long-term 20 year needs. For planning purposes, choosing a future project(s) and beginning the preparation of water use permits should be based on the supply capacity under average hydrologic conditions since these projects are developed to meet long-term water supply needs and not expected seasonal drought events or rare significant drought years. Comparing the current probabilistic demand forecasts for the 50 th to 75 th percentile of demands against the capacity of the system during average hydrologic conditions indicates that beginning preparation of water use permit application(s) could be required in the timeframe. Submittal of the permit application(s) would not be required until at least These timeframes should be monitored and updated if needed every twelve months to meet the requirements of the Interlocal Agreement. The seven projects approved by the Board for the Master Water Plan in 2008 can be studied further during the feasibility phase of work that is planned to begin in 2014 to assist the Board in choosing the next project or projects to build. C2. Master Water Supply Contract The Master Water Supply Contract outlines Tampa Bay Water s obligations to the member governments. Section 8 states that Tampa Bay Water: shall sell and deliver sufficient Quality Water to the member governments to meet their need for Quality Water. shall be in default hereunder should it fail to provide each member government a supply of Quality Water sufficient to meet its needs, except where the Authority s failure to supply the Quality Water needs of each government is due to force majeure. The Master Water Supply Contract describes specific details of water delivery which must be met by Tampa Bay Water including: Points of connection to each member government ( Exhibit C ). Water quality standards for water delivered to member governments ( Exhibit D ). Procedures for developing new or modified points of connection. Tampa Bay Water Page1-6

37 Section 1 Introduction and Overview D. Conclusion Tampa Bay Water has accomplished a lot since its creation in 1998, when its water supply was dependent 100% on groundwater. The completion of Configurations I and II has resulted in a diversified water supply portfolio. This interconnected system consists of groundwater, surface water and desalinated water. Tampa Bay Water now owns and operates a water supply system of twelve treatment facilities, fourteen pumping stations and over 240 miles of large diameter pipes connecting the regional facilities. In addition to having a reliable and flexible delivery system, Tampa Bay Water is actively involved in conservation and energy management efforts through its Water Use Efficiency and Energy Management programs. Through their water conservation efforts, it is estimated that Tampa Bay Water s member governments saved approximately 26 million gallons per day of potable water by the end of 2011, and are projected to save up to 20 million gallons per day more by the end of water year Tampa Bay Water has completed an Energy Roadmap to guide the Agency in saving energy and cut operating costs. Each year, the Agency ranks and prioritizes projects for implementation that help achieve the goal of energy efficiency. The Agency has saved $45,000 per year in electric cost by implementing recommendations that came out of the energy audit of the Agency s administration building and is anticipating a $100,000 per year in savings by replacing older well pumps with new energy efficient models at the Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield. Tampa Bay Water can continue to implement and enhance its planning and management activities to address seasonal and severe drought events and long-term future water supply needs. These include things such as: Continue implementation of Agency s Water Shortage Mitigation Plan Implement Water Use Efficiency activities approved by the Board in its Demand Management Plan resolution Complete Future Needs Analysis Consider operational enhancements, both administrative and capital, that could further facility operational capacity within existing permit limits These activities can be conducted along with feasibility study of the seven projects in the Master Water Plan to ensure that Tampa Bay Water continues to meet its unequivocal obligation to provide quality water to the member governments. Tampa Bay Water Page1-7

38 Section 1 Introduction and Overview This page intentionally left blank. Tampa Bay Water Page1-8

39 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.1 Introduction Tampa Bay Water has constructed a regional water delivery system that is comprised of groundwater sources, surface water sources, an off-stream storage reservoir, a seawater desalination facility and pumping and piping to distribute Quality Water. The regional system facilities that are currently in service are summarized below in Table 2-1. Table 2-1: Tampa Bay Water Regional System Facilities Currently in Service Distribution Groundwater Facilities Surface Water Facilities 3 Booster Pumping Stations 21 points of connection ~115 miles of raw water pipeline ~156 miles of finished water pipeline 2 alkalinity adjustment facilities 4 interconnections where we can purchase water from our Members 13 wellfields 177 wells 5 individual wellfields 6 groundwater treatment facilities 2 groundwater hydrogen sulfide removal facilities 2 river withdrawal pump stations; 1 desalination withdrawal point 1 re-pump station billion gallon surface water storage reservoir 1 surface water treatment plant 1 seawater desalination plant 1 booster pump station 1 reservoir pump station 1 augmentation pump station (Harney Canal) The location of these facilities is shown on Figure 2-1. Tampa Bay Water has defined appropriate pumping capacities for our major facilities within the current regional system. The pumping capacities are grouped into three areas: Rated (which includes design or permitted), minimum, and sustainable operating capacities. Sustainable operating capacities are further defined as peak day and greater than five days. Rated capacity, a term used by regulatory agencies in the issuance of drinking water permits, is based on the design treatment capacity of the facility and successful completion of performance testing which has demonstrated the capabilities of the facility. The term permitted capacity refers to a water use permit limit on source withdrawal. The term Rated Capacity used in this evaluation uses either the design or permitted capacity to determine the maximum amount of water the facility can handle. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-1

40 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Figure 2-1: Tampa Bay Water Regional Water Supply and Delivery System The minimum operational capacity is the lowest amount of water that a facility can pump or treat during a 24- hour day. When there is insufficient source water to meet the minimum operational flow requirements or the need for the water reduces below the pumping minimum, then the facility is taken out of service. The facility is returned to service when either the demand increases or sufficient source water returns to maintain production at or above operational minimum rates. Operational minimum capacities are determined based on design, hydraulic limitations, and operational criteria. For the system performance evaluation (see Section 12), the five-day sustainable operating capacity is used because this capacity represents the amount of water that can move through a facility dependably and meet demands at the daily time scale. Sustainable operating capacity is based on performance and operational experience. Factors considered in determining sustainable capacity include: chemical feed systems, facility hydraulics, normal maintenance activities, water quality, and industry standards. In addition to pumping capacities, the Agency also has defined two hydraulic operating modes for the regional system: normal and bypass. Normal mode, which is assumed for the regional system performance evaluation, uses pumping capacities at the regional High Service Pumping Station and the Cypress Creek WTP to distribute potable water through the regional delivery system. In bypass mode, potable water Tampa Bay Water Page 2-2

41 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory flows around the Cypress Creek WTP due to an emergency at this plant and loss of service. Bypass mode is planned primarily for emergency use. Since system hydraulics change under these two operating modes, some five-day and peak day sustainable capacities change. 2.2 General Description of Facilities This section provides a general overview of each source water treatment plant facilities, raw and potable transmission facilities. Throughout this section, WTP will refer to water treatment plant. 2.2.a. Groundwater sources Currently, groundwater sources account for approximately half of the total available supply in the Tampa Bay Water s water service area. This service area includes Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. The term available supply includes permitted ground water sources and long-term average hydrologically available surface water sources with current infrastructure in place. Figure 2-1 shows the locations and well configuration of the existing wellfields. Table 2-2 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for these facilities. In general, each of Tampa Bay Water's existing wellfields includes a number of water supply wells equipped with vertical turbine well pumps, discharge piping and valves, instrumentation and controls, and raw water mains to carry the supply to a treatment facility. The quality of the untreated groundwater pumped directly from the wellfields meets most state and federal primary and secondary drinking water standards. Generally, the water requires only disinfection and stabilization (to control corrosivity) prior to distribution to customers. In some cases Tampa Bay Water treats the groundwater and blends it with other regional water supplies prior to delivery to a Member Government point of connection. In other cases raw groundwater is delivered to member government treatment facilities where it is treated for local distribution. Selected wellfields include auxiliary generators. Most of the wellfields are connected to the regional system through their nearby water treatment plants. Tampa Bay Water groundwater sources include thirteen wellfields and five individual wells. Eleven wellfields are managed under the Consolidated Water Use Permit (WUP). The South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield, Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells, Carrollwood wells and Eagles wells have individual water use permits. All groundwater sources are managed to meet Tampa Bay Water delivery requirements for regional demands. Management policy objectives include reliability, costeffectiveness, and environmental sustainability. The Optimized Regional Operations Plan (OROP), initiated in 1999, is a custom-built application which incorporates an optimization model and utilizes output from various models, current hydrologic and pumpage data, and a set of operating constraints to manage production from the 11 wellfields under the Consolidated Permit, the Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells (BUDW), and the Carrollwood wells through the development of weekly well rotation schedules. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-3

42 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Table 2-2: Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the Wellfield Facilities Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity WUP Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days mgd mgd mgd Normal Bypass Normal Bypass Wellfield mgd mgd mgd mgd Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells 9.24/ Carrollwood Wells Cosme/Odessa WF CWUP Cross Bar WF CWUP Cypress Bridge WF CWUP Cypress Creek WF CWUP Eagles Wells Eldridge Wilde WF CWUP Morris Bridge WF CWUP North Pasco WF CWUP NW Hillsborough WF CWUP SC Hillsborough WF 33/ Section 21 WF CWUP South Pasco WF CWUP Starkey WF CWUP a(1) Cosme-Odessa Wellfield The Cosme-Odessa Wellfield is comprised of 19 active wells and one standby well located in the northwest region of Hillsborough County. All of the wells except well 1 are located on one-acre parcels purchased by Tampa Bay Water. These one-acre parcels are located within larger tracts of property owned by the City of St. Petersburg. Wells 1 is located on property owned by the City of St. Petersburg with easements provided to Tampa Bay Water. The wells were constructed between 1930 and Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield groundwater production facilities. The well casings are 12 to 16 inches in diameter and range from 65 to 138 feet below land surface. The total well depths range from 300 feet to 384 feet. All of the wells are equipped with 25 or 30-horsepower vertical turbine pumps and pumping capacities range from 500 gallons per minute (gpm) to 1040 gpm. All wellheads are enclosed in prefabricated steel enclosures. Each well is surrounded by a security fence. Power at the site is provided by TECO at a single meter. Tampa Bay Water owns and maintains the power lines to each well site. Approximately seven miles of 16-inch through 36-inch diameter collection mains allow water from dispersed wells along Gunn Highway and within the Cosme-Odessa Wellfield property to be transported to the City of St. Petersburg s Cosme WTP, which also receives regional water from the South Pasco and Cosme Transmission Mains. The wellfield raw water collection main was constructed during the 1930s, with expansions to the north in the 1940 s and 1950 s. Public water supply is then transmitted to the City of St. Petersburg water service area via a distribution system owned and operated by the City of St. Petersburg. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-4

43 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.2.a(2) Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield The Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield, located in north-central Pasco County, is comprised of 17 wells and provides water to Tampa Bay Water's Regional System. The production wells are on individual one-acre parcels located within an 8,000-acre tract owned by Pinellas County. The wells were drilled during 1979 and 1980, and the wellfield began operation in Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield facilities. The wells range from approximately 485 to 710 feet in depth. The casings are 24-inches in diameter and range in depth from approximately 120 to 160 feet below land surface. The wells are equipped with 100 to 150-horsepower vertical turbine pumps rated at 2,400 gallons per minute each. All wellheads are enclosed by concrete block buildings. The larger surrounding property is fenced with onsite security provided 24-hours per day by Pinellas County. The entire wellfield can be operated from an auxiliary generator, which is owned and operated by Withlacoochee Electric Cooperative and located at the Cooperative's Pasco Trails substation. Water is piped to Tampa Bay Water s Cypress Creek WTP through approximately fifteen miles of 16 to 60-inch diameter collection mains. Approximately 10 miles of the main is 60-inch diameter piping. The 60-inch diameter main is located within the wellfield and in a pipeline right-of-way between the wellfield and the Cypress Creek WTP. The collection main interconnects with the collection main from the Cypress Creek Wellfield where it is disinfected and pumped into the regional system at the Cypress Creek WTP. 2.2.a(3) Cypress Bridge Wellfield The Cypress Bridge Wellfield consists of ten wells. The wells are on dispersed one- to four-acre properties located in south-central Pasco County and in north-central Hillsborough County. The ten wells were drilled between 1986 and Two wells (Numbers 5 and 7) were placed in service in 1988 to supply water directly to a portion of Pasco County s water distribution system. Those direct connections are no longer in place. The remaining wells were placed in service in The Cypress Bridge wells, Lake Bridge WTP, and transmission mains are owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The Cypress Bridge well casings are 16 to 24 inches in diameter and range from 130 feet to 203 feet in depth. The total well depths range from 580 to 803 feet. The wells are equipped with 150 to 200- horsepower vertical turbine pumps with variable speed drives and the pumping capacities range from 1700 gpm to 2700 gpm. The wellheads are enclosed by concrete block buildings and each site is enclosed by a security fence. The four wells located in Pasco County are supplied with power from the Withlacoochee Regional Electrical Cooperative, and the six wells in Hillsborough County are supplied by TECO. Four of the wells are equipped with auxiliary generators for continued operation in the event of a power failure. Others are equipped with generator receptacles to allow operation with a portable generator. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-5

44 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Water from the wells is pumped through a network of approximately ten miles of collection mains ranging from 16-inches to 36-inches in diameter. The raw water from the wellfield is treated at the Lake Bridge Water Treatment plant site and supply is then delivered to the regional system. 2.2.a(4) Cypress Creek Wellfield The Cypress Creek Wellfield is comprised of 13 wells and is located in central Pasco County on 4,900 acres, of which SWFWMD owns 3,628 acres and Tampa Bay Water owns the remainder. The wellfield facilities are owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. Well drilling was initiated in 1974, and the wells were fully permitted and operational by The wells range from 490 feet to 750 feet in depth. Twelve of the well casings are 24-inches in diameter and one is 18-inches in diameter. Casing depths range from approximately 80 feet to approximately 170 feet below land surface. The wells are equipped with 100 to 150-horsepower vertical turbine pumps. Rated operating capacities range from 2,100 gpm to 2,800 gpm. Some of the wellheads are enclosed by prefabricated steel enclosures, while the others are enclosed in concrete block buildings. The wellfield is fenced with electronic gates and camera security provided Tampa Bay Water s Operational headquarters. The entire wellfield can be operated from an auxiliary generator provided by the Withlacoochee Electric Cooperative and located at the Cypress Creek WTP. The wellfield includes approximately six miles of collection mains ranging in size from 12 inches in diameter to 48 inches in diameter. The transmission main interconnects with the transmission main from the Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield at the Cypress Creek WTP. Raw water from this wellfield is treated at the Cypress Creek WTP and pumped into the regional system. 2.2.a(5) North Pasco Wellfield The North Pasco Wellfield is located in west central Pasco County. The wellfield was permitted for six wells; four of the production wells have been constructed but only two are in operation. The wells are on dispersed one-acre tracts generally located within or adjacent to property purchased by the Florida Department of Transportation for mitigation. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield facilities. The existing 24-inch diameter wells are approximately 750 feet deep and are casings range in depth from 180 to 205 feet below land surface. The two operating wells are equipped with 150-horsepower pumps rated at approximately 2,400 gpm. Each well is located within a concrete block building and has a security fence around it. Power is provided at each well by Withlacoochee Regional Electrical Cooperative. The wells are also equipped with generator receptacles to allow operation with a portable generator in the event of power failure. The wellheads are enclosed by block buildings. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-6

45 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Raw water from the North Pasco Wellfield is pumped to the Starkey Wellfield raw water collection main via 16-inch collection piping and a 36-inch diameter raw water transmission main (both totaling approximately 4 miles) and then sent to New Port Richey s Joseph Maytum WTP. 2.2.a(6) Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield The Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield (NWHRW) is comprised of seven regional production wells and in northwestern Hillsborough County. The production wells are located on dispersed one to four-acre tracts. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield. The Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wells were drilled between 1975 and The wellfield was first permitted in 1984 and the existing pumps were installed in the early 1990s. The wells range from 650 to 762 feet in depth, and have 16- to 24-inch diameter casings. Casing depths range from 100 to 175 feet below land surface. The wells are equipped with 100- to 250-horsepower vertical turbine pumps and variable speed drives and are rated at 2,100 to 2,800 gpm. Each wellhead is enclosed by a concrete block building and is surrounded by a chain link fence. Power is provided at each well site by TECO. Three of the wells are equipped with auxiliary generators for continued operation in the event of a power failure. Others are equipped with generator receptacles to allow operation using a portable generator. Six of the seven regional wells supply water to Hillsborough County's Northwest Hillsborough Potable Water Facility (Fawn Ridge WTP) which serves Hillsborough Northwest Service Area. Raw water from these six wells is sent to Hillsborough County s Northwest Hillsborough WTP through collection mains ranging from 16 inches to 30 inches in diameter and totaling approximately seven miles. A 16-inch raw water transmission main connecting NWH well number 7 to the Section 21 Wellfield was completed in December Raw water from that well is disinfected at Hillsborough County s Lake Park WTP. Through an emergency interconnect, finished water from the Northwest Hillsborough WTP can be provided to the Regional System through the Northwest Hillsborough Pipeline that was completed in a(7) Section 21 Wellfield The Section 21 Wellfield, which includes five active wells, is located in northwest Hillsborough County. There are two additional permitted supply wells that are not connected to the collection piping. The wells were drilled in All of the pumps were replaced between the late 1980s and early 1990s. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield facilities. The depths of the wells range from 410 to 700 feet and the casing extends between 70 and 200 feet deep. The wells are located on one-acre parcels within a 583-acre tract owned by the City of St. Petersburg. The wells are equipped with 100-horsepower vertical turbine pumps each with a pumping capacity of 2,700 gpm. All of the wellheads are enclosed in prefabricated steel structures with a security fence enclosing Tampa Bay Water Page 2-7

46 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory each well site. Power is provided at the site by TECO at a single meter. The overhead powerlines in the wellfield are owned and maintained by Tampa Bay Water. Two of the wells can be connected to portable power generators. The wellfield includes approximately 1.5 miles of collection mains ranging from 16 to 24-inches in diameter. The collection mains were installed in 1962 and 1972, and Water from the Section 21 Wellfield, combined with raw water from NWH well number 7, is piped to Hillsborough County s Lake Park WTP for treatment. Finished water is delivered to the Northwest Hillsborough Service Area. Lake Park WTP also receives regional water through the South Pasco Transmission Main. Through an emergency interconnect, finished water from the Lake Park WTP can be provided to the Regional System through the South Pasco Transmission Main. 2.2.a(8) Starkey Wellfield The Starkey Wellfield includes nine active production wells located in west-central Pasco County on 7,980 acres of land owned by SWFWMD. The wells were drilled between 1974 and The wellfield facilities are owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The wells range from 12 to 24 inches in diameter and from 300 feet to 905 feet in depth. Casing depths range from approximately 63 feet to approximately 194 feet below land surface. The pumping capacities range from 700 to 2,100 gpm. The wells are enclosed in either steel or concrete block buildings, and do not have perimeter fencing installed. Power is provided in the wellfield by Progress Energy at each well site. Three wells have emergency power generators. These facilities provide water supply to the New Port Richey and West Pasco County service areas which are also connected to the Regional System through the West Pasco Transmission main that was completed and placed into service in December Raw water from the Starkey Wellfield is piped to the City of New Port Richey's Joseph Maytum WTP through approximately 12 miles of collection and transmission piping ranging from 8 inches to 42 inches in diameter. Raw water is treated and distributed to New Port Richey and Pasco County. Tampa Bay Water and the City of New Port Richey entered into a surplus water purchase agreement which guides the amount of groundwater treated at the Maytum WTP. 2.2.a(9) Morris Bridge Wellfield The Morris Bridge Wellfield is comprised of 20 active wells located on 3,800 acres of land in north-central Hillsborough County acquired by the SWFWMD for flood control as part of the lower Hillsborough River Flood Detention Area. The wellfield and treatment facilities are owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The wells that are approximately 550 to 682 feet deep. The well casings are 16 inches in diameter and extend to approximately 210 feet below land surface. All of the wells are equipped with 75-horsepower vertical turbine pumps with a pumping capacity of 1,500 gpm. Each wellhead is enclosed in a concrete block building, and surrounded by a chain-link security fence. Power is provided by TECO at a single Tampa Bay Water Page 2-8

47 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory meter that serves the Morris Bridge Booster Pump Station and treatment facility and the Wellfield. The power lines to each well are owned and maintained by Tampa Bay Water. Standby power is available from the City of Tampa s generators located just west of the wellfield. A network of approximately ten miles of collection mains ranging in diameter from 12 inches to 48 inches carries water from the Morris Bridge Wellfield to the Morris Bridge Water Treatment Facility. Raw groundwater is disinfected and then pumped into the Morris Bridge Transmission Main for regional distribution. 2.2.a(10) Eldridge-Wilde Wellfield The Eldridge-Wilde Wellfield is located on approximately 1,800 acres in the northeast corner of Pinellas County and the northwest corner of Hillsborough County. The wellfield consists of 34 active wells developed between 1954 and Tampa Bay Water owns one acre parcels around the wells in the western portion of the wellfield located in Pinellas County on property owned by Pinellas County. The eastern portion of the wellfield is located in Hillsborough County on property and owned by Hillsborough County. Property rights for these wells still need to be obtained from Hillsborough County. The wellfield facilities and hydrogen sulfide removal facility are owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The wells range from 210 to 863 feet in depth. The well casings are 12 inches and 16 inches in diameter and range in depth from approximately 63 to 183 feet below land surface. The wells are equipped with 15- to 75-horsepower vertical turbine pumps which have design capacities ranging from 700 gpm to 2,100 gpm. The wells are surrounded by small steel buildings that do not have a perimeter fence, Power is provided to the wellfield by Progress Energy at one meter. Tampa Bay Water owns and maintains the power lines to each well site. Water from the Eldridge-Wilde Wellfield is piped to Tampa Bay Water s hydrogen sulfide removal facility for treatment through approximately nine miles of collection mains ranging from 8 inches to 42 inches in diameter. The water then goes to Pinellas County's Keller WTP for disinfection. Finished water from the Keller Plant, along with Regional Water from the Keller Connector Transmission Main, is then transmitted to Pinellas County s service area. The collection mains were constructed between 1954 and a(11) South Pasco Wellfield The South Pasco Wellfield is comprised of eight active wells located on one-acre parcels within a 590-acre tract owned by the City of St. Petersburg in southwest Pasco County. The eight wells were drilled in Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield and treatment facilities. The well depths range from 703 to 708 feet in depth. Casing depths range from 70 feet to 126 feet below land surface. All of the wells are equipped with 125 or 150-horsepower vertical turbine pumps with Tampa Bay Water Page 2-9

48 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory pumping capacities ranging from 2,400 gpm to 2,700 gpm. All wellheads are enclosed in prefabricated steel enclosures, and a security fence surrounds each well site. Power is provided by Progress Energy at a single meter location. Tampa Bay Water owns and maintains the overhead power lines to each well site. A backup power generator located adjacent to one of the well sites can provide backup power. Raw water is collected in approximately 1.5 miles of collection mains ranging from 12 to 42 inches in diameter, and then treated at the South Pasco Wellfield Water Treatment Facility site. Treated water is pumped to the South Pasco Transmission Main, mixed with water that is provided from the Cypress Creek Transmission Main and then sent to the Cosme WTP and Lake Park WTP for distribution. 2.2.a(12) South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield The South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield is comprised of 17 production wells. The wellfield is located in southeast Hillsborough County, in the vicinity of Lithia-Pinecrest, Keysville, and Nichols roads. The individual well sites total approximately 30 acres. Collection mains that are not located within the right-of-way are located within an additional 8.2 acres. The wells were drilled in the mid- to late-1980s and the completed system was placed into operation in Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield. The wells range from 560 feet to 910 feet in depth and the well casings are 20 inches in diameter. Casing depths range from 200 feet to 240 feet below land surface. The wells were replaced in 2012 with 140- horsepower, constant-speed vertical turbine pumps rated at 2,400 gpm each. Power is provided at each well site by TECO. Two of the wells are equipped with pad-mounted auxiliary generators to allow continued operation in the event of a power failure. Others are equipped with generator receptacles to allow operation using a portable generator. Each wellhead is enclosed by a concrete block building. And a perimeter fence. Raw water is collected in approximately 13 miles of 16-inch diameter to 54-inch diameter mains and is treated at the Lithia WTP. Regional water can also be delivered to the Lithia WTP from the Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells Transmission Main and Brandon/South-Central Connection. Potable water from the Lithia WTP is distributed into the South Central Hillsborough water service area. 2.2.a(13) Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells The Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells facility (BUDW) consists of five widely-dispersed wells in the Brandon area. The original BUDW well number 5 was removed from service during Water Year 2006, and was replaced with a BUDW well number 5R in Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wellfield and BUDW treatment facilities. The wells range from 201 to 425 feet deep with casing depths of 104 to 130 feet. Each well site is located on well sites that range from 0.4 to 4.0 acres in size. The wells are located in buildings that are constructed Tampa Bay Water Page 2-10

49 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory of concrete block and enclosed by a security fence. Power is provided at each well site by TECO. Each well has a receptacle connection for a portable emergency power generator. Raw water from the wells is collected in approximately eight miles of collection mains ranging from 8 inches to 24 inches in diameter. There are two treatment facilities for the BUDW system. BUD well 7 has treatment and disinfection facilities located at the well site, and a water treatment facility at the BUDW well 5 site was placed into service in 2009 and provides treatment for the remaining four wells. Treated water from the BUDW is provided to both the Regional System and to the Lithia WTP through the Brandon Transmission Main and Brandon South/Central Connector. BUDW well 2 has a 125- horsepower vertical turbine pump rated at 1320 gpm, BUDW well 4 has a 100-horsepower vertical turbine pump rated at 1,320 gpm, BUDW well 5R has a 200-horsepower vertical turbine pump rated at 1400 gpm, BUDW well 6 has a 60-horsepower vertical turbine pump rated at 660 gpm, and BUDW well 7 has a 200- horsepower vertical turbine pump rated at 2,130 gpm,. All pumps are equipped with variable frequency drives. 2.2.a (14) Carrollwood Wells The Carrollwood Wells facility consists of three dispersed wells in the Northwest Hillsborough service area. The Carrollwood wells are located on residential size lots within Carrollwood neighborhood. Tampa Bay Water acquired the water use permit, production wells and the residential lots that they are located on in 2004 and Hillsborough County acquired the service area from Florida Governmental Utilities Association (FGUA). Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wells. The wells range from 300 to 530 feet deep with casing depths of 87 to 120 feet. Well 1 is equipped with a 30-horsepower constant speed vertical turbine pump with a pumping capacity of 550 gpm, well 2 is equipped with a 40-horsepower constant speed vertical turbine pump with a pumping capacity of 625 gpm, and well 3 is equipped with a 50-horsepower constant speed vertical turbine pump with a pumping capacity of 830 gpm. Two of the wells are located within strucures that look like houses to blend in with the surrounding neighborhood, and the third is in a fabricated steel enclosure. Power is provided to the wells by TECO. Water from the wells is collected in approximately four miles of collection mains ranging from 10 inches to 12 inches in diameter, and delivered to the Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield collection main for treatment at Hillsborough County s Northwest Hillsborough WTP. The wells are connected to the Regional System via a raw water main that connects to the Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield collector main. 2.2.a(15) Eagles The Eagles Wells consists of two production wells that are located in Northwest Hillsborough County. The wells were previously owned and operated by Hillsborough County and later transferred to Tampa Bay Water in 1998 after being out of service for several years. Tampa Bay Water redeveloped this source Tampa Bay Water Page 2-11

50 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory of water in 2004 which included the rehabilitation of one of the existing production wells, construction of one new production well, installation of well houses and a new collection line. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the wells. The wells range from 401 to 408 feet deep with casing depth of 147 feet. Well 1 is equipped with a 25- horsepower constant speed vertical turbine pump with a pumping capacity of 170 gpm and well 2 is equipped with a 10-horsepower constant speed vertical turbine pump with a pumping capacity of 200 gpm. Power is provided to the wells by TECO. Supply from the wells is delivered to the construction of three miles of new 8-inch diameter City of St. Petersburg's Cosme WTP for treatment and distribution. 2.2.a(16) Crystal Lakes Manor Wells The Crystal Lakes Manor Wells consists of two production wells were constructed in 1983, and are located in Northwest Hillsborough County. The wells are located on 16.5 by 15 foot fee parcels, with easements for the associated piping. Tampa Bay Water owns and maintains these wells. The two subdivision wells are permitted under the Consolidated Water Use Permit. The wells are 450 feet and 560 feet deep, and have casing depths of 148 and 140 feet, with 30-horsepower pumps, each with a pumping capacity of 550 gpm. The wells are each surrounded by a wooden fence. Power is provided to the wells by TECO. Hillsborough County provides emergency power capability for to these wells at their treatment facility. Hillsborough County operates and maintains disinfection for the two subdivision wells that provide potable water to an isolated service area within the County s Northwest Hillsborough Service Area. Hillsborough County plans to include the area currently served exclusively by these wells into its potable water distribution system by extending a water main to the area in When that project is completed, Tampa Bay Water will decommission these two wells. 2.2.b Tampa/Hillsborough Interconnect The Tampa/Hillsborough Interconnect (THI) is a metered connection that allows surplus treated water from the City of Tampa to be used in Hillsborough County's Northwest County distribution system. The Tampa/Hillsborough Interconnect became operational in 1997 and can deliver up to 15 mgd. Tampa Bay Water owns the pump station while Hillsborough County controls the daily pumpage to meet Tampa Bay Water s request. This interconnection is used to increase the pressure of the City of Tampa supply, enabling it to be delivered into the County s water distribution system. Power is provided to the facility by TECO. The water obtained from the interconnect is identical in quality to the water delivered to the City of Tampa s water customers; however, Hillsborough County also owns and operates additional chemical feed trim facilities at this site to be used if needed for their system. Table 2-3 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for this facility. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-12

51 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Table 2-3 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the Tampa/Hillsborough Interconnect Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days mgd mgd mgd mgd mgd c U.S. 301 Interconnect In 2002, the City of Tampa constructed a 36-inch diameter interconnect (U.S. 301 Interconnect) in order to sell surplus treated water to Tampa Bay Water. In 2008, Tampa Bay Water made improvements at the U.S. 301 interconnect that also allows Tampa Bay Water to provide emergency water to the City, per Section 3.08B of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement. In 2011, the pipeline was extended to allow the chloraminated supply to be delivered to the storage tanks at the Regional High Service Pump Station. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the facilities. Table 2-4 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for this facility. Table 2-4 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the US 301 Interconnect Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days Facility mgd mgd mgd mgd Emergency Flow to Tampa Flow to Tampa Bay Water d Enhanced Surface Water System The Enhanced Surface Water System (ESWS) facilities consist of a pump station on the Tampa Bypass Canal (TBC), a pump station on the Alafia River, the regional surface water treatment plant (RWSTP), a re-pump station, the South-Central Intertie Booster pump station, the Regional Reservoir pump station, the C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir and associated transmission mains (Figure 3-2). The regional surface water treatment plant is located at the Regional Facility Site along with the Regional High Service Pump Station (HSPS) and Alkalinity Adjustment Facility (AAF). The original ESWS facilities were placed into service in late 2002 and early 2003, with the exception of the Regional Reservoir. The Regional Reservoir was completed and placed into service in Expansion of the ESWS began in 2007 and was completed in Table 2-5 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for the ESWS facilities that handle raw water. Table 2-5 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the Enhanced Surface Water System Raw Water Facilities Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity Facility Offstream Reservoir Pump Station WUP Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days Operating Conditions mgd mgd mgd mgd mgd Influent Effluent/Gravity Limit / Effluent 52 mgd Effluent Alafia off Tampa Bay Water Page 2-13

52 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Tampa Bypass Canal High Head Pump Station Low Head Alafia Pump Station all Re-pump Station Alafia 52 mgd High Head Alafia Off Low Head Alafia Off SCH Pump Station On South Central To Reservoir Hillsborough Intertie From Reservoir (PS off) Booster Station From Reservoir (PS on) Harney Pump Station all d(1) C.W. (Bill) Young Regional Reservoir The C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir is located on 5,200 acres in southeastern Hillsborough County. The Reservoir is an earthen embankment with an average height of 48 feet above natural grade. It impounds approximately 15.5-billion gallons (47,500 acre-feet) of raw water from the Hillsborough and Alafia rivers and Tampa Bypass Canal. The circumference at the top of the reservoir berm is approximately five miles. Renovation of the regional reservoir is scheduled to begin January The reservoir is expected to be returned to service by October The off-stream Reservoir is an integral part of Tampa Bay Water's ESWS. It stores captured surface water from the Tampa Bypass Canal, the Alafia River, and the Hillsborough River during high flow periods in accordance with water use permit withdrawal rules. The reservoir is connected to the South-Central Hillsborough Intertie via the 8-mile long, 84-inch diameter, bi-directional Reservoir Transmission Main. Previously, raw water from the reservoir was piped to the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant for treatment using a gravity-feed system. In 2011, Tampa Bay Water completed construction of the Offstream Reservoir pump station to allow increased drawdown capacity from the reservoir to the treatment plant. 2.2.d(2) Tampa Bypass Canal and Hillsborough River Water Supply The Tampa Bypass Canal facilities were part of the System Configuration I projects in the Master Water Plan. Construction of the Tampa Bypass Canal surface water supply facilities was completed in Structure S-161 is utilized to divert a percentage of high flows from the Hillsborough River to the Tampa Bypass Canal. This diverted river flow, as well as flow originating from the Tampa Bypass Canal, is withdrawn from the middle and/or lower pool of the Tampa Bypass Canal at a single pumping facility located on the east side of the Tampa Bypass Canal (adjacent to flood control structure S-162). The current water use permit authorizes Tampa Bay Water to withdraw all the water from the Lower Pool of the Tampa Bypass Canal when the pool level is above 9.0 feet and authorizes a flow-based diversion rate of 10% to 40% of the Hillsborough River when flow over the Hillsborough River Dam is above 65 mgd (100 cubic feet per second), up to a maximum diversion of 194 mgd. The maximum total daily withdrawal authorized from the Tampa Bypass Canal is 258 mgd (400 cubic feet per second). Tampa Bay Water Page 2-14

53 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory The TBC pump station delivers raw water from the middle pool and lower pool of the TBC through two miles of 84-inch diameter pipeline to raw water storage tanks at the regional facility site. Raw water is either sent to the RSWTP for treatment or pumped to the Regional Reservoir via the Re-pump station for storage. The previously existing Tampa Bypass Canal facilities included four 600-horsepower vertical turbine pumps. In 2011, expansion of the Tampa Bypass Canal pump station was completed and included the installation of four new 800-horsepower vertical turbine pumps, modification to the existing pumps to 800 horsepower each, installation of four variable frequency drives, new intake screens and auxiliary power generation facilities, with an expanded capacity of not less than 200 mgd. Power is provided to this facility by TECO. Generators located onsite can provide enough power to supply 66 mgd or raw surface water from this location. 2.2.d(3) Alafia River Water Supply and Pump Station The Alafia River Project was another System Configuration I project completed as part of the Master Water Plan. The Alafia River Pump Station facilities were placed into service in The current water use permit (renewed in 2012) authorizes Tampa Bay Water to withdraw 10 percent of the flow from the Alafia River when the river s baseline flow rate is at least 92.4 mgd (143 cubic feet per second). No diversion is allowed when the baseline flow is 82.7 mgd (128 cfs) or less. When the baseline flow is between 129 cfs and 143 cfs, daily diversion is limited to the difference between the baseline flow and 82.7 mgd (128 cfs). The maximum daily withdrawal is permitted at 60.0 mgd. The Alafia River Pump Station is located near the Bell Shoals Road bridge over the Alafia River. The pump station delivers raw water to the RSWTP through the 72-inch diameter South-Central Hillsborough Intertie or to the Regional Reservoir through its transmission main. The Alafia River Pump Station includes four 800-horsepower and vertical turbine pumps with variable frequency drives. Power is provided to this facility by TECO. 2.2.d(4) Surface Water System Raw Pumping and Transmission Facilities South-Central Hillsborough Intertie The South-Central Hillsborough Intertie is a bi-directional, 72-inch diameter, welded steel, 13-mile pipeline that delivers raw water from the Alafia River Pump Station and the Regional Reservoir to the Tampa Bay Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant for treatment. It can also convey raw water from the Tampa Bypass Canal and Hillsborough River sources to the Regional Reservoir for storage through the connection to the Reservoir Transmission Main. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-15

54 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Regional Reservoir Transmission Main The Regional Reservoir Transmission Main is a bi-directional, 84-inch, welded steel, 8-mile pipeline that connects the Regional Reservoir to the Alafia River Intake and pump station and the South-Central Hillsborough Intertie. This pipeline conveys raw surface water from the Tampa Bypass and Alafia River pump stations to the Regional Reservoir for storage and conveys stored regional reservoir water to the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant via the South-Central Hillsborough Intertie. Re-pump Station Tampa Bay Water s re-pump station is located at the Regional Facility Site and allows water from the Tampa Bypass Canal to be pumped to the Regional Reservoir through the South-central Hillsborough Intertie/Reservoir Transmission Main. Under System II expansion efforts, the pumping capacity was expanded to not less than 180 mgd with the addition of two new pumps and associated electrical equipment and yard piping. Expansion was completed in Power is provided to this pump station by TECO. South Central Hillsborough Intertie Booster Pumping Station The South Central Hillsborough Intertie (SCHI) Booster Pump Station is a new facility located along the South-Central Hillsborough Intertie. The SCHI Booster Pump station increases the pumping capacity of raw water from the Re-pump Station to the Regional Reservoir. In addition, the booster pump station can flow in the opposite direction increasing the flow of raw water from the Regional Reservoir to the Surface Water Treatment Plant. The facility consists of a pump building to house two 2,750 horsepower pumps, with a design pumping capacity of not less than 180 mgd, an electrical building for the variable frequency drive, a 300,000 gallon surge tank, and associated yard piping. Power is provided to this facility by TECO. The new booster pump station was completed in Offstream Reservoir Pump Station In 2011, Tampa Bay Water completed construction of the Off-stream Reservoir pump station. This pump station can increase flow of raw water from the Regional Reservoir to the Surface Water Treatment Plant. The function of the Offstream Reservoir Pump Station is to pump raw water from the Regional Reservoir to the Tampa Bay Water Surface Water Treatment Plant. The facility consists of four 400-horsepower pumps, a new electrical building for the variable frequency drives, and associated yard piping. The facility has a design pumping capacity of not less than 120 mgd. Power is provided to this facility by TECO. 2.2.d(5)Harney Pump Station Tampa Bay Water Page 2-16

55 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Tampa Bay Water's Harney Pump Station (also known as the Tampa Bypass Canal at Harney Road Pump Station) is utilized to augment the City of Tampa's raw water supply by pumping water from the Tampa Bypass Canal middle pool to the Hillsborough River Reservoir. Water is only pumped from the Tampa Bypass Canal when necessary to augment river flow into the City s reservoir. Tampa Bay Water has a water use permit which sets forth the criteria when augmentation is allowed. The station is located in central Hillsborough County along the Tampa Bypass Canal at Harney Road. The pump station includes two 150-horsepower constant speed submersible propeller pumps and one vertical turbine pump. This facility has been in service since Power is provided to this Facility by TECO. 2.2.d(6) Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant The Tampa Bay Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant is located in central Hillsborough County near Columbus Drive Extension and U.S. Highway 301. The plant treats surface water from the Tampa Bypass Canal, Alafia River, Hillsborough River and the C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir. Operation of the plant first began in The finished water is pumped to three 7.5 million gallon ground storage tanks for storage and blending with desalinated water. When the plant was placed into service in 2002, the treatment facilities could treat up to 66 mgd; with the addition of the ninth filter basin, this treatment capacity was expanded to 72 mgd. Tampa Bay Water completed an expansion of this plant in 2010 to a FDEP-rated capacity of 120 mgd. Treatment at the surface water facilities includes: ph adjustment using lime and or caustic soda; Enhanced coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation using a high-rate ballasted sedimentation process, sulfuric acid and ferric sulfide; Primary disinfection using ozone; Biologically active filtration for turbidity reduction (particulate removal), taste and odor control, and reduction of biodegradable organic carbon; Secondary disinfection chlorination (followed by ammonia addition after blending with desalinated water); and Alkalinity adjustment carbon dioxide or sodium hydroxide addition into the 84-inch diameter North-Central Hillsborough Intertie prior to leaving the Regional Facility Site. The surface water plant also includes residuals and liquid waste handling facilities. Residual handling facilities include gravity thickeners, belt filter presses, and an area that further dries the processed solids by stockpiling on site. The ultimate disposal of the solids is offsite beneficial reuse as an agricultural soil amendment. Liquid wastes include spent backwash water, belt filter wash water, filter-to-waste water, gravity thickener overflow water, belt filter press filtrate, and miscellaneous plant drains. These liquid wastes are equalized in a recycle surge basin and then returned (pumped) back to the headworks of the plant. Solids that accumulate in the recycle surge basin are sent to the gravity thickener. The plant also includes an administration/control building which has laboratory and pilot plant facilities, a control room, offices, locker rooms and restroom facilities, an electrical room, and a maintenance workroom. Power is Tampa Bay Water Page 2-17

56 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory provided to this Facility by TECO. There is enough emergency power generation capacity to produce 66 mgd of treated supply. Other buildings on the plant site include chemical storage buildings for liquid and dry chemical storage; an ozone building which houses ozone generators, power supply units, and a chilled water system; and a sludge dewatering/maintenance building that contains the belt filter presses. 2.2.d(7) Regional Distribution and High Service Pumping Potable water from the Tampa Bay Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant and Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant are blended in ground storage tanks at the Regional Facility Site. The Regional High Service Pump Station delivers this blended potable water from the ground storage tanks into the regional transmission System. Expansion of the High Service Pump Station s pumping capacity was completed in The expanded High Service Pump Station at the Tampa Bay Regional Facilities Site consists of six 2,000-horsepower horizontal split-case pumps with variable frequency drives and a design capacity of not less than 135 mgd. The expansion also included modification to the chemical feed systems and additional auxiliary power to maintain a treatment and delivery capacity of 66 mgd, in the event of a commercial power failure. Power is provided to this Facility by TECO. There is enough emergency power generation capacity to pump 66 mgd of treated supply to the regional system. The pumps, motors, and controls are housed in a building located near the ground storage tanks. Chloramination of the blended treated supplies from the RSWTP and Desalination Plant occurs at the regional facility site prior to pumping treated water into the regional distribution system. Table 2-6 lists the minimum and sustainable capacities for the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant, the Regional High Service Pumping Station. Table 2-6 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the of the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant, the Regional High Service Pumping Station Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days Facility Operating Conditions mgd mgd mgd Normal mgd Bypass mgd Normal mgd Bypass mgd Regional Surface Water Treatment Facility Desalination >90 degrees Facility <90 degrees Regional High Service Pumping Station Cypress Creek at 65 psi e Seawater Desalination Facility The Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant, located adjacent to Tampa Electric Company s Big Bend Power station on Tampa Bay, began full operation at the end of The Desalination facility is designed to produce potable water into the Tampa Bay Water Regional System. The facility utilizes reverse osmosis (RO) technology to treat water drawn from the condenser cooling water discharge of TECO s power Tampa Bay Water Page 2-18

57 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory station. Power is also provided to this facility by TECO. Table 2-2 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for this facility. The reverse osmosis system has seven independent trains, each comprised of a transfer pump, cartridge filter, associated high pressure pump, an energy recovery turbine and reverse osmosis membranes. The facility has an additional second pass train to retreat the back permeate from four trains of the initial seven trains. The second pass was expanded to retreat the back permeate from six trains. This expansion was completed in August Facilities at the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant include: Intake/discharge facilities intake pumps, cooling water pumps, concentrate discharge; Pretreatment facilities initial intake oxidation treatment, traveling screens, chemical mixing, coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, upflow sand filters, diatomaceous earth filters, and micron filtration (cartridge filters); Reverse osmosis facilities semi-permeable membranes (first pass); Second Pass nanofiltration (10 percent of first pass) Post treatment facilities lime addition and carbon dioxide addition as needed for stabilization, and chlorination; and Storage/finished water transmission storage, transfer pumping, transmission pipeline. A maximum of 55 million gallons per day of seawater is pumped into the desalination plant through a 54- inch diameter high density polyethylene intake pipeline by three 350-horsepower vertical turbine intake pumps. Installation of a fourth vertical turbine was completed in April After entering the plant, the seawater goes through pretreatment processes to reduce turbidity, silt, and fouling potential of the raw seawater supply. The pretreatment processes help to protect the reverse osmosis membranes from physical damage and blockage of the feed channels. After pretreatment, the supply is sent through the reverse osmosis treatment membranes which remove dissolved salt ions and organics from the feed water. If the first pass membrane permeate levels are below 100 milligrams per liter as chloride, it is not necessary to run the second pass units. Anytime the measurement of chlorides is above 100 milligrams per liter as chloride, second pass treatment is required. Following reverse osmosis membrane treatment, the permeate (product water) goes through a series of post treatment processes which include carbon dioxide addition, lime addition, and chlorination. Finished water gravity flows into the onsite five million gallon storage tank. Water is then pumped to the storage tanks at the Regional Facility Site via the Seawater Desalination Transmission Main. The concentrate created in the reverse osmosis process is sent to the plant s discharge facilities, which include a reverse osmosis concentrate splitter box and a 48-inch diameter high density polyethylene discharge pipeline. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-19

58 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.2.f Ground Water Treatment Plants Tampa Bay Water operates six groundwater treatment plants; Morris Bridge WTP, Lake Bridge WTP, Cypress Creek WTP, South Pasco WTP, and Brandon Urban Dispersed Well Site 5 and Well Site 7 WTPs. In addition, the Agency operates one hydrogen sulfide removal facility and a second hydrogen sulfide removal plant is being constructed. The groundwater treatment plants provide chemical treatment and disinfection of raw groundwater. The treated groundwater is either delivered to a Member Government or blended with regional water for delivery to downstream points of connection. Table 2-7 shows the rated (i.e., permitted or design), minimum and sustainable capacities for these facilities. Table 2-7 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the Groundwater Treatment Facilities Facility Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant and Pump Station Lake Bridge Water Treatment Plant Morris Bridge Water Treatment Plant and Booster Pump Station South Pasco Water Treatment Plant BUD 5 Water Treatment Plant BUD 7 Water Treatment Plant Keller Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant Lithia Ozone Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days mgd mgd mgd Normal mgd Bypass mgd Normal mgd Bypass mgd f(1)Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant and Pump Station The Cypress Creek facility is the operational control center of Tampa Bay Water's Regional System. The plant is located in central Pasco County in the western portion of the Cypress Creek Wellfield property. The Cypress Creek treatment facilities can treat raw groundwater from the Cross Bar Ranch and Cypress Creek wellfields. This treated groundwater is blended with Regional Water from the Cypress Bridge Transmission Main (mixture of surface, desalinated and groundwater) and pumped to the Cypress Creek Transmission Main for distribution to the Member Governments. The pump station was originally constructed between 1973 and It was expanded in 1981 and 1989 to include the fifth and sixth Tampa Bay Water Page 2-20

59 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory pumps and an empty position for a future seventh pump. In 2010, the high service pump station consisted of five 1,250 and one 1,500-horsepower, horizontal split-case pumps. Three were equipped for variable speed operation. The entire treatment plant and pump station can be operated from either of two electrical power feeds from separate electrical substations from Withlacoochee Electric Cooperative. Also, the facility can be operated from auxiliary generators located at the plant. An automated closed transition system allows transition from regular power to auxiliary power without shutting down the plant. This arrangement is important because the plant frequently shifts to auxiliary power during storm events. The pump room is located within a concrete walled building with a steel roof which also houses a control room and an electrical room. The building was upgraded in 1998 to improve hurricane resistance. A separate block and steel building houses staff offices and a water quality laboratory. Expansion of the pumping capacity was completed in Expansion included adding the seventh 1,250-horsepower horizontal centrifugal pump and the addition of a variable frequency drive to one of the existing pumps. In addition, a new five million-gallon storage tank and associated yard piping improvements were included. The major components of the expanded Cypress Creek Water Treatment Facility include: Treatment building for chemical feed and storage; Three 5 million-gallon prestressed concrete ground storage tanks; High service pump station; Emergency generators; Operations building; Laboratory building; Storage/maintenance buildings; and an Infrastructure and Emergency management building. The chemical feed and storage equipment located in the treatment building includes: Two 5,200-gallon sodium hydroxide storage tanks and the associated feed system, Four 7,200-gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and the associated feed system, Two 1,900-gallon aqua ammonia storage tanks and the associated feed system, and One 350-gallon aqua ammonia scrubber tank. The Infrastructure and Emergency Management Building houses staff offices for operations, maintenance, instrumentation and controls, and construction groups. The building was designed and constructed with a Hurricane Category 5 rating and serves as a command center during emergency events. 2.2.f(2)Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Monitoring and Control Tampa Bay Water Page 2-21

60 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Tampa Bay Water's entire Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system can be remotely monitored and controlled at the operations center at the Cypress Creek facility and the Regional High Service Pumping Station. Tampa Bay Water's SCADA system consists of Remote Terminal Units located at metering sites, well pump stations, water treatment facilities, booster pumping stations, and storage tanks. Communication between the Remote Terminal Units and the SCADA system is through leased telephone lines, as well as Tampa Bay Water owned-copper wire and fiber cables. The SCADA system host computers can access any remote terminal unit to monitor and historically archive 'real-time' operating conditions, as well as implement control strategies to start and/or stop pumps, change local operating limits, or respond to alarm events. The SCADA system has been expanded to include monitoring of Tampa Bay Water's regional facilities, and data collection from chloramine monitoring sites located throughout the water transmission system. The system is also interconnected with Tampa Bay Water's data management network. This allows data collection for use in predictive system modeling and water resource allocation efforts within Tampa Bay Water. 2.2.f(3)Lake Bridge Water Treatment Plant The Lake Bridge WTP is located at the Lake Bridge Booster Pump Station site in northern Hillsborough County and is owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The treatment plant treats groundwater from the Cypress Bridge Wellfield and delivers it into the Cypress Bridge transmission main. Treatment at the plant consists of disinfection using chlorine and ammonia. The chemical feed and storage equipment located in the treatment buildings include: Two 600-gallon sodium hydroxide storage tanks and associated feed system, Two 6,000-gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and associated feed system, Two 3,250-gallon aqua ammonia storage tanks and associated feed system, and One 530 gallon aqua ammonia scrubber tank. This chemical storage is also used for the disinfection residual trim and ph adjustment functions described under the Lake Bridge Booster Pump Station. Power is provided to this treatment facility by TECO. This facility also has an emergency power generator. 2.2.f(4)Morris Bridge Water Treatment Plant and Booster Pump Station The Morris Bridge WTP treats, stores and pumps water withdrawn from the Morris Bridge Wellfield into Tampa Bay Water s regional system via the Morris Bridge Transmission Main. This facility is located on a three-acre site adjacent to the City of Tampa's Morris Bridge Water Treatment Plant in north-central Hillsborough County. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-22

61 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory The original plant was constructed in 1997 and consisted of three 600-horsepower vertical turbine pumps, two of which were equipped with variable frequency drives, a 5 million gallon ground storage tank, chemical feed systems, and one control building. To accommodate higher regional system pressures, in 2010 a new 1,000-horsepower variable frequency drive pump was installed. The new pump installation which can operate at higher discharge pressure, replaced the sole constant speed pump from the original design. This improvement maintains the existing drinking water permit capacity of 30 mgd. There were also additional improvements to the plant in 2010 which included electrical upgrades, discharge piping modifications, improvements to the chemical feed systems and analyzers. The current chemical feed and storage systems at this facility include: Two 4,200 gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and associated feed systems, Two 1,325 gallon aqua ammonia storage tanks and associated feed systems, and One 80 gallon aqua ammonia scrubber tank. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates this facility. Power is provided to this treatment facility and adjacent wellfield by TECO. The Agency also has an agreement with the City of Tampa to provide auxiliary power from the City s Morris Bridge plant. 2.2.f(5) South Pasco Water Treatment Plant The South Pasco WTP is located at the South Pasco Wellfield and provides treatment and disinfection for this wellfield. This WTP was placed into service in 2003 as part of the Regional Chloramination Project. The finished water from the plant blends with the regional supply in the South Pasco Transmission Main. The blended supply is then delivered to Hillsborough County s Lake Park Water Treatment Plant and St. Petersburg s Cosme Water Treatment Plant. The chemical feed and storage systems associated with this plant include: Three 8,100 gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and associated feed systems, Two 500 gallon aqua ammonia storage tanks and associated feed systems, and One 80 gallon aqua ammonia scrubber tank. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the treatment plant. Power is provided to this facility by Progress Energy. At this location auxiliary power is also available. 2.2.f(6) BUD 5 Water Treatment Plant Tampa Bay Water Page 2-23

62 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory The BUD 5 WTP is located in South Central Hillsborough County and Tampa Bay Water owns and operates this facility. The plant was constructed and commissioned in January The plant treats and disinfects the raw groundwater from BUD wells 2, 4, 5R, and 6. Power is provided by TECO. Treated water from the BUD 5 water treatment plant enters the regional system through the Brandon Transmission Main. Distribution can be to Hillsborough County s Lithia Water Treatment Plant via the Brandon South Central Connector or to the Regional Facilities Site. Treatment at the BUD 5 plant consists of disinfection. The chemical feed and storage systems include: Two 5,500 gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and associated feed systems, Two 1,000 gallon aqua ammonia storage tanks and associated feed systems, and One 265 gallon aqua ammonia scrubber tank. 2.2.f(7) BUD 7 Water Treatment Plant The construction of the BUD 7 WTP was completed in October This facility is owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. The treatment plant is located in South Central Hillsborough County and provides treatment for only the BUD 7 well supply. As with the BUD 5 plant, treated water is pumped into the regional system through the Brandon Transmission Main and then sent to the Lithia Water Treatment Plant or the Regional Facilities Site. Power is provided by TECO. Treatment at the BUD 7 plant consists of disinfection using chlorine and ammonia. The chemical feed and storage systems associated with this plant are identified below: Two 1,500 gallon sodium hypochlorite storage tanks and associated feed systems, Two 300 gallon ammonia sulfate tanks and associated feed systems, and One 80 gallon ammonia sulfate scrubber tank. 2.2.f(8)Keller Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant The Keller Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant is located in the northeastern corner of Pinellas County and the northwest corner of Hillsborough County. The treatment plant provides pretreatment for hydrogen sulfide removal of the Eldridge Wilde groundwater supply. The pretreatment process includes chemical treatment for ph adjustment and mechanical treatment via Packed Tower Aeration. Tampa Bay Water purchased the pretreatment facility from Pinellas County in Tampa Bay Water sends the pretreated water to Pinellas County for final treatment and distribution into their system. Power is provided to this treatment facility by Progress Energy. The pretreatment portion of the treatment plant is owned and operated by Tampa Bay Water. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-24

63 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.2.f(9) Lithia Ozone Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant The Lithia Ozone Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Plant was completed in The plant is located in South- Central Hillsborough County and provides pretreatment hydrogen sulfide removal of the South-Central Hillsborough Wellfield supply. The ozone treatment process will replace the current tray aeration system. As with Keller, Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the pretreatment (ozone) portion of the plant and Hillsborough County provides final treatment and distribution into their system. Power is provided to this facility by TECO. This facility includes emergency power generation capability to operate at its average day capacity. 2.2.g Booster Pumping Stations Tampa Bay Water operates booster pump stations located throughout the transmission system. These include the U.S. 41 Booster Pump Station, the Odessa Booster Pump Station, and the Lake Bridge Booster Pump Station. Table 2-8 shows the permitted, design, minimum and sustainable capacities for these facilities. Table 2-8 Rated and Sustainable Capacities of the Booster Pumping Stations Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Design Minimum Peak Day >5 Days Facility mgd mgd mgd mgd mgd Odessa Booster Pump Station U.S. 41 Booster Pump Station Lake Bridge Booster Pump Station g(1) Odessa Booster Pump Station The Odessa Booster Pump Station is located on a one-acre easement in western Pasco County near the intersection of Gunn Highway and State Road 54. The booster station draws treated water from the Cypress Creek Transmission Main and discharges to Pasco County s distribution system. It can also draw upon water from the Starkey Wellfield during emergency conditions. This mode of operation is facilitated by 9,000 feet of 36-inch diameter pipeline connecting the West Pasco Improvements pipeline to the Odessa Booster Pump Station. The facility was placed in service in It was subsequently completely replaced in 2009 with a larger facility. The current booster station includes three 250-horsepower horizontal split case pumps with variable frequency drives. Power is provided to this booster pumping Tampa Bay Water Page 2-25

64 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory station by Progress Energy. The station is equipped with an 800kW auxiliary generator and automatic transfer switch for continued operation in the event of a power outage. 2.2.g(2) U.S. 41 Booster Pump Station The U.S. 41 Booster Pump Station is located near the intersection of County Road 583 and U.S. Highway 41 in Pasco County. The station draws treated water from the Cypress Creek Transmission Main and discharges to Pasco County s distribution system. The facility was placed in service in It was subsequently completely replaced in 2009 with a larger facility. The booster station includes three 200- horsepower, horizontal split-case pumps with variable frequency drives. Power is provided to this booster pumping station by Progress Energy. The station is equipped with an 800kW auxiliary generator and automatic transfer switch for continued operation in the event of a power outage. 2.2.g(3) Lake Bridge Booster Pump Station This facility sends treated Regional Water from the Morris Bridge Transmission Main into Pasco County s distribution system. This facility includes a disinfection residual trim and ph adjustment function. Chemical storage facilities are listed under the Lake Bridge WTP. The booster pump system consists of three 250-horsepower split case horizontal centrifugal pumps with variable frequency drives. The Lake Bridge facility was originally placed into service in Extensive modifications were made to the Lake Bridge Water Treatment Plant in These improvements allow the plant to maintain adequate system pressure at the Pasco County POC for the foreseeable future. The pumps can be used to boost pressure when required or be allowed to rest when delivered transmission pressure is greater than the required point of connection pressure. The treatment plant and pump station are controlled by operators at the Cypress Creek control center. Power is provided to this booster pumping station by TECO. In the event of a power failure, the plant can operate from an 800kW auxiliary generator via a transfer switch located at the plant. 2.2.h Potable Water Transmission Mains Tampa Bay Water's distribution system includes several major potable water transmission mains that deliver treated water supplies to Member Government points of connection. These major transmission pipelines are shown on Figure 2-2 and are summarized in Table 2-9. In addition to the major transmission mains listed in Table 2-9, there are raw water collection mains within each wellfield to collect water from the individual wells and convey the water to a Tampa Bay Water or Member Government treatment facility. The raw water collection mains are described within Section 2a (Groundwater Facilities). Tampa Bay Water Page 2-26

65 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Table 2-9: Tampa Bay Water Major Potable Transmission Mains (TM) Transmission Main North-Central Hillsborough Intertie Brandon Transmission Main Brandon/South-Central Connector Morris Bridge Transmission Main Cypress Bridge Phase A Phase B Cypress Creek Transmission Main Diameter (inches) Material 84 Steel and 36 Ductile Iron Ductile Iron Ductile Iron and 66 Steel/ Ductile Iron Prestressed concrete cylinder pipe / Steel / Ductile Iron Keller Connector 66 Steel 1.5 South Pasco Transmission Main West Pasco Transmission Main Cosme Transmission Main Northwest Hillsborough Transmission Main Seawater Desalination Transmission Main 42 Prestressed concrete cylinder pipe / Reinforced concrete pipe / Ductile Iron 36 and 42 Ductile Iron / Steel 7 Length (miles) Steel Ductile Iron Ductile Iron 14.5 Location/Function Potable water from Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant to Morris Bridge TM Potable water from Regional Facility Site to Brandon/South-Central Connector Potable water from Brandon TM to Lithia WTP Potable water from NCHI to Cypress Bridge TM Potable water from Morris Bridge TM to Cypress Creek TM Potable water from Cypress Creek WTP to Keller Connector Potable water from Cypress Creek TM to Keller WTP Potable water from Cypress Creek TM to Lake Park and Cosme WTP Potable water from Cypress Creek TM to Little Road and Maytum WTPs Potable water from Cypress Creek TM to Cosme WTP Potable water from Cosme TM to Northwest Hillsborough WTP Potable water from Tampa Bay Desalination Facility to Regional Facility Site Tampa Bay Water Page 2-27

66 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Figure 2-2: Tampa Bay Water Potable Transmission Mains Descriptions of each major potable transmission main are presented in the following sub-sections. 2.2.h(1) North Central Hillsborough Intertie The North Central Hillsborough Intertie extends from the Regional High Service Pump Station in central Hillsborough County to the southern portion of the Morris Bridge Transmission Main in northern Hillsborough County. Construction of the pipeline was completed in The pipeline includes approximately 13 miles of 84-inch diameter steel pipe and routes treated water from the Tampa Bay Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant and the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant to the Morris Bridge Transmission Main. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-28

67 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.2.h(2) Brandon Transmission Main The Brandon Transmission Main conveys potable water, and connects the Regional High Service Pump Station to the Brandon/South-Central Connector. Construction of the Brandon Transmission Main was completed in 2002 to initially convey raw groundwater from the Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells. The length of the transmission line is 10.5 miles. The first 5.3 miles starting from the North Central Hillsborough Intertie is 36-inches in diameter, and the remainder is 30-inches in diameter. In order to meet the water demand in the Hillsborough County South-Central service area in 2005, Hillsborough County s entire South-Central distribution system was converted to chloramines. In 2007, the Brandon Transmission Main was converted to a potable water main. As a result, Regional Water can be delivered to the Lithia Water Treatment Plant through the Brandon Transmission Main and Brandon/South-Central Connector, ending the isolation of the South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield from the Regional System. The capacity of the transmission mains is less than the capacity of the South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield. 2.2.h(3) Brandon/South-Central Connector The Brandon/South-Central Connector is a 6.3 mile transmission main that connects the Brandon Transmission Main to the Lithia Water Treatment Plant. The Brandon/South-Central Connector ties into the Brandon Transmission Main near Brandon Urban Dispersed Well Number 7 (Miller Road), crosses over the Alafia River, and connects to the discharge side of the Lithia Water Treatment Plant. Construction of the 30-inch diameter ductile iron pipeline was completed in The Brandon South- Central Connector, similar to the Brandon Transmission Main, was converted from a raw water transmission main to a potable water main in h(4) Morris Bridge Transmission Main Potable water is delivered from the North-Central Hillsborough Intertie to the Cypress Bridge Transmission Main via the Morris Bridge Transmission Main. The 64-inch diameter ductile iron Morris Bridge Transmission Main is approximately 3.7 miles in length and was completed in h(5) Cypress Bridge Transmission Main The Cypress Bridge Transmission Main connects the Morris Bridge Transmission Main to the Cypress Creek Transmission Main. Phase A of the transmission main is a 66-inch diameter steel pipeline that runs from near its crossing of Interstate 75 to the Cypress Creek Transmission Main. Phase B of the transmission main is a 64-inch diameter ductile iron pipeline that runs from the Morris Bridge Tampa Bay Water Page 2-29

68 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory Transmission Main to near its crossing at Interstate 75. The Cypress Bridge Transmission Main is approximately 10.2 miles in length and was completed in h(6) Cypress Creek Transmission Main The Cypress Creek Transmission Main extends from the Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant in Pasco County to Pinellas County's transmission system. The main portion of the pipeline between the Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant and the Cosme Transmission Main includes approximately 7 miles of 84- inch diameter prestressed concrete cylinder pipe and 5 miles of 84-inch diameter welded steel pipe. The remainder, downstream of the Cosme Transmission Main, is 64-inch diameter ductile iron pipe. The total length of the Cypress Creek Transmission Main is 17.6 miles. The pipeline was originally constructed during 1974 and 1975 under multiple contracts. Tampa Bay Water completed full replacement of the transmission main in h(7) Keller Connector Transmission Main The Keller Connector Transmission Main connects the Cypress Creek Transmission Main at the Pinellas/Pasco County border and travels south to Pinellas County's S.K. Keller Water Treatment Plant site. The 66-inch steel pipeline is 1.5 miles in length and was completed in the late 1990s. 2.2.h(8) South Pasco Transmission Main The South Pasco Transmission Main consists of 14 miles of 42-inch diameter, concrete cylinder pipe and ductile iron pipe. Ductile iron pipe extends from the South Pasco meter pit to South Pasco Well 41. The transmission main extends from southern Pasco County into northwestern Hillsborough County. The transmission main connects to the Cypress Creek Transmission Main at its northern end and delivers regional water to the City of St. Petersburg's Cosme Water Treatment Plant and to Hillsborough County's Lake Park Water Treatment Plant. The South Pasco Transmission Main also collects treated water from the South Pasco WTP. The South Pasco Transmission Main was completed in two phases. The first section (between the Section 21 Wellfield and the Cosme Water Treatment Plant) was completed during the 1960s. An extension to the South Pasco Wellfield and to the Cypress Creek Transmission Main was completed in the mid-1970s. Additional pipe was added when the South Pasco WTP was constructed. Tampa Bay Water Page 2-30

69 Section 2 Existing Facilities Inventory 2.2.h(9) West Pasco Transmission Main The West Pasco Transmission Main consists of three miles of 42-inch diameter ductile iron and steel pipe and four miles of 36-inch ductile iron pipe. The transmission main extends through west Pasco County and connects the Cypress Creek Transmission Main near its southern end, to New Port Richey s Maytum WTP and Pasco County s Little Road WTP. The transmission main provides regional supply to these two plants, which allows production rotation away from the Starkey Wellfield and facilitates environmental recovery in this area. The transmission line was placed in service in 2007 as part of the West Pasco Infrastructure Project, which included the design and construction of the transmission main as well as improvements at New Port Richey s Maytum Water Treatment Plant. 2.2.h(10) Cosme Transmission Main The Cosme Transmission Main consists of approximately eight miles of 64-inch diameter, steel pipeline that interconnects the Cypress Creek Transmission Main to the City of St. Petersburg s Cosme Water Treatment Plant. The transmission line was placed in service in h(11) Northwest Hillsborough Transmission Main The Northwest Hillsborough Transmission Main includes 12,000 feet of new 36-inch diameter ductile iron pipe that was placed into service in The new pipe connects to 17,300 feet of previously existing 36-inch pipe that was part of the Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield raw water collection system. Together, the two segments connect Hillsborough County s Northwest Hillsborough WTP to St. Petersburg s Cosme WTP. With completion of the project, Regional Water can be supplied to Hillsborough County s Northwest Hillsborough WTP through the Northwest Hillsborough Pipeline and Cosme Transmission Main. This provides a back-up source of potable water to the previously isolated Northwest Hillsborough WTP, and allows groundwater pumpage rotation at and away from the Northwest Hillsborough Regional Wellfield. An emergency interconnect is also included that allows treated NWHRWF water from the Northwest Hillsborough WTP to be sent into the Regional System. 2.2.h(12) Seawater Desalination Transmission Main The Seawater Desalination Transmission Main is a 14.5 mile pipeline that connects the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant near Apollo Beach to the Regional High Service Pump Station site in central Hillsborough County. The transmission main crosses under the Alafia River and Bull Frog Creek as it transports desalinated water supply north to ground storage tanks located at the Regional site. Construction of the 42-inch diameter ductile iron pipeline was completed in Tampa Bay Water Page 2-31

70 Section 3 Capital and System Programs Section 3 Capital and System Programs A. Capital Improvement Program Tampa Bay Water s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Plan is a comprehensive five-year plan of approved and proposed capital projects. The CIP Plan is updated annually as the need and timing for specific projects change. Final approval of capital projects is provided by Tampa Bay Water s Board of Directors. The following goals are used by Tampa Bay Water staff to develop the annual capital budget and the CIP Plan: Identify and prioritize capital projects through a coordinated departmental effort that considers the integration of planning and development, engineering, construction, financing requirements, and future operating and maintenance costs. Identify Projects Classify requested projects to ensure planned activities meet the requirements for a capital project. Initial Develop a schedule for each project being Prioritization considered. Develop a funding scenario for each project that identifies funding source(s), projected Funding cash flow, and future operating and Sources/Schedule maintenance costs estimates. Figure 3-1 shows the seven-step process followed for development of the annual update to the Capital Improvement Program Plan. A capital project is defined as planned activities that result in: A distinct capital asset owned by Tampa Bay Water, and/or; Major repairs, improvements, renovations, or expansions that extend an existing asset s useful life and/or result in a significant change in its functionality or capacity. Final Prioritization Approval Monitoring Mid-Year Changes Figure 3-1: Capital Improvement Program Annual Update Process Tampa Bay Water Page 3-1

71 Section 3 Capital and System Programs Capital assets owned by Tampa Bay Water are recorded in Tampa Bay Water s financial records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, applicable Florida State Statutes and agency policy. Capital projects can also include projects which are: Funded by Tampa Bay Water and/or others, for an asset owned and operated by another entity. Constructed by Tampa Bay Water for the benefit and/or in behalf of Member governments or other government agencies. If Tampa Bay Water does not retain ownership of the completed project, the cost of the project is accounted for as a contribution to the respective entity. Projects in the CIP have been evaluated based on the criteria defined in Table 3-1 below: Table 3-1: Capital Improvement Program Evaluation Criteria Criterion Compliance Level of Service Contractual Obligations Security and Safety Outside Funding Definition Project needed to meet: Legal Settlement Regulatory Agency Action (e.g., consent order, administrative order) Permit Requirements Project is critical to the existing level of service (i.e., existing operating conditions) Project improves the reliability of the regional system components or extends the components useful life (e.g., pressure, flow, metering equipment) Project needed to meet one or more of the following: Memorandum of Understanding Joint Project Agreement The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement production failure requirements Future water demands; and has been identified in the Master Water Plan Exhibit C & D of the Master Water Supply Contract The project is critical to the facility security The project is recommended by the vulnerability assessment The project addresses a hazard or safety issue to the workforce, public, or water supplies The project addresses State & Federal safety regulations Outside Funding possible such as: State & Federal grants Co-funding agreements Member Government contributions Existing Funding agreement in place such as: Co-funding agreement State & Federal grants Member Government contributions Annual O&M Effects to Operating (i.e., chemicals & power) and/or Maintenance Costs) Projects identified in the CIP Plan are initiated by different efforts, including: Tampa Bay Water Page 3-2

72 Section 3 Capital and System Programs Tampa Bay Water Long-Term and Master Water Plan Program Energy Management Program Renewal and Replacement Program Reliability Considerations Property Redress Vulnerability Assessment Member governments Joint Project Agreement Memorandum of Understanding Regulatory/Compliance requirements and other commitments The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement The Master Water Supply Contract The Southwest Florida Water Management District or Florida Department of Environmental Protection Current Program Status The most recent Capital Improvement Program Plan is included in Appendix A. B. Renewal and Replacement Program Tampa Bay Water s Renewal and Replacement (R&R) Program is a prioritized long-term plan for reinvestment in the existing system that is intended to maintain a sustainable infrastructure. The R&R Program estimates annual R&R funding requirements, projects future funding requirements, determines asset condition, and prioritizes R&R projects and activities. The R&R Program provides Tampa Bay Water with an established program to help manage its assets from installation through disposal in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that level of service goals are met. An asset is a component of a facility with an independent physical and functional identity and age (e.g., pump, motor, tank, and pipeline). Renewal is defined as a major capital investment in an asset to restore, renew, or refurbish it to a higher service of level and/or extend its useful life. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) activities are not usually considered renewal activities. Replacement of an asset usually occurs at the end of its useful life. An asset may be replaced because it has failed and it is determined to be less expensive to replace rather than continue to fix it. The R&R Program Development Process steps are described below. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-3

73 Section 3 Capital and System Programs 1. Data Collection Asset data is extracted from Tampa Bay Water s Enterprise Maintenance Management System (EMMS). Data not available in the EMMS is collected from multiple sources including: field visits; as-built record drawings; and Tampa Bay Water staff interviews. Asset/Equipment data includes: installation date; name plate data; physical attributes; preventative maintenance schedules; predictive monitoring reports; maintenance and work order history; asset condition, past asset replacement and refurbishments, and past asset failures with failure causes. 2. Risk Assessment Tampa Bay Water s Risk assessment approach considers Vulnerability as a measure of the likelihood of failure and Criticality as measure of the consequence of failure. Risk is calculated using the following equation: Risk= Vulnerability x Criticality Matrices for Vulnerability and Criticality are used to score each project and determine the Risk for each of Tampa Bay Water facilities. The Vulnerability matrix (Table 3-2) focuses on the quality of water, the current overall status of the facility, if the facility is run inside of its design parameters, and the most limiting equipment class. The Criticality matrix (Table 3-3) focuses on the health and safety of public and employees, financial impact, impact on environment or regulatory compliance, effect on water delivery and customers, and ability to respond and return the asset to service. Table 3-2: R&R Program Vulnerability Matrix Vulnerability Category Weight Negligible = 1 Low = 4 Moderate = 7 Severe = 10 Limiting Factor (i.e. Equipment Class: Pumps, VFD, Structure, Electrical) 25% New or Very Well Maintained Presenting with Minor Wear Presenting with Moderate Wear Major Wear or Unusable Estimated useful life of asset (Equipment Class) 25% 46% - 100% Remaining Life 31% - 46% Remaining Life 16% - 31% Remaining Life 0% - 15% Remaining Life Water Quality (High MCL or Damaging to Equipment) Unintended Use (high vibration, pumping debris, improper install) 25% Good 25% 0% Operated Outside the Design Parameters Minimal amount of Impact 25% Operated Outside the Design Parameters Moderate amount of Impact 50% Operated Outside the Design Parameters Very Poor / Large Amount of Equipment Damage 100% Operated Outside the Design Parameters Tampa Bay Water Page 3-4

74 Table 3-3: R&R Program Criticality Matrix Criticality Category Weight Negligible = 1 Low = 4 Moderate = 7 Severe = 10 Health and Safety of the Public and Employees 25% Financial Impact 10% Impact on Environment or Regulatory Compliance Effect on Water Delivery and Customers Ability to Respond and Return Asset to Service 20% 25% 25% No injuries or adverse health effects Absorbed within budget line item, <$10, % Compliance with permits and no impact on the environment No impacts on water delivery or customers Redundant asset available < 2 hours No lost-time injuries or Medical attention Absorbed within current budget and under GM signature, $10,001 to $50,000 Violation but no enforcement action and/or minor impact on environment Minor Disruptions Potential for Losttime injuries or medical attention required Requires Board approval $50,001 to $150,000 Violation with minor enforcement action or moderate impact on environment Short-term Impact; Substantial Disruption Potential for Loss of Life May require transfer between depts., new borrowing, or impact rates: > $150,001 Enforcement action with fines &/or major impact on environment Long-term impact; area-wide disruptions 24 Hours 2.5 Days 5 Days 3. Sensory Condition Assessment Tampa Bay Water facilities are evaluated by structural, process, mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation engineers along with Tampa Bay Water staff. The sensory condition assessment includes the following: visual, auditory, tactile, and olfactory senses to assign a condition to assets. 4. Desktop Assessment Tampa Bay Water Staff performs a desktop assessment for underground assets such as pipelines, buried power lines, and fiber optic lines. The desktop assessment considered: material, installation year, failure history, photographs, performance data, expected life span, size, and manufacturer. Additionally, the assessment includes Tampa Bay Water staff interviews to get institutional knowledge for the assets that had incomplete records. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-5

75 5. Replacement Planning Model The Replacement Planning Model (RPM) is a Windows based custom application used to forecast asset Renewal and Replacement(R&R) needs over a given timeframe. This application allows Tampa Bay Water staff to: view asset-related information; set-up how the forecasts should be performed; forecast R&R needs; and view the forecast results in a flexible manner. The RPM considers type, useful life, renewal activities, probability of failure, performance, condition, and utilization of assets to forecast the timing of their renewal or replacement. The RPM calculates the renewal or replacement costs in current day dollars or inflates the costs for future replacement. Costs are adjusted using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Indices. The RPM is updated annually as new assets are added and as assets are renewed and replaced. Either anticipated R&R activities and or projects are submitted to the Capital Improvement Program or queue for funding through Tampa Bay Water s operating budget for funding through the Renewal and Replacement Fund. Figure 3-2 shows the steps followed for the annual update of the R&R Program. Update Missing Data in EMMS and RPM Figure Update 3-2: Renewal Risk Assessment and Replacement of Assets Program and Annual RPM Update Cost Estimates Process Current Program Status The R&R Program continues to be updated as more assets are added to the EMMS. Currently about 80% of Tampa Bay Water s assets are included in the EMMS and RPM. Approximately 60 % of total assets have been evaluated. The remaining are generally the ones that are newer, are under replacement efforts already, or are under contracted operation and maintenance. FY 2013 Plans include continued program refinement, asset evaluation, and data entry into the program. The Desktop RPM User s Manual is included in Appendix A. C. Energy Management Program Tampa Bay Water s Energy Management Program includes the implementation of energy efficiency, conservation, and alternative/renewable energy capital projects. The Energy Program follows an Energy Roadmap that provides a 10-year look at issues related to energy consumption. The Energy Roadmap: Conduct Sensory Condition/Desktop Assessment Run Replacement Planning Model Conduct Staff Workshop to Review RPM Output and Select and Prioritize Activities/Projects Submit List of Activities/Projects Costs for Upcoming Fiscal Year Implemnet and Monitor R&R Activities/Projects Provides an action plan that sets expectations and principles, and establishes measureable targets across the organization. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-6

76 Identifies elements of technology and energy infrastructure to enhance financial stability and sustainability of Tampa Bay Water operations. Provides a basis to analyze the relationship between decisions that affect annual operations/maintenance and capital budgeting. The Energy Roadmap identifies the following steps shown in Figure 3-3: 1. Path to Efficiency: Implementation ( ) Tampa Bay Water will develop action plans to support the Board goals of efficient operations and financial stability with an increased focus on reduced energy use. Tampa Bay Water will also consider energy factors in decision-making processes such as budget development and equipment selection. 2. Understand Water and Energy Relationship ( ) Tampa Bay Water is working to collect comprehensive real time energy and flow data on a priority based on capacity and pressure supplied by a facility. This data collection will support the development of tools to correlate, analyze, and interpret the water/energy relationship. These tools will be used to measure performance and study energy efficiency alternatives. 3. Workforce Initiatives ( ) A focus on employees and the training necessary for informed decision-making is critical. Tampa Bay Water will empower staff with the technology and tools needed to realize and implement the Energy Roadmap and assist with operating decisions. Training and education will be provided to ensure the effective use of the tools. 4. Total Water System Management and Broad Collaboration ( ) Tampa Bay Water plans to expand its total water system management through strategic storage and system cycle management to improve efficiencies (e.g. supply, storage tanks, conservation, and demand). Tampa Bay Water will collaborate with external stakeholders including: Member governments; existing commercial power providers; and Alternative/Renewable energy power providers. 5. Combined Power and Water Management System ( ) Tampa Bay Water plans to leverage a combined power and water management system to optimize timing between daily demand and supply to promote energy efficiency. Power and water are balanced and networked. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-7

77 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 3 Capital and System Programs Increased Investment & Increased Energy Savings Step 1 Path to Efficiency: Implementation Step 2 Understand Water & Energy Relationship Step 3 Workforce Initiatives Step 4 Total Water System Management & Broad Collaboration Step 5 Combined Power & Water Management System Figure 3-3: Energy Management Program Roadmap Tampa Bay Water Page 3-8

78 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 3 Capital and System Programs The Energy Roadmap also identifies Gap Projects. Gap Projects are key elements necessary to bridge or connect other on-going and planned capital projects with the steps and goals of the Energy Roadmap. Table 3-4 lists the Gap Projects identified in the Energy Roadmap. Table 3-4: Energy Roadmap Gap Projects Gap Project 1. Facilities Energy Audits 2. Energy Efficiency Performance Metrics 3. Energy Considerations in Standard Specifications 4. Electricity Pricing Model 5. Energy Consumption Manager Application 6. Transformer Inventory and Evaluation 7. Strategic Tank Storage 8. Water-Energy Nexus: Intergovernmental Coordination Description Perform energy audits of all Tampa Bay Water facilities to identify energy conservation and energy efficiency measures (e.g. lighting retrofit, motor replacements) to implement at each facility and reduce operating costs associated with electricity, diesel, or natural gas use. Include energy and energy efficiency performance metrics in the Agency s operational goals, performance reviews, specifications, and budget reports. Include energy efficiency metrics and requirements in project and equipment specifications, to ensure more efficient equipment, motors, and assets and to reduce operating costs. Develop or purchase an electricity pricing model to forecast and predict electricity and power (where applicable) prices in municipal, regulated and competitive electric markets. Expand and further develop Tampa Bay Water s computer application. To track and monitor electricity consumption for specific facilities and assets. Perform an inventory of all electric transformers owned and used in Tampa Bay Water s facilities and evaluate these for possible replacement with more efficient transformers. Evaluate Tampa Bay Water owned strategic storage and initiate a working relationship with the Member governments through cooperative agreements for strategic storage. Strategic Storage initiatives will facilitate to adjust operations accordingly based on downstream storage capacity. Tampa Bay Water will explore possible collaborations with other water utilities, Member governments, and/or other governmental agencies on a regional scale to address the Water-Energy nexus. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-9

79 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 3 Capital and System Programs Gap Project 9. Collaborate with Members/customers for commercial power provider outreach 10. Customer outreach to evaluate end use collaboration opportunties 11. Employee Engagement Program 12. Vehicle Efficicency 13. Develop a Regional Operational Optimization Model 14. Energy Program Team 15. Energy and Operational Optimization Dashboard /Program 16. Energy Considerations in Renewal and Replacement Program Description Tampa Bay Water will collaborate with its Member governments to outreach local or regional electric utilities and commercial power providers. Tampa Bay Water would evaluate opportunities to reduce energy use by influencing end users consumption. Tampa Bay Water will develop a staff or employee engagement program to support the implementation of the Energy Roadmap. Develop an idling policy, fuel consumption goals, standards and programs or alternatives to conserve fuel, energy, and costs. Tampa Bay Water will develop a Regional Operational Optimization Model that considers energy and chemical consumption in the selection of water supply sources and water production facilities. The model will be based on Tampa Bay Water s Optimized Regional Operations Plan (OROP), which currently analyzes water resource conditions while optimizing supply to Tampa Bay Water Members in the most environmentally friendly manner and in compliance with our Water Use Permits. Establish and energy program team to act as the key staff responsible for implementing, managing, and reporting on the Energy Roadmap. Tampa Bay Water would pursue developing a comprehensive and dynamic energy optimization dashboard that would include the energy operating data for all major facilities, assets or equipment, electric pricing and rate information and system operational criteria to meet all water delivery, customer, and treatment needs at the lowest possible costs. The dashboard would direct Tampa Bay Water s assets (either directly or indirectly) to operate in an optimal (most cost and energy efficient) manner. Tampa Bay Water will incorporate energy efficiency into current standards, policies, and/or systems such as the Renewal and Replacement Program to realize cost savings and energy conservation. Current Program Status The Energy Management Program Roadmap is being implemented and is included in Appendix A. Tampa Bay Water Page 3-10

80 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 3 Capital and System Programs This page left blank intentionally Tampa Bay Water Page 3-11

81 Section 4 - Staffing Section 4 Staffing Tampa Bay Water reviews staffing periodically through formal audits and pay plan and benefits package reviews. A formal audit of staffing was last conducted in fiscal year The Board approved the latest pay and classification plan for the Agency in April The Agency maintains a lean staff of 132 full time equivalent positions to fulfill the Agency s mission while maintaining a fiscally responsible program to serve member governments. In April 2011, the Tampa Bay Water Board approved an Agency Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan contains four main goals, to guide the Agency in fulfilling the mission of providing a clean, safe, reliable water supply to the member governments. The four goals are as follows: Achieve a reliable water supply and delivery system Continue to improve the efficiency of Tampa Bay Water s operations Maintain the Agency s financial stability and sustainability Develop, improve and maintain collaborative relationships with stakeholders In 2012, the Agency underwent a reorganization process in order to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan. Tampa Bay Water is maturing as an Agency and is shifting from a focus on building new supplies to maintaining its existing supplies and facilities. Changes in the business environment and regional economy have had a dramatic effect on water sales and production. The shift away from large-scale construction activities to a focus on renewal and replacement allows the agency an opportunity to become a more efficient in its organizational structure. Figure 4-1 shows the organizational structure. Tampa Bay Water Page 4-1

82 Section 4 - Staffing Figure 4-1 Tampa Bay Water Organizational Structure Tampa Bay Water will continue to evaluate its staffing needs as necessary to ensure that the Agency is staffed properly. Tampa Bay Water Page 4-2

83 Section 4 - Staffing This page left blank intentionally Tampa Bay Water Page 4-3

84 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Introduction Tampa Bay Water has the unequivocal obligation to meet the water demands of its six Member Governments which include Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas counties and the cities of New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa. This relationship was established in accordance with the Master Water Supply Contract and per Chapter of the Florida Statutes which states that: regional water supply authorities may be created for the purpose of developing, recovering, storing, and supplying water for county or municipal purposes in such a manner as will give priority to reducing environmental effects of excessive or improper withdrawals of water from concentrated areas. A major component in developing new supplies of potable water is the ability to accurately determine future demands so that new projects can be implemented in an appropriate demand based sequence while minimizing inherent risks associated with under- or over-estimation, as well as supply reliability. As stated by the American Water Works Association s Manual of Water Supply Practices M50 (2007), a sound water demand forecast allows utilities and regional suppliers to provide the following: Adequacy of Supply Optimum Facility Location and Size Sound Transmission and Distribution Design Tampa Bay Water provides regional water demand forecasts for its six Member Governments specifically to project the amount of water supply needed within Tampa Bay Water s service area. The regional demand forecasts include the total water demand for the City of Tampa. The Agency s Longterm Demand Forecasting models are designed primarily for the purpose of longer-term planning and forecasting, over year time horizons. The models provide monthly and annual water demand forecasts for the seven water demand planning areas (WDPAs) of the six Member Governments through the 2035 planning horizon. This demand planning ensures that adequate supply will be made available to Member Governments in the future and that supplies are added in such a way as to minimize Member Government wholesale water rate impacts. Seven Water Demand Planning Areas are established which reflect the current service area boundaries for the six Member Governments. Separation of the regional system into demand planning areas assists Tampa Bay Water by identifying siting and capacity requirements of future supply development projects. The Water Demand Planning Areas are illustrated in Figure 5-1. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-1

85 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Figure 5-1 Tampa Bay Water Member Government Water Demand Planning Areas This section of the Long-Term Water Supply Plan provides an overview of the customer base of the Member Governments, Member Governments projected long-term water demands, and Tampa Bay Water delivered-water projections. Information provided in this section meets the requirements set forth in Section 2.09 of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement to identify current and future customers. A. Meeting Member Government Water Demands Tampa Bay Water and the Member Governments provide water to over 2.3 million people. Member Government service area coverage is summarized in Table 5-1. Potable water is supplied by Tampa Bay Water s Regional System which includes groundwater, surface water, and seawater sources as well as additional, self-supply sources of Member Governments. Tampa Bay Water ensures that short-term and long-term demands are met through utilization of its, Optimized Regional Operations Plan, System-wide Operational Model, and the Demand Forecasting System, respectively. Forecasted surface water flows, current groundwater levels, rainfall data and current demands are input into a customized computer model used to generate information to update the Optimized Regional Operations Plan on a weekly basis. Through use of the Optimized Regional Tampa Bay Water Page 5-2

86 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Operations Plan, supply sources can be utilized in a manner which meets real time demands, minimizes environmental impacts to regional water resources and meets the requirements set forth in the Consolidated Water Use Permit. Long-term demand forecasting is performed using the Demand Forecasting System to predict expected future demand on a spatial and temporal basis. The System-wide Operational model combines long-term probabilistic demand forecasts with supply uncertainty and operational protocols to determine the reliable supply through 2035, the current planning horizon. Tampa Bay Water has developed a regional System Performance model (see Section 12) that quantities the system performance in meeting demands through the forecast horizon. Member Government Hillsborough County Table 5-1 Summary of Member Government Service Areas Service Area Summary Hillsborough County supplies water to unincorporated area residents that are outside the service areas of the Cities of Tampa, Temple Terrace and Plant City. City of New Port Richey Pasco County Pinellas County City of St. Petersburg City of Tampa The City of New Port Richey supplies retail water to residents within its corporate limits and a portion of unincorporated Pasco County. The city also supplies wholesale water to a private utility (Lindrick Service Corporation) and the City of Port Richey. The Pasco County Water System supplies retail water to residents throughout the unincorporated areas of the county, as well as wholesale water to several private utilities, including Forest Hills, Orchid Lake, Virginia City, Southern State Utilities, and Jasmine Lakes Utilities, Corporation. The Pinellas County Water System provides water to approximately 19 wholesale and retail customers consisting of municipalities and unincorporated areas within the county. These customers include Belleair Beach, Belleair Bluffs, Belleair Shores, Clearwater, Indian Rocks Beach, Indian Shores, Kenneth City, Largo, Madeira Beach, North Redington Beach, Redington Beach, Redington Shores, Pinellas Park, Safety Harbor, St. Pete Beach, Seminole, Tarpon Springs, and Treasure Island. The City of St. Petersburg Water Demand Planning Area includes the City of St. Petersburg, Gulfport, and South Pasadena Water System, as well as some unincorporated areas within Pinellas County including Bear Creek, Lealman, Gandy and Bay Pines. The Tampa Water Department provides water to a service area of over 211 square miles, including the City of Tampa and some unincorporated areas of Hillsborough County. The City of Tampa self serves from the Hillsborough River and Sulfur Springs. The Tampa Bypass Canal (middle pool) is also used to augment the Hillsborough River during low flow periods. A1. Historical Usage by Member Governments Table 5-2 identifies the historic total demand for each of Tampa Bay Water s Member Governments and Tampa Bay Water Page 5-3

87 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Table 5-3 identifies the quantity of water provided to Member Governments by Tampa Bay Water each water year since Tampa Bay Water was formed in The years listed are water years, which begin in October of the previous calendar year and end on September 30th of the indicated year. Government/ Year Hillsborough County (mgd) Table 5-2 Historic Water Demands for Current Customers City of New Port Richey (mgd) Pasco County (mgd) Pinellas County (mgd) City of St. Petersburg (mgd) City of Tampa (mgd) Regional Total (mgd) Government/ Year Table 5-3 Hillsborough County (mgd) City of New Port Richey (mgd) Historical Water Delivery to Current Customers Pasco Pinellas City of St. County County Petersburg (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) City of Tampa (mgd) Total (mgd) Data provided is based on Tampa Bay Water s Enterprise Database. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-4

88 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands A2. Future Customers and Future Demands There are no plans to expand Tampa Bay Water s customer base. Water demand projections presented in this section are based on meeting the future needs of the six Member Governments. As a wholesale water utility, Tampa Bay Water supplies the daily water demands of its Member Governments. Supplying peak hour and fire flow demands are a local distribution issue and the Member Governments are responsible for meeting these demands. The Member Governments must develop and operate sufficient storage, pumping, and distribution facilities to meet their peak hour and fire flow demands. The Master Water Supply Contract between Tampa Bay Water and the Member Governments specifies the points of connection at which water is to be supplied to each Member Government s system as well as the pressure requirement at each point of connection. The specific quantity of water to be provided to each Member Government is not specifically identified in the contract. The quantity of water to be supplied is determined by the projected needs of the Member Governments. B. Demand Forecasting System The Demand Forecasting System was commissioned in December 2001 to quantify how socioeconomic, meteorological, and policy conditions influence potable water demand. Tampa Bay Water updated its Long-term Demand Forecasting models in 2008 and subsequently developed two long-term water demand forecasts to 2035, using 2008 as the base year and most recently using Water Year 2009 as the base year Hazen and Sawyer (2010a). The models provide monthly water demand forecasts for the seven water demand planning areas (WDPAs) of the six Member Governments through the 2035 planning horizon. These water demand projections are updated annually. As described in the Long-term Demand Forecasting Model documentation Hazen and Saywer (2010a), retail demand is modeled using three sector specific econometric models. Each model generates demand forecasts based on WDPA specific weather and socioeconomic projections. Sector specific models therefore satisfy the need for modeling retail demand on a member by member basis. From these results, sector specific results can be aggregated as needed into various time periods and geographic delineations. The forecasting methodology employs a rate of use times driver approach for calculating sectoral demands. Each sector specific model calculates average monthly demand, or rate of use, per water consuming entity, or driver unit. A different driver unit is defined for each sector (e.g., single-family (SF), multi-family (MF) and non-residential (NR)). The SF sectoral model calculates retail demand per single family household, with single family households serving as a driver unit. Likewise, the MF sectoral model calculates retail demand per multifamily dwelling unit, with the number of multifamily dwelling units serving as a driver unit. The NR sectoral model calculates retail demand per employee, with number of employees serving as a driver unit. A forecast of demand for any given sector is a simple product of predicted rate of use and the predicted number of driver units. Each sectoral model has a set of variables that explains the rate of water use by sector, WDPA, and month. Examples of explanatory variables include income, real marginal price, persons per household, and density. Coefficients for each explanatory variable which measure the relationship between the Tampa Bay Water Page 5-5

89 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands variable and the per unit sector water use by WDPA and month were determined by performing regression analyses on historic water use, weather, and socioeconomic data 1. Tampa Bay Water engaged the services of Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., to complete a probabilistic regional demand forecast for the seven water demand planning areas. Documentation of this work is provided in Hazen and Sawyer (2012). Probabilistic demand forecasting is performed to assess the potential variation in predictions of actual future demand from the point forecast given the point-projected ( expected ) future values of socioeconomic conditions and the observed historical variability in these conditions from year to year. The resulting probabilistic forecast therefore reflects a superposition of historical year-to-year variability in explanatory and driver variables, and resulting demand, on the point forecast. The probabilistic demand forecast was produced using probabilistic socioeconomic and weather projection ensembles. For the System-wide performance analyses additional work was performed to link the long-term demand projections with surface water availability simulations through common simulations of weather. The demand simulations are time series ensembles of demand by sector and WDPA that reflect 300-year-long simulated daily weather conditions that were derived from analogous weather simulations driving surface water flow models, and 300-year-long repetition of projected econometric data for a given time slice year of the probabilistic demand forecast, with each 300-year simulated demand ensemble receiving econometric assumptions from a different ensemble realization of the forecast. Each 300-year demand ensemble thus reflects the potential variability in weather conditions for each WDPA as may be witnessed over a 300 year period. Then, taken together, the collection of 300-year ensembles also reflects the collective uncertainty and potential range of realized econometric conditions in the time-slice year, using repetition of those conditions in simulations to support large sampling of weather conditions that could occur in the time-slice year. The weather simulations resulted in 1000 ensembles of weather; each time series was 300 years long. Each ensemble contained simulated weather variables (daily maximum temperature, daily precipitation) for each Water Demand Planning area and simulation day. The weather ensembles were ordered according to total precipitation across the Water Demand Planning areas and time. The forecast was produced by randomly pairing socioeconomic and weather ensembles, then applying each pairing to demand models (along with point-forecast assumptions for variables excluded from probabilistic projections). This application resulted in a set of forecasted realizations of demand time series for each sector (including wholesale and unbilled) and WDPA. The series within each demand realization were aggregated across space, time, and sector in the same manner as the point forecast, producing annual time series, for each realization, of total demand for each WDPA and the region as a whole. These total demand time series were then summarized across WDPA. 1 For a detailed discussion of the development of the long-term demand forecast models and their coefficients, see Hazen and Sawyer (2010a). Tampa Bay Water Page 5-6

90 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands The process for generating probabilistic weather ensembles was designed to support integrated demandsupply analyses. Through this process, probabilistic demand forecasts and supply simulations were produced using common weather simulations, allowing demand forecasts to be properly correlated, cross-correlated, to a degree indicated by historical data, with surface water supply simulations on an realization-by-realization basis. This sampling design resulting in 1000 demand-weather pairings, from which 334 demand-weather pairs were selected based on Latin Hypercube sampling. These 334 demand-weather pairs are being used in the System-wide Performance Analysis. C. Demand Forecasting System Results ( ) Tampa Bay Water service area demand projections for the planning horizon are based on probabilistic demand modeling as described in the previous section. The results are displayed for total regional demand and the demand for each water demand planning area (WDPA). Figure 5-2 depicts the results of the 5 th percentile to 95 th percentile probabilistic demand projections across the planning time frame 2015 to 2035 for the regional total demand. This probabilistic distribution was based on ranking the results of the 334 demand-weather pair realizations for total regional demand. The 5 th to 95 th percentiles represent 90 percent of the possible range of demands for each time period. The center line is the 50% or expected regional total demand for the planning horizon. The entire 1 to 100 percentile range of total regional demands for the planning horizon out to 2035 is being used in the system-wide performance evaluation. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-7

91 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Figure 5-2 Tampa Bay Water Probabilistic Demand Projections Table 5-4 shows the 5 th, 25 th, 50 th, 75 th and 95 th percentiles for projected demands for each WDPA and for the total region demand. For each WDPA, the probabilistic distribution for each time slice is based on the results of the 334 realizations for that WDPA. This means that the results for each percentile cannot be summed across the WDPA because the realization that results in the 25 th percentile for one WDPA is not necessarily the same realization that results in the 25 th percentile for a different WDPA. The probabilistic distribution for the total regional demand is based on creating the total regional demand for each realization then determining the rank order of the total demand for each time slice. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-8

92 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Table 5-4 Probabilistic Demand Projections for Current Customers City of Tampa WDPA NWH SCH Hillsborough Hillsborough CO. WDPA CO. WDPA City of New Port Richey WDPA City of St. Petersburg WDPA Pinellas CO. WDPA Total Regional Demand (1) Pasco Co Projected Year = 2015 WDPA 5th Percentile th Percentile % Percentile th Percentile th Percentile Projected Year = th Percentile th Percentile % Percentile th Percentile th Percentile Projected Year = th Percentile th Percentile % Percentile th Percentile th Percentile Projected Year = th Percentile th Percentile % Percentile th Percentile th Percentile Projected Year = th Percentile th Percentile % Percentile th Percentile th Percentile Note 1. Probabilistic WDPA does not sum to Total Regional Demand Note 2. All values are million gallons per day In 2010, Tampa Bay Water and its consultant Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. developed a process to evaluate the predictive capability of the demand forecast models by comparing the most recent annual forecasts with actual water use and to update the long term demand deterministic predictions based on updates to future socioeconomic conditions. Conducting the evaluation and updates helps Tampa Bay Water learn how to adapt to changes in water use and related weather and socioeconomic conditions and provides yearly updates of the long-term demand predictions. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-9

93 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Annual water demands within Tampa Bay Water s service have been impacted by the economic recession since The 2035 annual Tampa Bay Water delivery currently projected is about 64 million gallons per day less than the 2035 annual Tampa Bay Water delivered projected in the 2008 Long-term Water Supply Plan update. Tampa Bay Water is participating in a new Water Research Foundation project entitled, Water Demand Forecasting in Uncertain Times: Isolating the Effects of Great Recession. This research is designed to assess how water demand is affected by short-term economic shocks, such as the recession; how economic shocks can be differentiated from the many other factors known to impact demand, and analyze how water utilities may be better able to anticipate, adapt to and minimize impacts of future economic cycles on water demand planning. The Agency s System Configuration II projects are complete. Along with the other existing regional supply facilities, and based on a fully-functioning 15-billion gallon reservoir, these water supply facilities are sufficient to meet the region s needs for at least the next 10 years and based on the median demand projection could be sufficient for much longer. There are sufficient projects in Tampa Bay Water s Master Water Plan to meet the needs of the member governments for 20 years or longer. However, as the probabilistic demand projections show, there is wide variability in regional demands the further out into the planning horizon. Accurately estimating member government seasonal and annual water needs from Tampa Bay Water, and especially the year-to-year variation in that need for individual members, is a major forecasting challenge. D. Interlocal Agreement Requirements/ Recommended Planning and Management Activities The Interlocal Agreement requires that Tampa Bay Water actively monitor the members demands and the permitted capacity of Tampa Bay Water facilities as outlined below C. The General Manager shall actively monitor the quantity of Quality Water delivered to Member Governments and the aggregate permitted capacity of the Authority s facilities C.(1). If a Member Government demand exceeds the Authority s permitted capacity by 75% during any twelve-month period, the Authority shall initiate a preparation of Primary Environmental Permit applications necessary to ensure adequate supply C.(02). If Member Government demand exceeds the Authority s permitted capacity by 85% during any twelve-month period, the General Manager shall report to the Board and recommend that the Authority file Primary Environmental Permit applications to ensure adequate supply. The Authority shall file any such applications expeditiously Production Failure. Defined as when actual delivery by the Authority during any 12 month period to the Member Governments exceeds 94% of the aggregate permitted capacity. If the Authority has submitted a primary environmental permit and entered into final design and bid construction of the facilities, the additional capacity in the permit application can be included in the aggregate permitted capacity. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-10

94 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Over the past 15 years, Tampa Bay Water was actively permitting and building its alternative water supply projects; as such these requirements were always met. The timing of the agency s planning program (including choosing projects and preparing primary environmental permits) was guided by the commitments made with the Water Management District to reduce groundwater production and bring on new supply sources. With these commitments completed, Tampa Bay Water will not need to develop new water supply sources as frequently. Since project permitting and development is no longer an ongoing activity for the agency, the Interlocal Agreement requirements must now be monitored against the agency s aggregate permitted capacity to determine the timing of preparation and submittal of future permit applications. One challenge associated with this is that the water use permits for Tampa Bay Water s surface water supplies are based on river flows and do not have a set capacity. This means there is no total aggregate water use permit yardstick against which demands in any twelve month period can be judged. To honor the intent of the Interlocal Agreement requirements, the agency must thus consider the available quantity of the agency s surface water supplies in evaluating its total capacity. Water demands and the quantity of available surface water supply can vary greatly between wet to normal rainfall years versus drought years and can also be different intra-annually due to expected seasonal rainfall patterns. Preparing and submitting water use permits is costly and resource intensive; it would be unwise to undertake the activity based on the agency s water demands versus capacity during expected seasonal dry periods. The agency could conceivably begin preparing water use permit applications each spring dry season and no longer need to do so each summer rainy season. The same is true of significant drought events which would be expected to only happen once every years. It is unlikely that that a water use permit quantity based on demands versus supply in a 1 in 100 or even a 1 in 25 year drought event could be obtained by the Water Management District as the need for the water supply could not be demonstrated in most years. To address drought periods, Tampa Bay Water implements it its Water Shortage Mitigation Plan. Tampa Bay Water monitors climatic and water supply conditions and provides this information to the member governments and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. For planning program purposes, choosing a future project or projects and beginning the preparation of water use permits for them should be based on the supply capacity under average hydrologic conditions since new Master Water Plan projects are developed to meet long-term water supply needs (and not expected seasonal drought events or rare significant drought years). Comparing the current probabilistic demand forecasts for the 50 th to 75 th percentile of demands against this capacity yardstick, indicates that beginning preparation of water use permit application(s) would be required in the timeframe. Submittal of water use permit application(s) would not be required until at least Between then and now, planning feasibility efforts to evaluate the Master Water Plan projects can be conducted for the Board. This will allow the Board to be prepared to select a project or projects for permitting when needed. These timeframes should also be re-evaluated every 12 months and once the agency s future needs analysis is completed as outlined below. To fully address the issues of seasonal water supply, seasonal demand variability, and the uncertainties associated with projecting economic and demographic factors, Tampa Bay Water is also currently employing a reliability-based approach to assess its future water supply needs. Tampa Bay Water Page 5-11

95 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Surface water, groundwater, and desalinated water must be examined both individually and collectively, to confirm the regional system s ability to accommodate seasonal and annual changes in demand. Also, supplies must be available, within acceptable operating conditions, under all weather and economic circumstances this demonstrates resilience. Understanding the system s sensitivity to changing conditions, and the agency s ability to respond flexibly, will help inform both operating decisions and capital investment choices. System performance and the future need analysis starts from the premise of existing infrastructure components being fully functional, subject only to the normal cycles of repair, renewal and replacement. From here, planning is based on these steps: Evaluate the total water needs expected within the next 30 years. Quantify the reliability, resiliency and vulnerability of existing sources. Evaluate the performance of the existing treatment and delivery systems. Determine how much of the existing water supply is available to meet growth in the future, and how much additional supply is needed. Results of this System performance evaluation which will be used to further define the timing and quantity of new water supplies are expected to be completed within the next two years. Tampa Bay Water should also continue to implement and further enhance its planning and management activities to address both seasonal and severe drought events and long-term future water supply needs. These include such things as continuing the implementation of existing activities and planning tools approved by the Board and looking at the agency s operations for enhancements that might further its capacity within existing permit limits. For instance, relatively small but cost effective improvements to things such as chemical feed systems that could enhance the agency s effective capacity could be explored further. Participation in State water policy and regulatory discussions will also further an understanding by policy-makers of the complexities associated with developing and operating surface water supply systems in a state that experiences annual and cyclically severe drought events. As other regions of the State turn to the use of surface water to meet their future needs, understanding any beneficial initiatives such as conjunctive use approaches that may be proposed State-wide could also assist the agency. In summary, the following comprehensive planning and management activities are recommended to the Board to be implemented as required over the next five year planning period: Continue implementation of the agency s Water Shortage Mitigation Plan Implement the Water Use Efficiency activities approved by the Board in its Demand Management Plan resolution Complete the Future Needs Analysis Conduct feasibility planning activities for Master Water Plan projects Tampa Bay Water Page 5-12

96 Section 5 Customers and Water Demands Consider operational enhancements both administrative and capital that could further facility operational capacity within existing permit limits Participate in State water policy and regulatory discussions to further the understanding of surface water supply use; explore any potential beneficial initiatives that may be proposed Tampa Bay Water Page 5-13

97 Section 6 System Analysis Section 6 Systems Analysis Tampa Bay Water regularly performs hydraulic analyses for its regional supply and transmission system to study current system operating conditions and to evaluate plans for projected future operating conditions. This section provides an overview of the system analyses that have been performed, the continued system analysis that is performed from time to time, and a plan on how to evaluate the potential effect of future water supply projects on system hydraulics. A. System Analysis Tools Tampa Bay Water uses a number of computer modeling and analysis tools to evaluate its system. A summary of the system analysis tools that are currently used is provided below: Regional System and Enhanced Surface Water System Surge Models Surge models for Tampa Bay Water s Regional System and Enhanced Surface Water transmission systems developed in LIQT software. The models are used to predict potential system transient control issues and evaluate options to mitigate or reduce potential transient control problems. Regional Supply and Transmission System and Enhanced Surface Water System Hydraulic Models The hydraulic models use the ArcGIS based InfoWater software. The hydraulic model of Tampa Bay Water s regional finished water transmission system is used to study current and projected future system operations and evaluate potential system improvement options. The hydraulic model of Tampa Bay Water s Enhanced Surface Water System components is used to determine hydraulic limitations for the existing transmission system infrastructure and evaluate potential future expansions of the system. Hydraulic Grade Spreadsheets These excel spreadsheets graph the hydraulic grade of Tampa Bay Water s major pipelines based on supply input and demand output. The tools have been upgraded to include approximations for chemical usage and electricity. These estimates can be used for annual budgeting purposes. Enhanced Surface Water System Operational Model A stochastic model of Tampa Bay Water s Enhanced Surface Water System. The model is used to estimate supply availability based on climate related seasonal and long-term drought and heavy rainfall periods, for the existing supply sources, storage, and transmission system infrastructure, and evaluate potential yield and reliability of future expansions of the system. Regional System Performance Model This model includes the Enhance Surface Water Operation Model, probabilistic demand projections, operating rules and constraints for the groundwater, surface water and desalination facilities to evaluate the performance and reliability of Tampa Bay Water s regional water supply and delivery system. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-1

98 Section 6 System Analysis B. Previous Hydraulic and System Analyses B1. Surge Modeling Tampa Bay Water operates large finished and raw water transmission systems with limited numbers of water supply inputs and water demand outlets. Large transmission system with limited inlets and outlets can be susceptible to significant transient pressure events, also known as water hammer or surge pressures and vacuum conditions. In order to mitigate surge pressure events, Tampa Bay Water has implemented a variety of operating strategies, control systems, and surge mitigation devices throughout its systems. The transmission mains are furnished with combination air/vacuum relief valves to reduce the potential for water column separation and associated pressure surges and vacuums conditions that can occur during transient causing events, such as power outages at pumping facilities or the unintentional rapid closing of a valve. Transient surge model has been developed for the Tampa Bay Water Regional System and the Enhanced Surface Water System. These models were developed in LIQT software, and have been updated periodically when changes to the transmission system inlets or outlets are made. The models are used to analyze potential transient pressure control issues and evaluate options to mitigate transient pressure problems for both current and projected future operating conditions. The LIQT software utilizes the Method of Characteristics for solving hydraulic transients in the modeled systems. This method involves numerous computations along each pipeline segment, and is appropriate for large transmission systems that have limited inputs and outputs. The following analyses have been performed: Pre-System Configuration I Program Expansion Pre-System Configuration II Program Expansion Regional System Pre-System Configuration II Program Expansion Enhanced Surface Water System These analyses identified several locations where additional transient control measures were needed to handle the operating conditions associated with the system expansion. Additional surge mitigation infrastructure and controls that were identified in the Pre-System Configuration II Program Expansion for the Regional system and the Extended Surface Water System, were completed in In order to ensure that the recommended surge mitigation devices and strategies have been implemented and continue to function as intended, Tampa Bay Water has developed a comprehensive database for the surge mitigation features throughout the system. The database serves as an inventory of the surge mitigation features, and also includes information regarding recommended settings and maintenance requirements for each. Tampa Bay Water Staff is currently reviewing the surge mitigation features throughout the system to document field consistency with the recommendations indicated in the database. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-2

99 Section 6 System Analysis B Analysis Several analyses of Tampa Bay Water s system have been completed or are currently on-going. In 2006, the Tampa Bay Water 2025 System Analysis Update was completed by Black & Veatch. This analysis was performed to determine regional transmission system improvements to accomplish the following: Increase transmission system capacity to handle the then-projected increases in demands through Enhance the system s ability to deliver water during a wide-spread power outage condition and other potential emergency scenarios such as a pipeline failure. This system analysis update was completed through a collaborative effort between Tampa Bay Water, the Member Governments and Black & Veatch. The analysis resulted in several recommended projects to increase transmission system capacity to handle future system flow rates and projected demands through year In addition, there were a number of projects recommended to improve system reliability during potential wide-spread power outage conditions and emergency scenarios such as a pipeline failure. Most of the 25 recommendations scheduled for completion in 2012 have been completed as individual capital improvement projects, or included with other planned projects at the same locations. Table 6-1 shows the list of recommended improvements from the 2025 System Analysis that have not yet been implemented. Table 6-1 Recommended Improvements from the 2025 Analysis that have not been Completed Recommended Improvements Cost Reason Not Completed Yet Cypress Bridge Wells Pump Replacement with Higher Head Pumps Cypress Creek Pump Station Metering Improvement to Increase the Venturi Range to 180 million gallons per day Cypress Bridge Wellfield Metering Improvement to Increase the Venturi Range to 30 million gallons per day Cosme/Odessa Wellfield Standby Power Capacity for 11 million gallons per day of Supply South Pasco Wellfield Powerline Replacement Cosme WTP Emergency Interconnection Piping Improvements $3,000,000 $200,000 $80,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 $1,000,000 Higher head conditions are not occurring yet. Pump replacement will occur with the R&R program replacement. Higher flow conditions have not occurred yet. Higher flow conditions have not occurred yet. Property rights from St. Petersburg have not been granted. Property rights from St. Petersburg have not been granted. Property rights from St. Petersburg have not been granted. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-3

100 Section 6 System Analysis B Long- Term Water Supply Plan Options Analysis The future water supply options identified in Tampa Bay Water s 2008 Long-Term Water Supply Plan were evaluated in a hydraulic model for the demands projected for the year The results showed that there were hydraulic limitations in the Morris Bridge Transmission Main, Cypress Bridge Transmission Main, Brandon Transmission Main and Brandon South Central Connection. The analysis also determined that the hydraulic limitations would be improved by the addition of new supply capacities downstream of the Cypress Creek Pump Station and at the Lithia Water Treatment Facility. Conversely, the addition of new supply at the Regional Facility site or on the North Central Hillsborough Transmission Main between the Regional Facility site and the Morris Bridge Booster Station could require the addition of parallel or increased diameter piping to be installed. Since this analysis was completed, the list of Master Water Plan projects was narrowed to a Board Approved list of seven Master Water Plan projects. Since 2008, the projected system demands have been revised to lower values due to the economic slowdown in the Tampa Bay region. Hydraulic modeling for the seven Master Water Plan projects has not been required yet and will be scheduled in future feasibility work when needed. B4. Surface Water Supply Analysis The stochastic model of Tampa Bay Water s Enhanced Surface Water Supply System simulates rainfall, surface water flows, long term drought cycles, seasonal variability, and some surface water quality components, and storage to estimate the surface water supply available. This model has been used for many analyses, including: Analysis required for surface water supply for permit renewals Prediction of reservoir levels and supply availability and reliability Analysis of potential yield and reliability of future surface water supply expansion options Overall whole system Reliability Analysis B5. Overall System Supply Reliability Analysis Tampa Bay Water has a diverse portfolio of supplies, and demands that are projected to increase over time. Tampa Bay Water uses the Regional System performance model to determine the reliability of the system. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-4

101 Section 6 System Analysis C. Current and Future System Analyses C1. Hydraulic Analysis of the Existing Regional Transmission System The Existing Regional Transmission System model is run in the GIS based software InfoWater, and has been calibrated to the existing system infrastructure. It incorporates the major components of the Regional Transmission system, including the supply sources, storage, pumps, piping, demands, and their associated diurnal flow patterns. Model scenarios have been created for the existing system demands, and for projected future year 2025 and 2035 demands. The future demands and supplies are also simulated with scenarios to reflect the seasonal demand and supply availability projections for: January May September Peak demand of seasonal residents Dry season and overall peak demand time Low demand and maximum surface water availability The model results can be used to determine whether pumps and pipe sizes are adequate to convey supply for projected future member demands at the required system pressures, without exceeding the design pressures of the pipelines. Tampa Bay Water delivers Quality Water at 19 active potable delivery locations. Many locations have storage, while other locations have demand for flow that fluctuates significantly throughout the day. The model simulates these daily demand fluctuations in an extended period simulation (i.e. multiple time steps). The existing system surface water supply is modeled without the benefit of the 15 Billion Gallon reservoir (which is currently out of service for repair). This reduces the surface water supplies in January and eliminates it entirely for the May scenario. The surface water supply is maximized in the September scenario. Maximizing the surface water supply from the Regional Facility Site at flows greater than 70 million gallons per day may cause some difficulty in operating the High Service Pump Station. Neither a constant pressure nor a constant flow scenario will work to control the pumps. To maximize the surface water flow above 70 million gallons per day, the pump flow setpoints will need to be controlled regularly to vary with the overall system demand. The future year 2025 and 2035 model scenarios assume that reservoir is back in service, and the system pressure downstream of the Cypress Creek Pump Station increased by approximately 20 pounds per square inch to meet the requirement of 75 pounds per square inch at the Pinellas County point of connection. Pinellas County currently accepts lower pressure, but has requested an increase to 75 pounds per square inch after improvements have been completed to the Keller Water Treatment Facility Pump Station in late This system pressure increase combined with the increase flow from the regional facility and the increased future system demands create an overall increase in system pressures. During the early morning peak day flows, for the September 2035 model scenario, the pressure leaving the Regional Facility Site range from 120 to 168 pounds per square inch, which is very close to the Tampa Bay Water Page 6-5

102 Section 6 System Analysis maximum working pressure of the pipeline of 175 pounds per square inch. There are several strategies available to reduce the system pressures: 1) Operate in repump mode where pressure is boosted at the Cypress Creek Pump Station. This could reduce pressure upstream of the Cypress Creek Pump Station by approximately 45 pounds per square inch. Repump operations may require some additional infrastructure improvements at the Cypress Creek facility. 2) Install treated water storage and pumping capacity at the larger delivery locations that have highly variable flows, to even out system flows, and lower overall system pressures. 3) Increase the pipeline capacity between the Morris Bridge Booster Pump Station and The Cypress Creek Pump Station by installing a parallel line or replacing the pipeline with a larger diameter pipeline. Each option would have an initial capital cost and a longer term operation and maintenance. Further analysis should be completed to determine when the system pressures will approach the maximum level in the piping, and which option would provide the best protection and long-term value. The other difficulty downstream of the Cypress Creek Pump Station caused by system pressure increase is that the upstream pressure at Odessa and US41 Pump Stations are higher, and the existing pumps are oversized to deliver the required pressure at the Pasco County Points of Connection. The US 41 Pump Station upstream pressure currently range from 50 to 65 pounds per square inch, and would increase by approximately 19 pounds per square inch. The Odessa Pump Station upstream pressure currently range from 45 to 55 pounds per square inch, and would increase by approximately 15 pounds per square inch. Tampa Bay Water has identified several potential solutions, and will begin a project in 2013 to address the system pump/pressure issues at these two pump stations. Storage for treated water is an important component of the supply system. It appears that the 22.5 million gallons of storage available at the High Service Pumps Station is instrumental in the success of that facility in delivering varying flows with fairly constant influent from the Surface Water Treatment plant and the Tampa Bay Desalination Facility. The system piping modification to operate the regional system in a repump mode have been completed, however there is only 5 million gallons of hydraulically effective storage at the Cypress Creek Pump Station. An analysis of whether additional system storage would be beneficial should be completed. System hydraulic evaluations will continue to be updated regularly to ensure that Tampa Bay Water can reliably meet Member Government demands in the future. C2. Updated Hydraulic Analysis for Long-Term Water Supply Options As part of Tampa Bay Water s current Long-Term Water Supply Planning process, several potential water supply options have been identified. The details of these Water Supply options are discussed in Section 11. Table 6-2 lists the potential water supply options and provides information regarding the Tampa Bay Water Page 6-6

103 Section 6 System Analysis average supply, and the entry point into the regional system. The locations where the regional system would receive supply from the various options are shown in Figure 6-1. Project Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion Gulf Coast Seawater Desalination Plant Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Tampa Bay Wellfields Thonotosassa Wells Surface Water Expansion (7 Configurations) Aquifer Recharge Rapid Infiltration Basins Aquifer Recharge Wells Table 6-2 Potential Water Supply Options Average New Supply 10 million gallons per day 9 million gallons per day 10 million gallons per day 15 million gallons per day 10 million gallons per day 0.3 million gallons per day 7.7 million gallons per day 8.2 million gallons per day 16.5 million gallons per day 17.3 million gallons per day 9.7 million gallons per day 10.1 million gallons per day 20 million gallons per day 20 million gallons per day Regional Delivery Location Regional Facility Site Keller Water Treatment Facility 11 Existing Consolidated Wellfields North Central Hillsborough Transmission Main between the Regional Facility and Morris Bridge Regional Facility Site Lithia Water Treatment Facility Tampa Hillsborough Interconnect, and South Pasco Transmission Main Cypress Creek Water Treatment Facility Lithia Water Treatment Facility Tampa Bay Water Page 6-7

104 Section 6 System Analysis Tampa Bay Water Page 6-8

105 Section 6 System Analysis Over the past five years, work on the future water supply options has been deferred to the future based on the projections for the need for new supply have extended in time. Updated hydraulic analyses will be completed in the future based on the updated information for each option and sub option to evaluate how the implementation of the potential new water supply options could impact the operation of the Regional Transmission System. The analyses will consider the seasonal differences in demand and supply availability, the diurnal fluctuation in demand at delivery locations and the projected system demand conditions through year The analysis will specifically investigate whether the new supplies will improve or exacerbate the hydraulic restrictions in the Morris Bridge Transmission Main, Cypress Bridge Transmission Main, Brandon Transmission Main, and Brandon South Central Connector. As the decision regarding which long-term water supply options will be considered for further evaluation and implementation becomes more defined, additional analyses should be completed to evaluate the need for additional operational flexibility and potential system operating restrictions. The results of the future analyses will help define the need for the potential system improvements identified in this section of the report. C System Analysis Tampa Bay Water will complete an update of the Tampa Bay Water 2025 System Analysis Update (Black & Veatch, 2006), based on the post System Configuration II infrastructure and the projected 2035 demands. The analyses will focus on Tampa Bay Water s ability to maintain reliable service during potential wide spread power outage conditions, pipeline failures, and facility shutdowns. The improvements that were recommended from the last analysis that have not been completed (see Table 6-1) will also be re-evaluated to determine if they are still necessary. C4. Future System Surge Analysis Tampa Bay Water s future plans for continuing to maintain adequate surge protection throughout the system include: Completing updates to the surge mitigation feature database, including field observations and testing to document the settings and functionality of the surge mitigation devices and control systems. Any discrepancies between the recommendations and the field observations will be further evaluated and addressed as necessary. Update of the surge models, including verifying field consistency with records documents for the new infrastructure and equipment that was added as part of the System Configuration II Program. Evaluation of future system operating conditions as necessary to allow for proactive implementation of appropriate surge mitigation devices and operating strategies. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-9

106 Section 6 System Analysis These efforts will support Tampa Bay Water s ability to continue providing a safe and reliable potable water supply to its Member Governments. D. Summary of System Analysis Recommendations Tampa Bay Water should perform the following system analyses: Regional System and Enhanced Surface Water System Surge Models o Have the database of system surge features, field verified for the equipment and settings by Tampa Bay Water staff. o Have the System Engineer update and run the system surge models to verify that the system has adequate surge protection in o Update the surge analysis in the future for any major changes to the system. Regional Supply and Transmission System and Enhanced Surface Water System Hydraulic Models o Evaluate system improvements at the Odessa and US 41 Pump Stations resulting from an increase in system pressure from Cypress Creek prior to the increase of Pressure at the Pinellas point of Connection in o Evaluate options for lowering system pressures in the transmission main between the High Service pump Station and the Cypress Creek Pump Station if regular pressures in the transmission main are projected to exceed 150 pounds per square inch. o Evaluate the benefits of adding finished water storage in the coming 5 years. o Have the System Engineer update the 2025 Analysis and determine if the previously recommended projects are still necessary in o Evaluate long-term water supply options in the coming 5-year planning period. Hydraulic Grade Tools (with chemical and electrical cost estimates) o Project monthly chemical and electrical costs for annual budgeting each year. Enhanced Surface Water System Operational Model o Project supply availability based on projected regional rainfall forecasts on at least a monthly basis. o Further evaluate future surface water system expansion options as a part of the Master Water Plan feasibility work. Regional System Performance Model Tampa Bay Water Page 6-10

107 Section 6 System Analysis o Update the analysis of system reliability in the Regional System Performance Model whenever any changes to supply sources and/or changes demand projections. o Evaluate the improved system reliability with each of the long-term water supply options. Tampa Bay Water Page 6-11

108 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review Section 7 Regulatory Review A. Introduction As a part of planning to meet the water needs of the member governments, it is important for Tampa Bay Water to consider existing and proposed regulations at the State and Federal levels. Existing water use permits and treatment facility permits held by Tampa Bay Water are also enumerated in this section. Copies of these permits are included in Appendix E. Drinking water standards are established at the Federal and State levels to protect human health. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection typically adopts drinking water standards as mandated at the federal level; however, State standards may be more stringent than the Federal standards. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is also responsible for permitting water treatment facilities and distribution systems. Local water management districts subdivide the State into five regions. Tampa Bay Water s service area falls within the boundary of the Southwest Florida Water Management District. The District has the specific mission of maintaining a balance between current and future water demands and protecting water resources for the purpose of sustaining regional supply and maximizing environmental, economic, and recreational benefits. The Southwest Florida Water Management District is responsible for issuing water use permits, environmental resource permits, and well construction permits. Tampa Bay Water is required to provide water that meets all State and Federal drinking water standards as well as Exhibit D Standards. Exhibit D Standards were established in the Master Water Supply Contract to further refine what was defined as a Quality Water to be provided to member governments. These standards are summarized in Table 7-1. Tampa Bay Water Page 7-1

109 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review Table 7-1 Exhibit D Water Quality Parameters and Compliance Levels Water Quality Parameter Standard Field Conductivity < 850 μmhos/cm Field Temperature < 35 o C Total Alkalinity > 40 milligrams per liter as CaCO 3 Total Sulfides < 0.1 milligrams per liter (max-avg) Total Hardness < 300 milligrams per liter as CaCO 3 Calcium Hardness 50 milligrams per liter as CaCO3 < X < 250 milligrams per liter as CaCO 3 Total Organic Carbon < 3.6 milligrams per liter Iron < 0.15 milligrams per liter Turbidity < 1 Nephelometric Turbidity Units Color < 15 platinum-cobalt units. Odor < 2 Threshold Odor Number Fluoride < 0.8 milligrams per liter ph > 7.4 Nitrite < 1 milligrams per liter as Nitrogen Nitrate < 10 milligrams per liter as Nitrogen Total Dissolved Solids < 500 milligrams per liter Ammonia < 1 milligrams per liter as Nitrogen Total Phosphorous < 1 milligrams per liter Orthophosphate < 1 milligrams per liter as Phosphorous B. Federal Rules and Regulations Federal regulations are promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Regulations related to drinking water include the following: Safe Drinking Water Act The Safe Drinking Water Act establishes health-based Maximum Contaminant Levels for chemicals and bacteriological constituents that can be found naturally, or are introduced through human activities, in the nation s drinking water supplies. The Federal Government works in conjunction with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to regulate utilities within Florida. Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act is the key legislative rule which protects the water quality of the nation s surface waters. One mechanism to achieve protection is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, which establishes limits on discharges to ensure that the total discharge of pollutants of concern is less than the maximum assimilative capacity of the receiving stream. B1. Safe Drinking Water Act The Environmental Protection Agency regulates public water systems via the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Act was passed in 1974, amended in 1986, and again in The Safe Drinking Water Act includes protection and assessment of drinking water sources, Maximum Contaminant Levels for Tampa Bay Water Page 7-2

110 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review numerous water quality parameters, treatment standards, monitoring and reporting requirements, public information requirements and enforcement authority. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, or primary standards, are legally-enforceable standards that protect drinking water quality by limiting the levels of specific contaminants that can adversely affect public health and are known or anticipated to occur in water. These standards take the form of either Maximum Contaminant Levels or Treatment Techniques. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection regulates sodium as an additional primary standard. National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations, or secondary standards, are guidelines set for contaminants that may adversely affect the aesthetic quality of drinking water. Individual States may choose to adopt these guidelines as enforceable standards. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection has incorporated secondary drinking water standards into Chapter of the Florida Administrative Code. B2. Future Regulations Presented below is a summary of major water-related regulations under development at the Environmental Protection Agency. Regulation Proposal Final Notes Bisphenol A (BPA) TBD TBD Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July 26, EPA is considering environmental testing for BPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), including potential testing of drinking water and its sources. On February 2, 2011, EPA announced plans to develop a single National Drinking Water Carcinogenic 2014 June 2015 Regulation (NPDWR) covering up Volatile Organic (projected) (projected) to 16 carcenogenic VOCs. EPA is Compounds (VOCs) conducting evaluations and developing supporting materials for proposal. Clean Water Protection Rule TBD TBD The Clean Water Protection Rule would codify requirements Tampa Bay Water Page 7-3

111 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review Lead and Copper Rule (LCR): Regulatory Revisions Perchlorate Radon Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR) RTCR - Finished Water Storage Facility Inspection Requirements Effluent Guidelines and Standards for Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction Including Coalbed Methane and Shale Gas Extraction 2014 (projected) 2014 (projected) November 2, 1999 June 17, 2010 TBD October 2014 (projected) May 2014 (projected) August 2014 (statutory deadline) TBD February 13, 2013 TBD February 2016 (projected) Fluoride TBD TBD currently set forth in the EPA/Army Corps of Engineers Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act. The guidance was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review on February 21, EPA has announced its intention to engage in a series of public meetings/workshops to discuss potential rule revisions. EPA is awaiting the final Science Advisory Board report on setting a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) and continues to evaluate revised modelling approaches to set an MCLG. Long-term prospects for a radon rulemaking are uncertain. EPA's Spring 2011 Regulatory Agenda lists final action for this rule as "to be determine." However, it is not listed at all in the Fall 2012 Regulatory Agenda. The final RTCR was published in the Federal Register on February 13, Compliance begins on April 1, EPA is evaluating options for a potential regulation. EPA has completed and peerreviewed a quantitative doseresponse assessment based on the available data for severe dental Tampa Bay Water Page 7-4

112 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review fluorosis as recommended by National Research Council (NRC). EPA has also completed and peerreviewed a document on environmental exposure to fluoride and the relative source contribution (RSC) for water. The RSC is needed in order to derive the Maximum Contaminate Level Goal (MCLG) from the doseresponse assessment. Information Sources: American Metropolitan Water Association May 2013/US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website July 2013 C. Water Management District Permits The Southwest Florida Water Management District enforces legislation as promulgated in Chapter 373, of the Florida Statutes which lays the foundation for Florida s five water management districts. Water management district responsibilities include determining reasonable and beneficial use of water resources through regulation and thereby, preserving the water quality and quantity of the state s waters. The Southwest Florida Water Management District has issued three types of permits to Tampa Bay Water, as outlined below. Environmental Resource Permits: required in order to regulate the construction and operation of surface water systems. Helps maintain regional integrity of surface water resources including rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. Construction based permit required if wetlands are affected, surface water flows are altered, or water resources needing to be protected during construction activity; Water Use Permits: allows water withdrawal for various water uses. Several water use permit classifications exist, depending on the withdrawal quantity. Public supplies of potable water greater than 500,000 gallons per day (such as Tampa Bay Water sources) are classified as Individual Water Use Permits. Individual Water Use Permits can be based upon annual average or peak month withdrawal flows which may be seasonally influenced by established Minimum Flows and Levels; and Well Construction Permits: standards for well construction are enforced by this permit to ensure that the quality and performance expectations of the well are achieved. Tampa Bay Water Page 7-5

113 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review C2. State Water Supply Initiative Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency The Department of Environmental Protection is leading a statewide effort to improve consistency in the Consumptive/Water Use Permitting Programs implemented by the Water Management Districts. The individual water management district consumptive use permitting rules, while all developed under the authority of Ch. 373, F.S., are inconsistent among the districts. While some of the differences may be based on differing physical and natural characteristics, others are the result of development of separate rules and procedures developed over time. This results in confusion for the regulated public, particularly along the border areas of the districts, and inequitable treatment of similar applicants in different districts. Additionally, the development of separate procedures and rules is costly and inefficient. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection s goals for the Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency Initiative include: Make programs less confusing for applicants, particularly those who work in more than one District Treat applicants equitably statewide; Provide consistent protection of the environment; Streamline the process; and Incentivize behavior that protects water resources, including conservation. Some of the Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency Initiative topics that the Department and the Water Management Districts are working on include: o Types of Permits/Permit Thresholds o Water Conservation for Public Water Supply o Reuse o Substitution credits o Impact Offsets o Administrative Changes o Consistent permit application forms o Re-organization of applicant s handbook Tampa Bay Water Page 7-6

114 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review o Make 10-yr compliance report requirements consistent with DEP guidance memo and existing statutes o Consistent pumpage reporting forms and other monitoring forms o Develop standard limiting conditions for permits The completion of the Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency Initiative rulemaking will be done by the Water Management Districts and is expected to be completed in D. Existing Tampa Bay Water Permitted Sources and Treatment Facilities Permits Tampa Bay Water has five groundwater water use permits, two surface water permits, and one surface water augmentation permit, which are summarized in Table 7-2 below: Table 7-2 Tampa Bay Water Existing Water Use Permits Facility Description WUP Number Effective Date Expiration Date Consolidated Wellfields /25/ /25/2021 South-Central /31/ /31/2020 Hillsborough Regional Wellfield Brandon Urban Dispersed /20/ /20/2019 Wells Carrollwood Wells /11/ /11/2030 Eagles Wells /11/ /11/2030 Tampa Bypass /28/ /31/2030 Canal/Hillsborough River Alafia River /27/ /27/ Consolidated wellfields- the water use permit authorizes withdrawals at Tampa Bay Water s 11 Central System Wellfields. The 12-month running average regulatory limit for these 11 wellfields is 90 million gallon per day. There is no permitted peak month quantity. Well rotation and wellfield pumpage is scheduled using Tampa Bay Water s Optimized Regional Operations Plan model. The permit expiration is January 25, South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield- the water use permit allows withdrawal at the South-Central Hillsborough Regional Wellfield of 24.1 million gallons per day on a 12-month running average basis and 33 million gallons per day on a peak month basis. The permit expiration date is December 31, Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells-the water use permit for the Brandon Urban Dispersed Wells allows for withdrawals of 6.0 million gallons per day on a 12-month running average flow basis Tampa Bay Water Page 7-7

115 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review and a 9.2 million gallons per day on a peak month basis. The permit expiration date is November 20, Carrollwood Wells- the water use permit for the Carrollwood Wells allows for withdrawals of 0.82 million gallons per day on a 12-month running average flow basis and peak month basis. The permit expiration date is October 11, Eagles Wells- the permitted withdrawal from these wells is 198,000 gallons per day on an annual average basis and 285,000 gallons per day on a peak month basis. The permit expiration date is September 3, Tampa Bypass Canal/Hillsborough River- the current water use permit authorizes Tampa Bay Water to withdraw all the water from the Lower Pool of the Tampa Bypass Canal when the pool level is above 9.0 feet and authorizes a flow-based diversion rate of 10% to 40% of the Hillsborough River when flow over the Hillsborough River Dam is above 65 mgd (100 cubic feet per second), up to a maximum diversion of 194 million gallons per day. The maximum total daily withdrawal authorized from the Tampa Bypass Canal is 258 million gallons per day (400 cubic feet per second). The permit expiration date is December 31, Alafia River Project- the water use permit for the Alafia River allows for diversion of up to 10 % of the flow when the Alafia River at Bell Shoals is above 84 million gallons per day, with a maximum diversion rate of 60 million gallons per day. The water use permit expiration date is November 27, 2032 Harney Augmentation Permit- the water use permit authorizes Tampa Bay Water to withdraw 20 million gallons per day on a 12-month running average basis and 40 million gallons per day peak month from the Harney Canal (Middle Pool) of the Tampa Bypass Canal to augment the City of Tampa s Hillsborough River Reservoir. The permit expiration date is May 24, Tampa Bay Water has a number of permits for their treatment facilities issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection under criteria contained in Rule FAC. These permits allow for the operation of existing water treatment facilities, along with the construction and operation of any new facilities. Permitted water treatment facilities constructed and operated by Tampa Bay Water are listed in Table 7-3. Table 7-3 Tampa Bay Water FDEP Permits FDEP Permit Number PWS ID Number Permit Description WC/ Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant Expansion WC/ Tampa Bay Water Surface Water Treatment Plant WC/M Tampa Bypass Canal Pump Station Modification DS/C Tampa Bypass Canal Intakes, Pump and Raw Water Pipeline DS/C Alafia River Intake and Raw Water Tampa Bay Water Page 7-8

116 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review Pump Station WC/MA Tampa Bay Water Regional Reservoir DS/C inch Transmission Main from Alafia River to Tampa Bay Water Regional Reservoir WC/M Regional High Service Pump Station Modification WC/M Regional Re-Pump Station Modification WC Tampa Bay Water Re-Pump Station WC/M Alkalinity Adjustment Facility WC/ Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination WC/ Brandon Well Number 5 Chloramination and Piping Modification WC/ Brandon Well 7 Chloramination WC/M Brandon Well 7 Capacity Increase 01682//-055-DS/C Brandon Wells 2, 4 and DS/C Brandon South-Central Connection WC/MA West Pasco Improvement DS/C South Pasco Meter Pit WC/M Cypress Creek Pump Station Modification WC/M Cypress Creek Pump Station Modification WC/MA Lake Bridge Water Treatment Plant Capacity Expansion WC/MA Odessa Booster Pump Station WC/MA Pasco County Delivery Expansion- US 41 Point of Connection WC/MA Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant WC/MA Lake Bridge Water Treatment Plant- Cypress Creek Wellfield Chloramination WC/ Morris Bridge Water Treatment Plant Chemical Feed System WC/M South Pasco Wellfield Chloramination-Modifications DS/C Chloramination Project for Lake Park WTP DS/C Carrollwood Collection Main Contract I DS/C Carrollwood Collection Main Contract II DS/C N/A Eagles Wells-raw water to Cosme Tampa Bay Water Page 7-9

117 Long-Term Water Supply Plan 2013 Section 7 Regulatory Review WTP PWS E. Regulatory Effect on Operations and Water Supply Development In operating its facilities and planning for future supply sources, Tampa Bay Water should continue to participate in Federal and State regulatory and policy initiatives in order to understand their effect on operations and future water supply development options. At the State level, Tampa Bay Water can provide constructive input on initiatives such as the Florida Department of Environmental Protection s Consumptive Use Permitting Consistency effort to help improve the permitting process. At the Federal level, things such as source water quality based upon established Maximum Contaminant Levels and Maximum Contaminant Guidance Levels, as well as potential emerging contaminants and Contaminant Candidate List constituents that might become regulated in the future will need to be followed. The research being performed on such constituents, their potential effects on public health, the environment, and related treatment aspects will continue to provide new information and a better understanding on how they might affect water supply. The research process is expected to occur over a long time span and thus will allow Tampa Bay Water time to adapt should any new regulatory limits be set. In the meantime, Tampa Bay Water can continue to participate in the regulatory development process to ensure that any proposed legislation is supportive of Tampa Bay Water s goal to provide safe clean drinking water. Tampa Bay Water Page 7-10

118 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program Section 8 Source Water Protection Program A. Introduction Tampa Bay Water s first and foremost concern for its source water protection program is the protection of the public health. Source water protection is the first step in the multi-barrier approach to drinking water protection. The goals of this protection are to protect public health and the environment, and allow cost effective and attainable drinking water treatment. Protection of Tampa Bay Water s existing and potential future sources is essential for protecting the public health and maintaining a sustainable water supply in the future. The Source Water Protection Program helps implement three Goals in the Board s Strategic Plan: Achieve a reliable water supply and delivery system Maintain the Agency s financial stability and sustainability Develop, improve, and maintain collaborative relationships with stakeholders Tampa Bay Water has a diversified water supply portfolio. The Agency utilizes groundwater, surface water and desalinated water to meet daily drinking water demands of the member governments. Tampa Bay Water relies on 11 consolidated wellfields, the Hillsborough River, Alafia River, Tampa Bypass Canal and the Seawater Desalination Plant located on Hillsborough Bay. Each and every day, this blend of sources is delivered to the member governments, who in turn deliver the water to 2.3 million people living in the region. The Source Water Protection Program employs a range of initiatives to prevent and reduce source water pollution. These initiatives include such things as education and outreach programs, participation in regulatory initiatives, partnerships and monitoring programs. As a wholesale water provider, Tampa Bay Water does not have regulatory purview over the land areas that influence the sources of supply. Additionally, a significant portion of these areas extend outside of the boundaries of Tampa Bay Water s six member governments jurisdictions. Collaboration and partnerships with member governments, regulatory agencies, stakeholders and municipal governments outside of Tampa Bay Water s service area are important components of a successful source water protection program. B. Tampa Bay Water s Source Water Protection Program During the 2008 update of the Tampa Bay Water Long-Term Master Water Plan, a Source Water Protection Program was identified as one of the initiatives to be undertaken by the Agency. The Plan Tampa Bay Water Page 8-1

119 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program outlined the need for a multi-barrier approach to the source water protection of Tampa Bay Water s existing and potential future water supply sources. The Board of Directors approved the creation of the Source Water Protection Program in December 2008 as a part of the Long-Term Master Water Plan efforts. Starting in 2009, Tampa Bay Water staff undertook an effort to develop the Source Water Protection Program. The planning effort was conducted over the course of three fiscal years. Tampa Bay Water procured Atkins North America, Inc. services to assist with the first two phases of this planning exercise. Staff completed the final phase with in-house resources. The Program was completed and approved in December Implementation of the Source Water Protection Program began in C. Tampa Bay Water s Source Water Protection Program The Source Water Protection Program contains several source water protection options listed below. They are listed in order of priority for implementation in the Source Water Protection Program: 1. Broad Regional Public Education (includes Source Water Protection Mini Grant) 2. Source Water Protection Liaison (includes Tampa Bay Water Estuary Program) 3. Wellhead/Groundwater/Surface Water Protection Ordinance 4. Land Use and Development Proposal Reviews 5. Water Quality Monitoring Plans and Trends Evaluation 6. Alignment of Water Quality Standards to Drinking Water Use (Alafia River and Tampa Bypass Canal Reclassification) 7. Participation in Development of Florida Department of Environmental Protection Rules (e.g. Statewide Stormwater Treatment Rule; State Water Quality Standards) 8. Participation in Development of Florida Department of Environmental Protection/ US Environmental Protection Agency Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), Basin Management Plans, Federal Panels and Similar Activities 9. Watershed Water Quality Monitoring 10. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Review for Alafia River, Hillsborough River and Tampa Bypass Canal 11. Participation in Local Watershed Meetings 12. GIS Water Quality Database Tool (Alafia River, Hillsborough River, Tampa Bypass Canal) 13. County Watershed Management Plans Tampa Bay Water Page 8-2

120 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program 14. Participation in Pathogens and Other Unregulated Compounds Research 15. Land Acquisition as a part of Projects for Tampa Bay Water s Water Supply System Infrastructure/Other Environmental Land Programs C.1. Broad Regional Public Education (including the Source Water Protection Mini Grant Program) Broad Regional Public Education was deemed the highest priority for the Source Water Protection Program. Broad Regional Public Education Program can include the educational areas outlined below. The ones that are implemented each year depend on funding availability and other agency needs and opportunities that arise. Providing source water protection information on the Agency website page, including interactive tools for the public to use Speakers Bureau presentations with source water protection information. Tampa Bay Water s staff who engage in public speaking events often have the opportunity to spread the message of source water protection importance to various local groups in the area Developing curriculum and lesson plans for elementary, middle and high schools. This curriculum focuses on the importance of protecting local drinking water sources. The curriculum is available to teachers and educators in order to assist them in teaching school children about the drinking water sources and actions that can be undertaken to protect them. Funding materials to promote events (pamphlets, mail-ins, posters and other promotional items). Tampa Bay Water enhances the promotional material given to the general public at different environmentally-themed events with added messages about source water protection Purchasing ads in local print media to promote mini grants and other events sponsored by the Agency. Sponsoring or co-sponsoring recycling events hosted by member governments. These events are an excellent venue to promote source water protection. Member governments often sponsor recycling events for the public, where the public can dispose of unwanted used engine oil, pesticides, herbicides, prescription pills and cleaning supplies. Developing street signs that promote source water protection Sponsoring community educational events which promote source water protection awareness (e.g. Earth day, River Clean-ups, etc.) Tampa Bay Water Page 8-3

121 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program C.2 Source Water Protection Liaison (including the Tampa Bay Estuary Program membership) As Tampa Bay Water does not have regulatory purview, the Agency works with its member governments and other agencies, such as the Southwest Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to further source water protection goals.. Liaising with these agencies is important to the success of Tampa Bay Water s Source Water Protection Program. Tampa Bay Water staff interacts with member government and regulatory agencies staff on a regular basis. The Source Water Protection Liaison function is designated to building relationships that help the source water protection efforts. These include: Working with federal, state and local governments on source water protection items Pursue policy matters that affect funding, either through revenue opportunities or expense impacts Understand and communicate technical and operational issues to senior staff Provide expertise on constraints, opportunities and organizational structures of regulatory agencies, health departments and other entities related to source water protection Legislative analysis, coordinating peer review technical panels from the scientific community and pursuing collaborative government efforts Coordinating the source water protection efforts agency-wide Staying connected with the latest developments in different areas of source water protection that might benefit Tampa Bay Water The Source Water Protection Liaison function is a team effort; the team leader collaborates with other Tampa Bay Water staff who are involved in source water protection related activities agency-wide. This team effort ensures that the staff communicates internally with others who are involved in the Source Water Protection Program. This also ensures that the Agency as a whole is communicating with its member governments and regulatory agencies successfully. C.3.Wellhead/Groundwater/Surface Water Protection Ordinance This is a very important effort for Tampa Bay Water. Member governments have adopted their own Wellhead or Surface Water Protection Ordinances. Tampa Bay Water participated in this collaborative Tampa Bay Water Page 8-4

122 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program and scientific effort with the member governments; the Ordinances were drafted and subsequently adopted in the counties land development codes. These Ordinances restrict types of development that can occur in the vicinity of drinking water sources; it is a protective measure that looks to prevent potential impacts of certain developments on the public drinking water supply sources. Areas around public drinking wells, as well as around surface water intakes are protected and development proposals within these areas are reviewed to ensure that they are complying with set rules and regulations of the Ordinances. Tampa Bay Water does not have regulatory purview, and as such, cannot enforce these Ordinances. However, through technical and planning assistance, the Agency staff offers comments and recommendations to member governments planning and growth management departments on a caseby-case basis. Tampa Bay Water participates in revisions and updates of the Ordinances. The counties have updated their Ordinances in the past on a 5-10 year basis. Tampa Bay Water staff will continue to participate in this important effort in the future. C.4. Land Use and Development Proposal Review The Land Use and Development Proposal Review effort is conducted by Tampa Bay Water in order to assist the member governments in their technical and planning reviews of new developments and rezonings of existing developments. Tampa Bay Water acts as a resource to the Planning and Growth Management departments, offering technical and scientific reviews. Tampa Bay Water s comments and recommendations to the member governments focus solely on Tampa Bay Water s public drinking water supply sources and the potential impact to them that could result from development activities. If required, Tampa Bay Water staff may offer recommendations to be adopted into the County Development Order for the particular development. When necessary, Tampa Bay Water provides technical and legal staff to attend Development Review Committee hearings or Land Use hearings to support the County staff s recommendations. By integrating this effort into the overall Source Water Protection Program, Tampa Bay Water expanded the Land Use and Development Proposal Review effort to include additional local governments and municipalities whose geographical boundaries fall within the Alafia and Hillsborough rivers watersheds. By developing collaborative relationships with these governments, Tampa Bay Water staff can be included in the development review process and offer assistance to the planning staff. Tampa Bay Water Page 8-5

123 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program C.5. Water Quality Monitoring Plan and Trend Evaluation This particular effort is conducted as a part of current regulatory data collection requirement. Tampa Bay Water is required to monitor its supply sources and report the findings to regulatory agencies. This process ensures that the Agency is in compliance with rules and regulations set forth by the regulatory agencies. As a part of the Source Water Protection Program, the Agency expanded its Monitoring Plan and Trend Evaluation activities to capture trends from all of our current surface water supply sources. Collecting additional data from all of the sources helps the Agency follow the trend of water quality to provide a better understanding of challenges to source water protection. C.6. Alignment of Water Quality Standards to Drinking Water Use (Alafia River and Tampa Bypass Canal) Tampa Bay Water petitioned the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to reclassify the portions of the Alafia River and the Tampa Bypass Canal to Class I standard water body. The Class I standard provides additional protection from potential pollution of a water body. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is considering the information provided by Tampa Bay Water. Final approval of a petition must be granted by the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission. C.7. Participate in Development of Florida Department of Environmental Protection Rules (e.g. Statewide Stormwater Treatment Rule; State Water Quality Standards) Tampa Bay Water participates in various activities at the state and national level that may have an impact on the protection of water supply sources. These activities are varied, and they do not occur annually. Tampa Bay Water assigns staff based on available resources whenever the rules are being re-evaluated and participates in new rule making that has the potential to impact the Agency s supply sources by offering technical and planning expertise. C.8. Participate in Development of FDEP/US EPA Total Maximum Daily Loads, Basin Management Plans, Federal Panels and Similar Activities Tampa Bay Water Page 8-6

124 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program Tampa Bay Water participates and provides input on the creation of Total Maximum Daily Loads and Basin Management Action Plans. These programs have the potential to impact the supply sources the Agency relies on for public water supply. Based on resource availability, Tampa Bay Water allocates staff and financial resources to participate in these efforts. C.9. Watershed Water Quality Monitoring Tampa Bay Water currently conducts watershed water quality monitoring on select parts of the Alafia River. Each year, the Agency conducts a Wellfield Assessment which summarizes potential point source pollution threats to Tampa Bay Water wellfields. As a part of this process, the staff reviews federal and state pollution databases in order to map the potential impacts relative to Tampa Bay Water groundwater sources. This activity assists the Agency collection of data and the evaluation of the trends occurring in the groundwater and surface water sources. C.10. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Review for Alafia, Hillsborough/Tampa Bypass Canal Tampa Bay Water reviews mining permit applications in the Alafia River watershed. As with the Land Use and Development Proposal Reviews, this effort is conducted on a case-by-case. As a part of the Source Water Protection Program, Tampa Bay Water s goal is to expand this effort to cover areas within Hillsborough River watershed and Tampa Bypass Canal. The data collected from these reviews is of value to Tampa Bay Water s long term planning and hydrologic modeling efforts. C.11.Participate in Local Watershed Meetings Tampa Bay Water s participation in various local watershed-related meetings is important for relationship-building with member governments and regulatory agency staff, as well as with the general public. By attending these meetings, Tampa Bay Water staff keeps abreast of the latest developments within particular watersheds, some of which may be of significance to Tampa Bay Water. This particular effort was not ranked as important to the success of the Source Water Protection Program as other efforts. As budget and staff constraints allow, Tampa Bay Water attends local meetings and seeks information related to source water protection efforts in the region. Tampa Bay Water Page 8-7

125 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program C.12. GIS Water Quality Database Tool (Alafia River, Hillsborough River, Tampa Bypass Canal) The GIS Water Quality Database Tool is a comprehensive database that benefits other Tampa Bay Water source water protection efforts. This database contains large amounts of data collected in the past 20 years on an agency-wide scale. The database is a good visual tool which helps staff determine and analyze water quality changes and trends. By bringing all of the monitoring data into a singular database, the Agency has the benefit of reviewing and analyzing the data to produce forecasts. This database tool can produce reports, summaries and visual aids (such as maps) to illustrate the Agency s multiple monitoring efforts. C.13. County Watershed Management Plan As with the local watershed meetings, this effort is also important for relationship-building with member governments and regulatory agency staff. This effort was not ranked as important to the success of the Source Water Protection Program as other efforts, but remains an important tool in stakeholder outreach. As budget and staff constraints allow, Tampa Bay Water attends watershed management plan meetings and continues to stay informed about source water protection efforts in the region. C.14. Participation in Pathogens and Other Unregulated Compounds Research Understanding potential pathogens, endocrine disruptors and unregulated compounds is very important to Tampa Bay Water. As a water supplier, the Agency s first and foremost concern is the protection of public health. Tampa Bay Water adheres to all rules and regulations set forth by the state and federal regulatory agencies which ensure the protection of public health. Much attention has been brought to the new research on pathogens and other unregulated substances which can be found in drinking water. These non-conventional parameters are fairly recent phenomena, and the research is ongoing. Water supply agencies and facilities are not required to monitor for these unregulated compounds, and available research does not indicate potential impact to the public health. In order to be fully informed, Tampa Bay Water participates in the research on unregulated compounds at a national level. The Agency staff is involved in panels and other seminars where the newest findings are discussed. As a part of the Source Water Protection Program, the Agency continues to support staff involvement in this research in order to keep abreast of the latest developments and potential regulatory initiatives that may result from it. Tampa Bay Water Page 8-8

126 Section 8 Source Water Protection Program C.15. Land Acquisition as a part of Projects for Tampa Bay Water's Water Supply System Infrastructure/ Other Environmental Lands Programs Land acquisition is recognized as a successful tool in achieving source water protection efforts. Member governments and other regulatory agencies have the right to purchase land and preserve it in order to promote source water protection. Tampa Bay Water can purchase property when it is needed for the development of a new infrastructure project or facility. When new water supply facilities are built, the Agency will consider purchasing additional land surrounding such facilities (e.g. additional land surrounding a wellfield to be used as a source water protection buffer). The land would be used as a protective buffer and would not be open to development. Tampa Bay Water does not anticipate acquiring new land for new facilities in the near future. This opportunity will be reviewed when the Agency determines a new water supply facility is needed. D. Source Water Protection Program Implementation Tampa Bay Water s Source Water Protection Program was adopted by the Board of Directors in December Annually, staff can examine the Agency s source water protection needs and budget to help ensure that those efforts which are most beneficial are funded. Tampa Bay Water Page 8-9

127 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change A. Overview Tampa Bay Water s long-term planning activities provide for at least a 20-year look ahead of potential water supplies to meet the region s growing water needs. The Long-Term Master Water Plan needs to incorporate consideration of the effects of climate and weather variability and climate change on Tampa Bay Water s System. Future changes in climate may affect the water resources upon which the Tampa Bay region depends. The uncertainty caused by climate change relative to its impacts on water resources poses an important challenge for Tampa Bay Water and its member governments. Securing reliable water supplies for future generations is important in the face of changes in climatic patterns. Water supplies can become more reliable and sustainable through a comprehensive approach to water supply planning which includes diversifying water sources, planning future infrastructure needs, and implementing adaptive strategies to manage uncertainties associated with climate changes. Tampa Bay Water has a diverse water supply system, including groundwater wellfields, three surface water sources, an off-stream storage reservoir, and a seawater desalination facility. Tampa Bay Water is becoming more reliant on surface water sources. Nearly half of the agency s water supplies comes from local surface water sources; therefore, it is important to examine the relationship between climate change and water quality and quantity issues. Such reliance upon surface water supplies imposes a new level of uncertainty upon Tampa Bay Water and makes the region more susceptible to extremes of weather and climate. Important effects of climate change that will potentially affect Tampa Bay Water include the impacts of increasing temperature on evapotranspiration and seasonal rainfall patterns, increasing rainfall variability and frequency of extreme events (e.g. more hurricanes, more droughts), source water quality changes due to increases in temperature, increased runoff, or changes in rainfall patterns and temperatures affecting water use patterns and future water needs. Changes in historic rainfall patterns have the potential to affect development and management of Tampa Bay Water s supplies. Tampa Bay Water s current surface water supplies are based upon analyses of historic data which allows the agency to determine the reliability of the supplies given those historic flow characteristics. Variability in future high and low flows in surface water sources may not correspond to historical trends and thus add uncertainty regarding the timing and quantity of water available to capture and treat, deliver, or store. Uncertainty in source water quality is also associated with climate change and variability. For Tampa Bay Water s groundwater sources, saltwater encroachment due to sea level rise is not a concern within this planning horizon. Tampa Bay Water has a very extensive groundwater monitoring program which will detect changes in groundwater quality with sufficient lead time to allow implementation of adaptive strategies. For surface water sources, potential changes in water quality associated with climate change Tampa Bay Water Page 9-1

128 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change could occur due to increased runoff, movement of saline water up the Alafia River toward the intake facility, or increases in salinity in Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay Water has ongoing surface water quality monitoring programs which will detect changes in salinity in the Alafia River and Tampa Bay with sufficient lead time to allow adaptive strategies to be implemented. Changes in temperature could affect surface water augmentation programs due to decreased dissolved oxygen concentrations in receiving water bodies; however, it is not expected that this change is likely to occur during this planning horizon. In addition, Section 8 outlines details of Tampa Bay Water s source water protection activities which could be used to provide adaptive or mitigative strategies to address water quality issues associated with increased runoff into surface water sources. Changes in historic rainfall and temperature patterns can also add to the uncertainty in demand forecasting. Florida has a seasonal rainfall pattern and the peak of the eight month dry season typically occurs in the months of March through May. Water demands usually reach their peak in May. During the summer months, high temperatures are moderated by more frequent rainfall events, which in turn lower demand. A shift in this typical rainfall pattern could lead to changes in demand patterns, which could require changes in how surface water is captured, treated and stored. Tampa Bay Water is currently supporting research conducted by the University of Florida Water Institute in collaboration with the Southeast Climate Consortium ( a NOAA Regional Integrated Science Assessment center), on the hydrologic implications of climate change and climate variability for the Tampa Bay region. In addition, Tampa Bay Water is a member of two coalitions which are focused on improving our understanding of climate change and variability and how to adapt to these changing conditions. In 2009, Tampa Bay Water joined the Water Utility Climate Alliance ( which is a coalition of 10 of the largest utilities across the United States. The Water Utility Climate Alliance (WUCA) provides leadership in assessing and adapting to the potential effects of climate change through collaborative action. The Alliance seeks to enhance the usefulness of climate science for the adaptation community and improve water management decision-making in the face of climate uncertainty. Tampa Bay Water is also a founding member of the Florida Water and Climate Alliance ( which formed in The Florida Water and Climate Alliance is a collaborative effort focused on increasing the relevance of climate change and variability data and tools to the planning and operations of Florida s public water supply utilities. The partners are interested in how climate variability/change and sea level rise may impact planning and operations of Florida s public water supply utilities. The collaborative working group promotes shared knowledge, data, models and decision-making tools among public water suppliers, water resource managers, climate scientists and hydrologic scientists. Through involvement with these two coalitions, Tampa Bay Water is helping shape national, state, and local conversations and research regarding climate change and adaptation. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-2

129 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change B. Potential Effects on Tampa Bay Water The National Climate Assessment includes a summary of future climate projections for the southeastern United States. These future climate projections for the Southeast U.S. are described in the NCA Southeast USA Technical report and are based on global climate model output and statistically and dynamically downscaled climate projections from phase three of the Coupled Model Inter-comparison project (CMIP 3) using the A2 and B1 emission scenarios and from the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (NARCCAP NARCCAP runs a set of regional climate models driven by a set of global climate models over a domain that includes the coterminous United States and part of Canada. NARCCAP results include precipitation and temperature outputs which are dynamically downscale to a 50 kilometer resolution for the future projection period of , using the A2 emission scenario and for the historic period NARCCAP results are not bias corrected. Highlight of these findings are included in this section of the Long-term Water Supply Plan. In addition, preliminary results of statistically and dynamically downscaled bias corrected climate projections from University of Florida and Florida State University research will also be described. There is broad agreement among the climate models that mean annual and seasonal temperatures are projected to increase through the 21 st century with the greatest warming in the summer months and least warming during the winter months across the southeastern U.S. NARCCAP results shows a 3 to 4 degree F increase along west central Florida by Annual average changes in precipitation patterns across the Southeast have greater spatial variability. While in some areas annual average precipitation is projected to increase, in other areas annual average precipitation is projected to decrease. Projected changes in precipitation based on NARCCAP results show about a 2 percent increase in annual precipitation but a significant difference in seasonal rainfall. Projections show a 5 to 10 percent decrease in summer precipitation and about a 2 to 4 percent increase in winter precipitation. Tampa Bay Water and the University of Florida Water Institute are actively engaged in research to use downscaled climate model output in local hydrologic models to assess the implications of climate change on regional water resources. Global climate models produce output at course scale resolutions, typically 200 by 200 kilometers, which precludes use of this information by local hydrologic models. There are two techniques available, dynamically downscaling using a Regional Climate model and statistically downscaling based on observation data, to produce finer resolution climate model outputs that are appropriate for use by local and regional hydrologic models. A number of statistical downscaling techniques are available to downscale and bias correct output from global climate models. The University of Florida evaluated several methods and found that many of them do not reproduce the small-scale spatial variability of precipitation exhibited by observed precipitation data which is an important factor for predicting hydrologic responses important to Tampa Bay Water. Subsequently, they developed a stochastic analog method to statistically downscale bias corrected daily global climate precipitation to accurately reproduce the observed temporal and spatial characteristics for west-central Florida (Hwang and Graham 2013). Tampa Bay Water Page 9-3

130 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change University of Florida is also using dynamical downscaled atmospheric reanalysis and projected climate model output available from Florida State University s COAPS (Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies) web site ( FSU is using the FSU-FCI Regional Spectral Model to dynamically downscale three global climate models to a 10 kilometer resolution over the southeast. Atmospheric reanalysis is a reconstruction of the historical global atmospheric circulations using all available historic data. This atmospheric reanalysis offers a consistent dataset for relatively long periods of time to conduct climate analysis (Stefanova et al 2011, Misra et al 2011). Prior to using dynamically downscaled global climate model projections, the University of Florida evaluated the ability of dynamically downscaled reanalysis data to reproduce local-scale spatiotemporal precipitation and temperature data needed to accurately predict streamflows in the Tampa Bay region (Hwang et al 2013). Results showed that errors in the raw reanalysis precipitation output from the regional climate model were propagated through Tampa Bay Water s integrated hydrologic model producing unacceptable streamflow prediction and that the raw regional climate model reanalysis outputs cannot be considered acceptable for historic precipitation and temperature data for hydrologic modeling. Results showed that bias in the precipitation and temperature outputs from the regional climate model were effectively removed using bias correction methods. These bias-corrected outputs did provide acceptable reanalysis data for hydrologic modeling. A conclusion of the research was that biascorrected reanalysis dynamically downscaled climate predictions should be sufficient for use in seasonal to decadal water resources planning. Figure 9-6 shows results of bias corrected dynamically downscaled monthly mean minimum and maximum temperature projections for the retrospective period (bottom line) and future projection period (top line in each panel) from three global climate models. All three global models agree that monthly mean maximum and minimum temperatures will increase based on the A2 emission scenario. The increase in mean monthly maximum temperature is about 2 degrees C across all months and the increase in mean monthly minimum temperature ranges from about 1 degree C in the winter months to nearly 3 degrees C in late summer early fall months. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-4

131 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Figure 9-6. Global climate model retrospective and projections of mean minimum and maximum month temperatures in the Tampa Bay region. Preliminary results of changes in precipitation based on future projections are not as consistent across the three global climate models. Raw results (not bias corrected) from the CCSM model cannot be used to assess precipitation changes based on future scenarios. This model does not accurately simulate the seasonal rainfall pattern in west-central Florida. The other two models, HadCM3 and GFDL are better at simulating seasonal rainfall patterns and with bias corrections to provide reasonable rainfall predictions. Bias-corrected changes in mean monthly rainfall are shown in Figure 9-7. These results are still preliminary. The differences in these three global climate models need further evaluation before we can assess the hydrologic implications of changes in rainfall due to climate change. Figure 9-7. Bias corrected mean monthly changes in precipitation for the Tampa Bay region C. Risk Assessment and Adaptive Management Strategies Risk-based decision making is one approach that can be used to balance risks and costs and incorporate the uncertainties associated with climate change. Risk assessment includes evaluating the likelihood of a hydrologic impact occurring due to climate change. The framework for an adaptive risk-based model is shown in Figure 9-8. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-5

132 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Figure 9-8 Adaptive Risk-based Planning Adapted from Kiefer, J. (2008). A Risk Management Framework for Evaluating Climate Change Impacts on Water Supply Reliability. Presented at Florida Challenges, Global Solutions. University of Florida Sustainable Water Resources Conference, February Tampa Bay Water s Board of Directors has approved the incorporation of adaptive management into long-range planning activities. Adaptive management supports action in the face of uncertainty and limited scientific knowledge. Tampa Bay Water s current mix of supplies is diverse. This diversity offers opportunities for adaptive planning and adaptive management which can offset some of the effects associated with climate uncertainties. As Figure 9-9 indicates, the key components of adaptive management are defined as follows: Implementation water supply planning, construction programs and operations feedback; Tampa Bay Water Page 9-6

133 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Feedback monitoring and review of economic and environmental outcomes of management actions; Re-evaluation conceive new strategies (planning and operational) as information accumulates and understanding improves; and Repeat Loop continuous improvement process. Figure 9-9 Adaptive Management Cycle Implementation Feedback Re-evaluation D. Adaptive Strategies Tampa Bay Water employs adaptive strategies in both its planning and operational activities. The agency s long-term water supply planning process includes: development of strategic adaptive policies, demand forecasting, demand management planning, supply reliability analyses, and determining the timing and quantity of future water supply needs, as well as the identification and assessment of potential supply alternatives as described in this document. These programs are supported by Tampa Bay Water s monitoring, data analyses and modeling activities. D1. Monitoring and Analyses Tampa Bay Water has extensive surface water, groundwater, and meteorological monitoring activities which provide sufficient lead time to allow adaptive or mitigative strategies to be implemented to address changes in water quantity or quality which affect existing supplies. Ongoing data analyses are Tampa Bay Water Page 9-7

134 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change part of their operational protocols which allow adjustments to be made in how source water is used to meet demands and maintain environmental stewardship. D2. Modeling and Research Tampa Bay Water uses a variety of hydrologic models to evaluate both short-term and long-term availability and reliability of its existing and planned supplies. These models are based on historic data analyses which provide rainfall and streamflow characteristics used to simulate future probabilities of streamflows and ultimately supply availability. Tampa Bay Water also has demand forecasting models that allow assessment of both near-term and long-term demands. These models include both socioeconomic parameters as well as weather parameters (e.g., temperature and rainfall) to forecast water demands. Tampa Bay Water has developed a model of its entire regional system which is used to quantify the reliability, resiliency, and vulnerability of its regional system. Results from this model are used to evaluate the impacts of changing operational protocols, changes in demand and changes in supply availability and to evaluate adaptation options. Continuously updating these models to incorporate best available information regarding climate changes (e.g., changes in rainfall and temperature characteristics) is a part of Tampa Bay Water s adaptive planning strategies. Tampa Bay Water works with the University of Florida s Water Institute and Florida State University s Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies on understanding the hydrologic implications of climate change and climate variability. It is important that Tampa Bay Water continue funding research focused on improving climate modeling and use of climate model outputs to reduce uncertainties in decision making for future water supply. D3. Potential Water Supply Alternatives An important aspect of adaptive water supply planning is to include in the pool of potential projects those that can be developed, constructed and placed into service relatively quickly in response to a sudden increase in demand as well as those larger projects which require more lead time to develop and construct. In addition, having projects that can be molded to better fit future situations is also an important adaptive objective. Including these criteria into the planning process will enable Tampa Bay Water to adjust to climate change effects. D4. Adaptive Management for Operations Adaptive management strategies available to assist Tampa Bay Water in meeting its operational challenges that relate to climate variability and change include its water shortage mitigation plan, seasonal and annual source decision making protocols, and the conjunctive use of its groundwater / surface water sources. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-8

135 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change The water shortage mitigation plan uses two set of triggers; hydrologic and supply shortage triggers, which provide a proactive approach to managing water supply deficits that are related to changing hydrologic conditions (e.g. rainfall deficits leading to reduced stream flows). Implementation of this plan is an important component to maintaining a reliable supply. Tampa Bay Water has developed a robust decision making process for seasonal and annual scale water supply allocation decision which incorporates operating protocol, rainfall driven supply reliability and demands. This process utilizes monthly demand and hydrologic data coupled with seasonal climate forecasts to adjust operations according to changing conditions. The conditions focused in making adjustments are relatively near-term as they relate to climate effects. This process makes use of a system of monitoring and feedback that allows adaptation to change. Conjunctive use of Tampa Bay Water s groundwater and surface water supplies optimizes the use of both sources of supply and improves the reliability of Tampa Bay Water s interconnected regional supply system. The benefits of conjunctive use include: improved resistance to droughts, balancing climate impacts on source availability; preventing over-use of groundwater sources of supply; and ensuring system reliability to meet demands under changing hydrologic conditions. E. National Climate Assessment The Global Change Research Act of 1990 mandated that national assessments of climate change be prepared not less frequently than every four years. The last national assessment was published in 2009 (Karl et al. 2009). The Third National Climate Assessment report is expected to be finalized in early The National Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee (NACDAC), a federal advisory committee created in 2011, will prepare the report. The draft for public comment of the Third National Climate Assessment report was released in January The public comment period ends in April The National Climate Assessment report includes a specific chapter (Chapter 17) on the Southeast and the Caribbean. In addition, there are two technical reports specific to the Southeast U.S., a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Report (January 2013), Regional Climate Treads and Scenarios for the U.S. National Climate Assessment Part 2. Climate of the Southeast U.S., and the Southeast Region Technical Report to the National Climate Assessment (revised July 23, 2012), both provide historic climatic conditions and future climate scenarios pertinent to the Southeastern U.S. The draft Third National Climate Assessment report, states that in general, evidence of climate change across the United States has been mounting for years, and the sum total of this evidence tells an unambiguous story: the planet is warming. Some facts to support this include, the U.S. average temperature has increased by about 1.5ºF since 1895; more than 80% of this increase has occurred since 1980 and the most recent decade was the nation s hottest on record. In addition, the chances of recordbreaking high temperature extremes will continue to increase as the climate continues to change. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-9

136 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change The Climate Science Appendix to the draft report includes 12 key messages based on observations, model simulations, and other analyses that explain what is happening to climate at the national and global scales, why these changes are occurring and how climate is projected to change throughout this century. Key messages 1. Although climate changes in the past have been caused by natural factors, human activities are now the dominant agents of change. Human activities are affecting climate through increasing atmospheric levels of heat-trapping gases and other substances, including particles. 2. Global trends in temperature and many other climate variables provide consistent evidence of a warming planet. These trends are based on a wide range of observations, analyzed by many independent research groups around the world. 3. Natural variability, including El Niño events and other recurring patterns of ocean-atmosphere interactions, influences global and regional temperature and precipitation over timescales ranging from months up to a decade or more. 4. Human-induced increases in atmospheric levels of heat-trapping gases are the main cause of observed climate change over the past 50 years. The fingerprints of human-induced change also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice. Past emissions of heat-trapping gases have already committed the world to a certain amount of future climate change. How much more the climate will change depends on future emissions and the sensitivity of the climate system to those emissions. 6. Different kinds of physical and statistical models are used to study aspects of past climate and develop projections of future change. No model is perfect, but many of them provide useful information. By combining and averaging many models, many clear trends emerge. 7. Scientific understanding of observed temperature changes in the U.S. has greatly improved, confirming that the U.S. is warming as expected in response to global climate change. This warming is expected to continue. 8. Many other indicators of rising temperatures have been observed in the U.S. These include reduced lake ice, glacier retreat, earlier melting of snowpack, reduced lake levels, and a longer growing season. These and other indicators are expected to continue to reflect higher temperatures. 9. There have been observed trends in some types of extreme weather events, and these are consistent with rising temperatures. These include increases in: heavy precipitation nationwide, especially in the Tampa Bay Water Page 9-10

137 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Midwest and Northeast; heat waves, especially in the West; and the intensity of Atlantic hurricanes. These trends are expected to continue. Research on climate changes effects on other types of extreme events continues. 10. Drought and fire risk are increasing in many regions as temperatures and evaporation rates rise. The greater the future warming, the more these risks will increase, potentially affecting the entire U.S. 11. Summer Arctic sea ice extent, volume, and thickness have declined rapidly, especially north of Alaska. Permafrost temperatures are rising and the overall amount of permafrost is shrinking. Melting of land and sea-based ice is expected to continue with further warming. 12. Sea level is already rising at the global scale and at individual locations along the U.S. coast. Future sea level rise depends on the amount of temperature change and on the ice melt around the world as well as local processes like changes in ocean currents and local land subsidence or uplift. The Southeast region experiences a wide range of extreme weather and climate events that affect human society, ecosystems, and infrastructure. Since 1980, the Southeast has experienced more billion-dollar weather disasters that any other region in the U.S. Most of these were associated with hurricanes, floods, and tornados (NOAA, 2013). Key messages for the Southeast U.S., emphasized in the 2013 draft National Climate Assessment report Southeast and Caribbean chapter, are: 1. Sea level rise poses widespread and continuing threats to natural and build environments, as well as the regional economy. 2. Rising temperatures and the associated increases in frequency, intensity and duration of extreme heat events will affect public health natural and built environments, energy, agriculture and forestry. 3. Decreased water availability, exacerbated by population growth and land-use change, will continue to increase competition for water and impact the region s economy and unique ecosystem. The southeastern region experiences a wide range of extreme weather and climate events that affect human society, ecosystems and infrastructure. Within Tampa Bay Water s service area these include, hurricanes, tropical storms, flooding, droughts, and extreme heat and cold events. The Southeast U.S. is one of the few regions globally not to exhibit an overall warming trend in the surface temperatures over the 20th century (IPCC 2007). However, the past decade 2001 to 2010 has been the warmest on record. Analyses of annual and seasonal time series of precipitation indicate a slight upward trend in precipitation that is not statistically significant. The seasonal time series exhibit Tampa Bay Water Page 9-11

138 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change statistically significant long-term upward trend in fall rainfall and shows a significant downward trend in summer rainfall. Inter-annual variability in precipitation has increased over the last several decades across much of Southeast (NOAA 2013 and Ingram et al 2012). As reported in the Southeast Region Technical Report to the NCA, no long-term trends are revealed in the time series of annual or summer season precipitation across the SE during the last 100 years, except along the northern Gulf Coast where precipitation has increased. Inter-annual variability has increased during the last several decades across much of the region with more exceptionally wet and dry summers observed as compared to the middle part of the 20 th century. This precipitation variability is related in part to the mean positioning of the Bermuda High. The strength and position of the Bermuda high have been tied to sea surface temperature anomalies in the northern Pacific Ocean (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the subtropical western North Atlantic (Atlantic warm pool). Summer precipitation variability in the southeast also shows some relationship with Atlantic sea surface temperature anomalies and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. In general, warmer than average sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic lead to increased warm-seasonal precipitation across the southeast region (Ingram et al 2012). The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation is an ongoing series of long-duration changes in sea surface temperature of the northern Atlantic Ocean with cool and warm phases that may last for 20 to 40 years. Warm Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation phases are associated with increased rainfall in central and south Florida and a significant increase in hurricane activity, while the cold phases are associated with more drought conditions. Enfield et al (2001) discuss that importance is being placed on understanding and predicting the natural sea surface temperature swings in the North Atlantic Ocean so that the natural variability can be correctly accounted in the ongoing evaluation of greenhouse warming. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation appears to clearly affect Florida rainfall on long term cycles. Tampa Bay Water monitors and evaluates trends in the annual and seasonal time series for precipitation from several long term rainfall stations. Two long-term rainfall stations (St. Leo and Plant City) maintained by NOAA are used to illustrate annual trends in rainfall within Tampa Bay Water s service area. These gauges are located within the two watersheds that feed the agency s surface water supplies. Figure 9-1 and 9-2 show annual total rainfall for the St. Leo and Plant City NOAA stations. No statistically significantly trends in annual rainfall are shown. However, there is significant inter-annual variability in precipitation at these two stations. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-12

139 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Figure 9-1. St. Leo Long term annual rainfall and long term trend Figure 9-2. Plant City Long term annual rainfall and long term trend Figure 9-3 illustrates the range of inter-annual variability across Tampa Bay Water s service for the past 36 years. This figure also highlights an increased frequency of consecutive below normal rainfall years since Tampa Bay Water Page 9-13

140 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Figure 9-3. Inter-annual rainfall variability across Tampa Bay Water s service area Another climate feature of interest to Tampa Bay Water is known as the El-Nino-Southern Oscillation. Enfield et al (2001) also indicate that it is important to understand the effects of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation on the intensity and geographic coverage of interannual impacts such as those of the El-Nino-Southern Oscillation. El Nino and La Nina events are controlled by sea surface temperature changes in the Pacific Ocean. El Nino and La Nina events tend to develop during the months of April-June, reaching their maximum strength during the months of December-February. Each event typically persists for 9-12 months though occasionally persist for up to two years (e.g., years drought in Tampa Bay). El Nino and La Nina cycles typically recur every two to seven years. These events can reoccur within the five-year update cycle of Tampa Bay Water s long-term plan. Global sea level rise has been a persistent trend for many decades. For the Tampa Bay area, sea level measurements are available for both St. Petersburg and Clearwater Beach (Figures 9-4 and 9-5). Historic observations of sea level along Florida s west coast show persistent sea level rise trends. Sea level has been rising along the Tampa Bay coastal area at a rate of 2.4 mm per year over the past several decades. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-14

141 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Figure 9-4. The mean sea level trend is 2.36 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/ mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1947 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 0.77 feet in 100 years. (NOAA) Figure 9-5. The mean sea level trend is 2.43 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/ mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1973 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 0.80 feet in 100 years (NOAA). Tampa Bay Water Page 9-15

142 Section 9 Climate Variability and Long-Term Climate Change The draft National Climate Assessment report states that, Portions of the Southeast are highly vulnerable to sea level rise. How much sea level rise is experienced in any one location depends on local land subsidence or rising and changes in offshore currents. Vulnerabilities to sea level rises include increased storm surges, drainage and flooding, rising water tables, saltwater intrusion, vulnerabilities to built infrastructure, and changes in coastal ecosystems. No widely accepted method is currently available for producing probabilistic projections of sea level rise at actionable scales (Parris et al 2012). The current National Climate Assessment has used a scenario based approach to describe the future potential conditions for decision making under uncertainty. Scenario planning offers an opportunity to initiate actions now that may reduce future impacts or vulnerabilities. The conclusion offered in Parris et al 2012 states that four scenarios of global mean sea level rise ranging from 8 inches to 6.6 feet have been identified. These scenarios provide a plausible set of trajectories of global mean sea level rise for use in assessing vulnerabilities, impacts and adaptation strategies. Key message from the National Climate Assessment indicate that sea level will continue to rise. F. Actions / Recommendations Tampa Bay Water should continue to support research in climate modeling, downscaling and bias correction of climate model output and the hydrologic implications of climate change. Tampa Bay Water should continue to support research and modeling of seasonal climate information to improve seasonal and annual water supply decisions. Tampa Bay Water should continue to be an active member of the Water Utility Climate Alliance and the Florida Water and Climate Alliance. Tampa Bay Water should continue to provide both funding and staff support to these groups. Tampa Bay Water should continue to incorporate reliability, resiliency and vulnerability analyses to quantify the performance of its regional water supply system and to improve its understanding of how uncertainties associated with climate change and variability affect future water supply decisions. Tampa Bay Water should update its Vulnerability Assessment to include an evaluation of the effects of climate change on its assets. Tampa Bay Water Page 9-16

143 Section 10 Demand Management Section 10 Demand Management A. Introduction Tampa Bay Water currently helps meet the water demands of more than 2.3 million people in the tri-county region. Residential demands accounted for nearly 75 percent of billed water consumption, with the remainder associated with the needs of commercial businesses and industry. The agency has been actively involved in quantifying water demand and potential changes in demand through water use efficiency efforts, mainly through member government implementation, since adoption of its original demand management plan the mid 1990 s. Additionally, the agency developed tools to quantify ongoing member water use efficiency programs that helped to meet original Board of Directors adopted planning goals. In 2013, approximately one-half of the water supplies for Tampa Bay Water member governments were dependent on the timing and quantity of local and regional rainfall. In order to meet reliability goals, it is important to understand how variability and uncertainties would affect the planning and development of water supplies. As Tampa Bay Water s reliance on surface water and other alternative water sources continues to increase, the value of increased water use efficiency in managing future long-term supply needs has become evident. As new supply development costs continue to increase, avoided cost of water supply becomes a more critical element of the water supply planning process. The demand management element of this plan investigates the benefits and costs of water demand management as a quantifiable, alternative water supply source. The demand management element is based on Tampa Bay Water s revised Demand Management Plan (DMP). The DMP is considered one component of the agency s strategic goals to achieve reliability of its water supply and delivery system to our member governments. Demand side management efforts are intended to serve as a complementary component to traditional water supply planning processes in meeting current and future water demands. Demand-side management encompasses a set of activities designed to: Provide a better understanding of how and why water is used; Forecast human demands for water supplies; Develop prospective water-using efficiency (demand reduction) measures; Identify programmatic and project goals, evaluation criteria, performance measures, and monitoring mechanisms; Define and evaluate program effectiveness and goal achievement; and Evaluate the benefits and costs of efficiency measures as an alternative or complement to supply development. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-1

144 Section 10 Demand Management Through efficient use of available supplies and use of targeted implementation strategies, water use efficiency can help manage peak and average day water demand in conjunction with reducing long-term future water supply requirements. Cost-effective alternatives to new supply development and other valuable benefits can be realized through demand side management including: optimization of existing facilities, deferred capital investment costs, improved public perception, support of future supply projects, and environmental stewardship and protection. B. Components of Tampa Bay Water s Demand Management Plan The DMP update consists of a comprehensive investigation of benefits and costs of integrated water demand management as a quantifiable, alternative to conventional water supply sources, reflecting improvements in the state of water use efficiency occurring since 1995 when the first DMP was adopted. The update also includes an evaluation of potential demand management projects as a beneficial tool for long-term water supply planning. Results define how water efficiency activities may fit into Tampa Bay Water s long-term water supply planning process, which includes supply reliability and member government long range demand projections. The demand management evaluation effort includes an analysis of water savings (past and future) and an analysis of avoided supply costs related to improved water use efficiency. The avoided supply cost analysis considers increments of conserved water versus (a) cost to operate existing water supply sources and (b) total cost (capital and operating costs) to develop new water supply. Consideration of cost savings and water supply benefits permits a consistent apples to apples comparison to other water supply alternatives C. Profile of Regional Water Demand Demand profiling provides a greater understanding of demand trends and how these trends relate to or can be affected by water use efficiency improvements. The Regional Baseline Water Demand Profile quantifies and describes the water using and economic characteristics of Tampa Bay Water s member government customers. This includes an assessment of water savings estimates achieved from previously implemented conservation programs and the market for water efficiency technologies. The regional profile includes analyses of water use patterns among the major water using sectors in the Tampa Bay region. C1. Distribution of Water Use Characterization of water use relies on identification and assessment of water use trends over time, across sectors and geographies. Regionally, there are three major common sectoral uses of water, single-family residential (SF), multifamily residential (MF), and nonresidential (NR), which includes water used by businesses and institutions. The distribution of regional sectoral demands is illustrated in Figure 1. Regionally, SF demand is greater than MF and NR demands combined. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-2

145 Section 10 Demand Management Weather-sensitive and weather-insensitive components of single-family demand were estimated regionally and for each member government over WY2002 WY Weather insensitive generally indoor use is generally influenced by the number of people residing in a household along with the presence and efficiency levels of various indoor domestic end uses (e.g., toilets, washing machines, etc.). Outdoor end uses are weather sensitive and tend to be a highly variable component of total water use. Outdoor uses are influenced both by weather and socioeconomic factors. Figure 2 illustrates the estimated proportion of weather-sensitive demands in the single-family sector by month through time. Annual average single-family household demand over the period is 229 gpd, and is estimated to include 52 gpd of weathersensitive and 177 gpd of weather-insensitive demand. NR, 24% MF, 20% SF, 56% Figure 1: Distribution of Regional Sectoral Water Demands Figure 2: Regional Single-Family Weather-Sensitive and Weather-Insensitive Demands Tampa Bay Water Page 10-3

146 Section 10 Demand Management C2. Evaluation of Achieved Water Savings from Existing Programs Statistical evaluations were undertaken to measure and verify impacts of existing conservation programs implemented by member governments. The results of these evaluations can be summarized as follows: Member government ultra-low flow toilet rebate programs - The data indicates households having received one or more rebates, used nearly 12% less water on average after the change out of the toilet. Further analyses indicate homes with only one rebate averaged a 10.8 % reduction. Florida-Friendly landscapes - Homes recognized by the County Extension offices as having both water wise landscape design and efficient irrigation technology and practices, used about 3-5% less after one year of participation and from 5-9% after two years. Member government irrigation evaluation programs - Although significant potential may exist, results suggest a diminution of savings over time, with an estimated reduction in water use by about 7% after one year of participating and only 3% after two years. C3. Analysis of Water Technologies and Baseline Efficiency Levels Through a literature review of available and emerging technologies/programs, a water efficiency program library (WEPL) of technically-applicable demand management technologies, programs and best management practices was developed for potential application in the Tampa Bay region. The library includes technologies and programs identified for preliminary assessment and information relating to cost, end use reduction, and durability, providing a menu of water conservation options expected to result in measurable water savings. Examples of residential end use technologies include toilets, showerheads, faucets, clothes washers, dishwashers and irrigation. Nonresidential end uses generally include those found in the residential sector, but also consist of technologies that can use substantial quantities of water used for cooling, heating and process water including product development (e.g. food service). Estimates of water savings potential was based on a changing mix of water using technology, as well as the rate (or intensity) at which water using technology was used. Assessment of technology and program based savings potential required base-year (2008) estimates of distribution of fixture age and efficiency in region by sector of water use and market penetration of water efficient technologies. These estimates provide a baseline for examining remaining water efficiency potential over the agency s long-term water demand horizon (2035). Parcel data provided current estimates of the distribution of fixture age and efficiency in region by sector of water use. In addition, a regional single-family survey was conducted to assist in quantifying prevailing water end uses and behaviors and the remaining potential for efficient technology. Market penetration by passive measures were assumed to be associated with plumbing standards and increased efficiency due to an evolving market (supply and demand) for water efficient products recognized or certified through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WaterSense label and/or Energy Star programs. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-4

147 Section 10 Demand Management Figure 3 illustrates estimated distribution of regional single-family water demands by end use in gallons per capita day for the Tampa Bay region. Table 1 provides estimated average end use flow rates. Based on this assessment, the greatest efficiency potential appears to exist in toilet, clothes washer and dishwasher use, with potential reductions in the percent range under current federal standards and in the percent range under high efficiency product benchmarks. Shower, Toilet, Faucet, 8.20 Clothes Washer, Dishwasher, 1.78 Figure 3: Estimated Distribution of Regional Single-Family End Uses of Water in Gallons/Capita/Day End Use Table 1 Estimated Baseline Single-Family Flow Rates, Gallons per Event (2008) Estimated % Tampa Bay Current High Reduction under Water Standard Efficiency Standard Benchmark Estimated % Reduction under High Efficiency Benchmark Toilet % -46% Shower % -5% Faucet % 48% Clothes Washer % -55% Dishwasher % -33% 1 Current standard based on 9.5 Water Factor, 2.7 cubic feet per load and.96 loads per day 2 Current standard based on federal dishwasher standard effective January D. Evaluation of Water Efficiency Alternatives (Forecast) Water savings can be realized from either passive or active water use efficiency measures. Passive water efficiency is achieved through a natural process of replacing old fixtures with new, more efficient fixtures as they wear out or become effectively obsolete or installing efficient water-using fixtures in new construction due to either codes or driven by market changes. Passive water efficiency typically occurs indoors with the replacement of toilets, clothes washers, dishwashers, and urinals. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-5

148 Section 10 Demand Management Active water efficiency measures include programs designed to expedite the replacement process described above. Such programs are often sponsored by water utilities to ensure a target installation rate and associated water savings and can include outdoor efficiency technologies. Estimating passive water savings is essential in determining efficacy of active water efficiency programs and for projecting long term water demands. Before the potential benefits of active water efficiency alternatives can be assessed, passive savings must be estimated. An assessment of remaining passive efficiency potential was used to identify, develop, screen and select technically applicable active alternatives. The WEPL contains the complete listing of available indoor and outdoor measures for new homes, existing homes, and non-residential uses. D1. Passive Fixture and Savings Estimates The U.S. Energy Policy Act (EPAct), effective in 1994, mandated flow standards for many fixtures (e.g., toilets, faucets and showerheads, among others). Since then, manufacturers have introduced and marketed fixtures and appliances, which far exceed EPAct standards, leading to EPA WaterSense and Energy Star programming, which certify and label products meeting consumer expectations while performing at rates lower than current national efficiency standards. These programs influence the market by encouraging consumers to purchase high-efficiency (HE) water products. WaterSense labeled products require independent third-party certification of performance and product durability, insuring product use is consistent with labeling over a defined life. As consumers decide to purchase and install HE water products, water consumption efficiency increases. The current Tampa Bay Water baseline demand forecast reflects water use of existing HE products within sectoral per account water use calculations, but does not integrate changes predicted in future product penetration. Accounting for prospective changes in market penetration allows adjustment to the baseline demand forecast reflecting market-based passive demand reductions. Assumptions about efficiency standards, fixture life, and market penetration of high efficiency products, were used to estimate fixture distributions and water use for each year in the long-term demand forecast. Passive savings were estimated for residential toilets, washing machines and dishwashers as well as nonresidential toilets and urinals. Figure 4 illustrates the estimated reduction in water demands from passive demand management programs relative to the baseline water demand forecast over the planning horizon. By 2035, approximately 26 MGD of water savings potential is estimated and attributable to passive efficiency. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-6

149 Section 10 Demand Management MGD Baseline Demand Baseline Demand w/passive Figure 4: Baseline Demand Forecast with Passive Savings D2. Screening and Selection of Active Efficiency Technologies / Programs Remaining market potential for water efficient technology (beyond what is likely accounted for by passive measures) was determined through the 2035 demand forecast planning horizon by screening the applicability of several active (utility-sponsored) programs. The screening process included 24 programs / technologies, either applied through existing programs (regionally and nationally), or developed based upon specific application of technologies in specific sectors or water end uses. Regional and national literature and other secondary sources, along with information gleaned from survey and analysis of regional water use characteristics supported the screening process. The 10 programs meeting screening criteria and selected for inclusion in the Demand Management Plan portfolio are shown in Table 2. Of the 10 programs, 6 programs are applicable to the non residential (NR) sector, 3 to the single-family (SF) sector and 1 to the multi-family (MF) sector. Estimates of gallons saved reflect savings over the life of each measure, which vary depending on measure implementation assumptions, unit savings rates, and useful life of the technology. Estimates of cost-effectiveness were critical for screening, ranking and selection of conservation measures. Evaluation of relative cost-effectiveness of measures required estimation of the unit cost of water saved ($/1000 gallons) for each active measure. Estimated unit costs were compared with unit costs of supply alternatives to evaluate the viability of demand management alternatives. As identified in Table 2, the most Tampa Bay Water Page 10-7

150 Section 10 Demand Management cost-effective program is cooling tower retrofits at an average cost of $0.07/1000 gallons. The least costeffective program identified selected is the Conveyor Dishwasher incentive program at an average cost of $0.42/1000 gallons. Activity Name Class Table 2 Programs Meeting Screening Criteria Utility Savings, Unit Costs Useful Savings, ($/unit) Life (yrs) (gpy) Gallons Saved over Useful Life $/1000 gal Cooling Tower NR $1, ,386,530 13,865,300 $ PRSV NR $ , ,260 $ HEU (1/2 Gallon) NR $ , ,853 $ ULFT (Valve-Type) NR $ , ,100 $ Alternative Irrigation Source SF $ ,034 2,350,850 $ HET (Tank-Type) NR $ , ,290 $ Residential HET SF $ , ,550 $ ET/SMS Irrigation Controller SF $ , ,450 $ Residential HET MF $ , ,775 $ Conveyor Dishwasher NR $ ,951 1,199,020 $ D3. Development of Alternative With Conservation Demand Forecasts Estimated impacts of passive water savings and potential active demand management alternatives on the region s long-term demands were evaluated over the planning horizon. Table 3 presents the reliability-based (75 th percentile) baseline water demand projections in five-year increments as compared to the demand projections produced when passive and active demand management programs are considered. Figure 5 illustrates the magnitude of estimated water demand reductions from both passive and active savings relative to the 75th percentile baseline demand forecast and current sustainable system capacity. As shown in Table 4, by 2035, a total of approximately 38 MGD of water use reduction and savings potential was identified. Of this total, 26 MGD of water use reduction is associated with the impact of passive changes, while the estimated additional savings from active efficiency is 9 MGD. Table 3 Comparison of Demand Projections Scenarios with Passive and Active Savings Projected Water Demand (MGD) Absolute Percent Average Annual Forecast Scenario Change Change Percent (75th percentile) Change Baseline Demand % 1.23% Passive Savings % 0.87% Passive/Active Savings % 0.69% BCR Tampa Bay Water Page 10-8

151 Section 10 Demand Management MGD Baseline Demand Baseline Demand w/passive Baseline Demand w/passive and Active Current System Capacity Forecast with Passive and Active Efficiency Figure 5: Baseline Demand Forecast with Passive and Active Savings Table 4 Projected Water Savings from Passive and Active Water Conservation Forecast Scenario Projected Water Savings (MGD) / Percent Reduction (75th percentile) Passive Savings 0/0 6.6/ / / / /8.5 Active Savings 0/0 0.3/ / / / /4.1 Passive and Active Savings 0/0 6.9/ / / / /12.5 E. Economic Analysis of Alternative Demand Management Strategies Quantification of supply-side benefits are based on the accrual of avoided costs demonstrates the benefits of proposed efficiency measures and deferral of source development. Avoided costs (or benefits) from water use efficiency generally result from 1 : Capital deferral; 1-Typically, avoided capital and operating costs from greater water efficiency are also associated with greater environmental benefits, because more water is available to serve ecological purposes. Environmental benefits of greater efficiency were not quantified as part of the Demand Management Plan Update. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-9

152 Section 10 Demand Management Capital elimination; and Reduction in variable cost. Savings and costs were determined over a 60-year planning horizon ( ) allowing savings rates in this analysis to mature over the life of the technology installed. Net avoided costs of viable demand management alternatives were evaluated over two separate timeframes; the total life of all savings and through the 2035 forecast horizon. When costs and benefits of the portfolio of viable demand management alternatives are evaluated over total life of the savings (through the end of 2065), a net present value of $30 million in benefits was identified (as shown in Table 5). Given these benefits and costs, the collective portfolio of demand management alternatives has a B/C ratio (benefits / costs) of When costs and benefits are evaluated over the much shorter 2035 forecast horizon, the net present value of avoided costs remain positive but is reduced to $8.6 million. Table 5 Net Present Value (NPV ) of Avoided Costs PV Cost ($M) PV Benefit ($M) NPV ($M) BCR Life of Savings to 2065 $27.2 $57.1 $ Life of Savings to 2035 $31.3 $39.9 $ F. Board Approved Demand Management Plan Directives As exemplified in Figure 5, incorporation of passive water use efficiency projections into the forecast reduces the demand forecast by 26 mgd in 2035, creating additional regional operational and supply flexibility. Based on this analysis and the need to track passive water use efficiency changes over time, the Tampa Bay Water Board of Directors adopted Board Resolution No in February This resolution incorporates water use efficiency evaluation efforts into the Agency long-term water supply planning process. This resolution is based on the findings provided in the updated Demand Management Plan and directs the Agency to: Develop and implement data collection, management and analysis protocols and procedures for the continued assessment of passive water use efficiency within Tampa Bay Water s service area. Integrate passive water-use efficiency into the Agency s Long-term Demand Forecast and Future Need Analysis. Include the Water Use Efficiency Evaluation as an element of the Long-term Water Supply Plan and include an updated evaluation of potential active measures for implementing efficient water-use products as part of future options for the next Long-term Water Supply Tampa Bay Water Page 10-10

153 Section 10 Demand Management Incorporation of the effects of increased water-use efficiency into the Agency s long-term planning process provides the Board of Directors with more supply policy options, affords Tampa Bay Water and its member governments a supply buffer (increased water use efficiency reduces demand) and allows Tampa Bay Water to prepare and plan for the effects due to changes in water use efficiency. Tampa Bay Water Page 10-11

154 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Section 11 Potential Future Water Supply Sources Tampa Bay Water is continually planning to ensure our region has enough drinking water in the future. The agency tracks growth trends and matches those with potential new supplies to meet new demands. It is through these planning efforts that the agency s current system should meet the region s drinking water supply needs for the next decade. Every five years, the agency updates its Long-Term Master Water Plan. This 20-year plan identifies potential new water supply projects that could be designed and built to meet the future drinking water needs. Seven project concepts were identified by Tampa Bay Water staff and approved by the agency s Board of Directors for further study as part of the previous Long-Term Master Water Plan update in During this planning cycle, no new projects will need to be built due to decreased demands in our region. These project concepts have been carried forward into the current Plan update. Over the next 3-4 years, the seven project concepts will be analyzed further to determine if they are feasible for construction and operation when new water supplies are needed. The seven project concepts are described in detail in Section 11. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-1

155 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources SMALL FOOTPRINT REVERSE OSMOSIS PINELLAS COUNTY In December 2008, the Board approved monitoring the Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis Projects in Pinellas County as part of the update to the agency s Master Water Plan. This included the City of Tarpon Springs and City of Oldsmar projects. Staff later added monitoring of the City of Clearwater s project per the Board s interest in the project. City of Oldsmar Project The City of Oldsmar has historically purchased approximately 1.54 million gallons per day (MGD) of potable water from Pinellas County. The City owns and operates a pump station and a 1 million gallon storage facility for receiving and distributing water to the distribution system. The goal of the City of Oldsmar (City) s project was to provide a long-term alternative drinking water source to the City. The City intends to maintain their current interconnect with Pinellas County as a back-up water supply during plant shutdowns. Additionally, in the event of water shortages or emergencies, the City anticipates it would be available to share its resource with others. The City s project included a brackish water wellfield, associated brackish water transmission system, a reverse osmosis water treatment facility, and a by-product deep injection disposal well. The water treatment facility has a design average flow of 2.0 MGD and it could be expanded to a maximum flow of 3.2 MGD. The City has completed the construction of their reverse osmosis water treatment plant, the brackish water wellfield and associated transmission system and is currently in operation. City of Tarpon Springs Project The City of Tarpon Springs (City) has historically purchased approximately 3.0 million gallons per day (MGD) on an average day, and up to 5.0 mgd on a maximum day, of potable water from Pinellas County. The City also has produced 0.5 MGD from the City s existing fresh groundwater wellfield. The City s project consists of 18 production wells, associated raw water pipelines, a reverse osmosis water treatment facility, and by-product disposal pipelines. The reverse osmosis water treatment facility has a design average flow of 5.0 MGD and a maximum flow of 6.4 MGD. The City s anticipates startup of the new facilities to begin in the spring of Tampa Bay Water Page 11-2

156 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources City of Clearwater Project The City of Clearwater (City) historically has purchased approximately 9 mgd of the City s 13 mgd average demand, which is projected to increase to mgd by 2015, form Pinellas County. The City plans to build a new 6 mgd Brackish Water Facility and expand their existing Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plant No. 1 from its current capacity of 3 mgd to 4 mgd. The City anticipates obtaining the remainder of their water demands from their existing Water Treatment Plant No. 3 and by continuing to purchase potable water from Pinellas County Utilities. The City s project includes design and construction of a brackish water wellfield, associated transmission system, a 6 mgd reverse osmosis water treatment facility, and a by-product deep injection disposal well. The new reverse osmosis water treatment facility will be supplied by approximately 15 brackish production wells, all located within City limits. The City anticipates having the expanded system online by Recommendations: The following steps are recommended for the Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis Pinellas County project: Continue Monitoring the City of Clearwater and Tarpon Springs projects through completion. Discontinue monitoring the City of Oldsmar project as their project is complete. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-3

157 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources TAMPA BAY SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANT EXPANSION This concept provides for a 10 million gallon per day (mgd) expansion of the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant located in Southern Hillsborough County. The existing desalination plant utilizes Tampa Electric Company s Big Bend Power Station cooling water as its seawater supply source from Tampa Bay. The cooling water from the Power Plant is also used to dilute desalination concentrate before being returned to the Bay. The facility is currently undergoing a ten-year Reliability Program that started on January This reliability program includes projects that will provide the necessary reliability to the facility and will be compatible with the expansion of the Facility. The Reliability Program is described in the Agency s Capital Improvement Program Plan. The 10 million gallon per day expansion of the existing desalination plant would require additional water to be diverted from the Big Bend Power Plant cooling water system to the reverse osmosis plant. Supply and finished water pipelines were originally sized to accommodate a 10 mgd expansion. Therefore, this option would take advantage of the previously installed pipeline capacity. An additional 10 million gallons per day of treated water from the reverse osmosis plant would be delivered to the Tampa Bay Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant for blending prior to distribution to Member Governments. The pretreatment and chemical facilities would be modified to accommodate the expansion. Additional reverse osmosis treatment trains would be added to the existing system to provide an additional 10 million gallons per day capacity. The base estimate includes only those components not previously constructed, such as additional conventional pretreatment and reverse osmosis treatment similar to the existing installation. However, depending on the specific configuration at the facility, additional expansion components may be required, including enhanced pretreatment, additional post treatment, additional solids handling, expanded cooling water pumping and piping additions, and intake and concentrate piping replacement. The calculated project costs (in 2013 dollars) are as follows: 10 MGD Expansion Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 21.6 per MGD Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 4 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 8.11 per 1,000 gallons Tampa Bay Water Page 11-4

158 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Recommendations: The following next steps are recommended for the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant Expansion project: Continue implementation of the Reliability Program Explore technological advances in seawater desalination treatment. Investigate and evaluate proven and potential technologies that may reduce seawater desalination treatment energy consumption, energy recovery technologies, and alternative or renewable energy options. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-5

159 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources GULF COAST (ANCLOTE) SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANT Tampa Bay Water previously considered the feasibility of developing a second seawater desalination plant along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. The identified site would be co-located with the Anclote Power Plant in southwest Pasco County. The power plant is coal-fired, and has a rating of 1,006 Megawatts. The power plant is owned and operated by Progress Energy. Co-location is a cost effective and environmentally sound arrangement since the desalination plant benefits by using existing structures, which minimizes the environmental impacts of new construction. Moreover, the power plant can supply power and dilution water to the waste concentrate of the desalination plant. This project concept provides for 25 million gallons per day (MGD) yield reverse osmosis desalination plant. The desalination plant would share the intake infrastructure with the Anclote Power Plant. The waste concentrate from the desalination process would be diluted with the cooling water from the Anclote Power Plant and discharged into the Anclote Power Plant s cooling water discharge canal. Finished water would be delivered to the regional point of connection in northeast Pinellas County. An alternative project configuration was evaluated to see if a better fit to the projected future water demand could be achieved. This included the construction of a smaller plant with a 9 million gallon per day initial capacity, followed by expansion to 21 million gallons per day. The project total cost includes the cost for raw water supply and waste discharge pipelines, reverse osmosis treatment, and finished water delivery system. The calculated projects costs (in 2013 dollars) are as follows: 25 MGD Option Capital Cost (in million dollars): $551.1 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 22 per MGD Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 3 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 7 per 1,000 gallons at full capacity (i.e. 25 MGD) Phased Expansion - 9 MGD (Phase 1) Capital Cost (in million dollars): $262.2 Tampa Bay Water Page 11-6

160 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 29.1 per MGD Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 4 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 9 per 1,000 gallons at full capacity (i.e. 9 MGD) Phased Expansion Expansion to 21 MGD (Phase 2) Capital Cost (in million dollars): $252.2 additional cost for Phase 2 only Capital Cost (in million dollars): $514.4 (Phases 1 and 2) Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 24.5 per MGD Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 3 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 7 per 1,000 gallons at full capacity (i.e. 21 MGD) Recommendations: The following next steps are recommended for the Gulf Coast Seawater Desalination Plant project: Further evaluate the potential point of connection options; the transmission main corridor; and intake and high service pump station requirements. Coordinate and outreach with pertinent stakeholders the property requirements for the desalination facility; point of connection; and the transmission main corridor. Explore technological advances in seawater desalination treatment. Investigate and evaluate proven and potential technologies that may reduce seawater desalination treatment energy consumption, energy recovery technologies, and alternative or renewable energy options. Further evaluate and address environmental and permitting requirements. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-7

161 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources ADDITIONAL POTABLE GROUNDWATER FROM EXISTING NORTHERN TAMPA BAY WELLFIELDS The current Combined Permit for the 11-Consolidated Regional Wellfields will expire January 25, The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) and Tampa Bay Water are continuing to evaluate progress and assumptions made concerning regional recovery of water levels by analyzing trends in aquifer and surface water levels. Tampa Bay Water s 11-Consolidated Regional Wellfields are shown in Figure 11-1 This project concept would involve increasing the allowable annual average withdrawal rate of these wellfields from the current annual average permitted flow of 90 million gallons per day (mgd), if the environmental analysis being conducted shows that additional supply can be developed in an environmentally-sustainable way. This long-term planning evaluation assumes increase of 10 and 15 mgd, which would increase the permitted supply to 100 or 105 mgd. Supply diversification, increased regional rotational capacity, wetland mitigation and drainage mitigation projects are all improving conditions in the Northern Tampa Bay area. Ongoing monitoring, modeling, and forecasting activities could demonstrate an increase in groundwater withdrawals could be approved consistent with regulatory rules while still meeting the water resource recovery goals set forth by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Design Concept Detailed operating protocol and potential allowable withdrawal increases at the specified wellfields would be dependent on maintaining aquifer, wetland, and lake recovery within the northern Tampa Bay area. The assumed yield for this evaluation is 10 to 15 mgd on an annual average basis. This evaluation estimates capital improvements for production wells and collection main rehabilitation, to support an increased capacity. While the existing wells have historically pumped greater capacities, we are assuming wells would be rehabilitated to improve their specific capacity by 0.5 mgd each. In addition the increased wellfield flow may require existing piping to be relined or replaced, so pricing the cost of 3 miles of 36-inch diameter piping is included in the options. Treatment would be provided by existing groundwater treatment facilities. This project would utilize existing raw water collection transmission main and regional finished water transmission corridors.. The configuration of the project as described is preliminary. Further monitoring, data analysis, and modeling of regional aquifer, wetland, and lake levels would need to be incorporated into furthering this project concept. A summary of the assumed concept components is shown in Table Tampa Bay Water Page 11-8

162 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Figure 11-1 Project Concept Location Map Tampa Bay Water Page 11-9

163 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Upgrade (acidification, deepening, larger pumps/motors/vfds) of 20 or 30 Existing Production Wells Additional monitoring wells Table 11-1 Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Wellfields Concept Summary Supply Treatment Transmission Property 10 or 15 Million Gallon per Day Annual Average Groundwater Yield Utilize Existing Regional Treatment Capacity 3 Miles of 36-inch Collection Main 2 acres of Temporary pipeline easement Permitting Considerations The current Combined Permit for the 11-Consolidated Regional Wellfields (Water Use Permit Number _001) will expire January 25, The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) will be evaluating progress and assumptions made concerning regional recovery of water levels by analyzing trends in aquifer and surface water levels. Recovery strategy goals include target wetland and lake levels that have been designated within the vicinity of the central system wellfields. Additional setpoints, known as Management Levels, are established for the Floridan aquifer. Continued monitoring and analysis of these levels will assist the District and Tampa Bay Water in identifying long-term water management practices that could be implemented in the Northern Tampa Bay Water Use Caution Area. Rehabilitating and operating groundwater wells and associated pipelines would require an Environmental Resource Permit from the District and operating permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Increasing the quantity from the existing wellfields could require additional monitoring. For each well that is upgraded, we have added additional deep and shallow monitoring wells. Environmental Stewardship The withdrawal and treatment of groundwater sources generally requires less energy demand than do other source water types. Surficial and Upper Floridan aquifer drawdown and potential effects on surface water systems including other existing legal users are items to be considered associated with groundwater withdrawals. The ability to increase the withdrawal capacity in the future would be contingent on providing proof that adverse impacts to aquifer levels, wetland, and lake water levels could be managed at established Tampa Bay Water Page 11-10

164 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources recovery levels without impacts.. Tampa Bay Water is working with the District to continue to collect and analyze data and to use this information to understand long-term environmental conditions. The Upper Floridan aquifer in the Northern Tampa Bay Wellfields is vulnerable to long-term changes in precipitation patterns (such as below-average rainfall) could affect the yield. Project Costs Utilization of existing wellfield infrastructure allows for a considerably lower project cost estimate as opposed to development of new wells. These costs may not reflect all additional monitoring and mitigation required to increase the existing permitted supply. The calculated costs, based upon a 10 and 15 million gallon per day yields, are as follows: 10 MGD Yield 15 MGD Yield Capital Cost $21,784,000 $28,011,000 Capital Cost/million gallons per day $2,178,000 $1,867,000 O&M Cost/1,000 gallons $0.19 $0.19 Annual O&M and Capital Cost $2,122,000 $2,847,000 Total Cost/1,000 gallons $0.58 $0.52 Updated capital costs would be provided for the actual capacity increase selected for further analysis. Recommendations The following next steps are recommended for this project: Continue data collection and analysis for existing wellfield usage. Evaluate information to understand long-term environmental conditions. Determine the additional mitigation and monitoring required to increase the permitted quantity, and consider this effort when evaluating this option with the other long-term options. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-11

165 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Consider quantity increase for 2021 at the earliest, or in subsequent water use permit renewals, depending on when additional supply is required. References The following documents were reviewed to prepare this project concept evaluation. Consolidated Water Use Permit _001 Southwest Florida Water Management District Long-Term Water Supply Plan (2008) by Black & Veatch. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-12

166 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources THONOTOSASSA WELLS This project would consist of construction of new groundwater production wells on City of Tampa property in the Thonotosassa area at the location shown in Figure 11-4 In addition to the wells, a chloramination facility, storage and pumping station would allow delivery of treated water via a new transmission main to the North Central Hillsborough Intertie. This project capacity could add approximately 10 million gallons per day of average annual groundwater supply to the Regional System. It would take approximately 5 years to complete the property acquisition, design, permitting, construction and commissioning of this future supply source. Figure 11-4 Thonotosassa Wells Location Map Concept Design A 10 million gallon per day capacity wellfield would be constructed and include raw water pipelines ranging in size from 12- to 18-inches in diameter depending on the routing and number of wells contributing to the mains. The final number and configuration of wells would require additional analysis and cumulative impact analysis modeling. Pump sizing would require additional aquifer testing to more accurately estimate the resulting drawdown at each well site. This project is conceptualized as providing onsite chloramination and delivery of finished water to the Regional System. After chloramination, a finished water storage tank and high service pump station would be utilized to deliver up to 20 million gallons per day of finished water. The flow would be routed to the Regional System through a potential 30-inch transmission main. Hydraulic analysis would also be required to identify the system pressure required to pump into the existing Regional System. A pipeline routing study would need to be performed to determine the best pipe routes. For the purpose of this concept evaluation, routing was estimated using existing right of ways. The major project components are summarized in Table Tampa Bay Water Page 11-13

167 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table Thonotosassa Wells Concept Summary Supply Treatment Transmission Property Groundwater 10 Million Gallon per 5 Miles of 12-inch Raw 10, 1-acre well sites Day Chloramination Water Pipeline Facility 10 Million Gallon per Day Annual Average Yield Wellfield: Production Wells/ Monitor Wells 2.5 Million Gallon Above Ground Concrete Storage Tank 20 Million Gallon per Day High Service Pump Station 0.5 Miles of 18-inch Raw Water Pipeline 8 miles of 30-inch Finished Water Transmission line to North Central Hillsborough Intertie 1, 5-acre Treatment Plant site 5.5 miles of access/pipeline easements Water Quality A test production well and monitoring well were installed on the property in The drilling and aquifer test data indicated that aquifer parameters varied vertically and horizontally across the site. The water source of this option, the Upper Floridian aquifer, generally contains good quality groundwater. Water quality samples were collected in 1990 from the test well and monitoring well. The water quality parameters tested in 1990 were below the maximum concentration limits for secondary drinking water standards and within the normal range of public supply wells in the region. Sampling of the test well was performed again on September 28, Higher than typical amounts of aluminum, iron, turbidity, calcium hardness, and the presence of coliform bacteria were detected and may have occurred due to incomplete development of the well or the well remaining stagnant for 20 years. The concentrations of these contaminants may reduce if the well is better developed with pumping and sampled again. Property Considerations The wells would be constructed on several one acre well site parcels within a 423 acre parcel owned by the City of Tampa. The treatment facility would require an additional 5 acre parcel. Tampa Bay Water would seek to acquire the well site and treatment plant parcels and appropriate access/pipeline easements with the City prior to site development. The land use immediately adjacent to the wells is predominately agricultural and low density residential. There are two hazardous and solid waste sites, both of which are in the area. One site is the Taylor Road Landfill, which is located approximately 4 miles west-southwest of the potential wellfield. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-14

168 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Potentiometric maps for the Upper Floridan aquifer in indicate flow is east to west in this area. Therefore, the landfill is down gradient from the proposed wellfield and a low risk. Florida Gas Transmission has a permanent easement on the property and may seek to expand this easement in the future. The location and proximity of this easement to the potential production wells and setback requirements for gas pipelines would need to be considered in the siting of the well sites. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the property was completed in November 2009 to identify any recognized environmental conditions on the potential wellfield property. The following locations for further evaluation were identified: 1) An open top roll-off container where the police department burns solid waste. 2) A debris area with small containers of chemicals and creosote-treated wood. 3) A soil berm where the police occasionally uses paint pellets during target practice. 4) The shed area where agricultural equipment and ATVs are stored and maintained A Phase II environmental site assessment of the property is recommended, with sampling at the four locations. Ease of Permitting The major permit that would be required for this project is a water use permit for the new wellfield from the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This potential wellfield is located in the Dover/Plant City Water Use Caution Area, however it is outside the Minimum Aquifer Level Protection Zone. Figure 11-5 shows the approximate location of the property and the areas that have increased water use permitting requirements. Permitting within the Dover/Plant City Water Use Caution Area would require submission of additional application forms, analysis and documentation; however, the increased restrictions within this area are targeted toward agricultural frost/freeze protection pumping, rather than public water supply. Permitting withdrawals in this area will require cumulative impact analysis using a hydrologic model to address concerns related to groundwater drawdown and the potential effects on existing permitted users and natural systems. Construction of a new pipeline, treatment, and storage facilities would require an Environmental Resource Permit from the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Additional permits from Florida Department of Environmental Protection would need to be obtained for construction and operation of the piping, disinfection system, and the pumping station. Site Development permitting with Hillsborough County would also be required. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-15

169 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Figure 11-5 Location of the Potential Thonotosassa Wells within the Dover/Plant City Water use Caution Area Potential Thonotosassa Wellfield Location Cost Effectiveness Project Cost The estimated costs (in 2013 dollars) are provided below: Capital Cost $44,674,000 O&M Cost/1,000 gallons $0.18 Annual O&M and Capital Cost $622,000 Total Cost/1,000 gallons $0.98 Environmental Stewardship The consumption of energy for groundwater withdrawal and treatment is generally low when compared to the other water supply alternatives. Most of the energy usage is attributed to well pumps and high service pumps. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-16

170 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Results from the 1990 aquifer performance testing provided clear indication that the Upper Floridan aquifer test well had a high level of productivity. Testing also concluded that some level of connectivity exists between the surficial aquifer system and the Upper Floridan aquifer due to the drawdown observed in surficial aquifer monitor wells. As such, it would be very important to understand if prolonged pumping from the Upper Floridan aquifer might impact natural systems and/or permitted users in the area. Nearby agricultural interests currently producing water from the Upper Floridan aquifer are particularly active in the winter dry season for strawberry production. These permitted users need to be considered in the permitting process. The location of the potential wellfield is inside the Hillsborough River Basin. The potential effects of this withdrawal on the base flow of the Hillsborough River and its tributaries would need to be evaluated should this project move forward. Future Recommendations Coordinate further with the City of Tampa to understand their interest within the potential timeframe of the project. Annual or periodic sampling of the existing Avon Park Formation test well located at the site. Conduct a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment with sampling at the four identified locations that had recognized environmental conditions. Perform hydrologic modeling to determine if there are impacts to the Minimum Aquifer Protection Level Zone, existing users, natural systems and the Hillsborough River or its tributaries. Perform hydraulic modeling to determine the range of system pressures necessary for the finished water pumping station. Perform a route study to determine the best pipeline route for connection to the Regional system. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-17

171 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources References The following document was reviewed to prepare this project concept evaluation: Pemberton Creek Site Well Construction and Aquifer Testing (1991) by Schreuder and Davis, Inc. (SDI). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Thonotosassa Wells Project Parcel 2441 Kirkland Road Dover, FL 33527, Golder and Associates, November Title Study by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, July 21, Tampa Bay Water Page 11-18

172 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources SURFACE WATER EXPANSION This project concept involves expanding the existing surface water supply system with new infrastructure components to deliver, store, and treat additional surface water. In 2009, Tampa Bay Water received a cooperative funding grant from the Southwest Florida Water Management District to perform planning-level analysis of further expansion of Tampa Bay Water s surface water system. A contract with Montgomery Watson Harza (MWH) to perform the work was approved by the Board in December Analysis was performed by MWH to further determine the yield, reliability, and cost of expanding the existing surface water system. This analysis included modeling of the potential concepts using the Enhanced Surface Water System Model. MWH estimates that a surface water expansion project could take between 5 and 7 years to complete design, permit, and construct the project. The planning phase of the project could take between 3 and 4 years. The total amount of time needed to complete the project could take approximately 11 years. This project could result in average increases in yield of between 0.3 and 17.3 million gallons per day. Other components of the Surface Water Expansion concept such as downstream augmentation of the Alafia River and expansion of the Alafia River Pump Station were not evaluated by MWH in the recent planning study. Information on these potential components can be found in the 2008 Long-Term Plan. Surface Water Expansion Concept Components The modeling completed used the most updated version of the Enhanced Surface Water System Model, which includes operational constraints for existing system components based on operational experience to date. The available supply from the Alafia River, Tampa Bypass Canal and Bullfrog Creek were simulated based on basin rainfall. Rainfall is varied per the wide range of historical seasonal fluctuation and longer term drought and heavy rainfall cycles. One thousand 300-year input ensembles were modeled, generating 1,000 output ensembles to be characterized by their long-term average performance, performance variability, and reliability. The modeling produced comparable estimates for yield, and reliability, storage, and fluoride concentration of the potential expansions versus the baseline system. The modeling baseline and all of the configurations are simulated with 19% of the Alafia River flow above the minimum required flow as the allowable withdrawal, which is greater than the existing Alafia Water Use Permit amount of 10%. As long as the remaining 9% is still available, and has not been granted as a water supply to another entity, it is assumed that Tampa Bay Water would apply for a permit to use this quantity in the future. The Southwest Florida Water Management District has granted Tampa Bay Water permission to utilize the full 19% of the flow by Emergency Order on the following occasions: August 3, 2007 through October 31, 2007 using District EO SWF Tampa Bay Water Page 11-19

173 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources July 22, 2008 June 30, 2010 using District EO SWF July 31, 2012 November 15, 2012 using District EO SWF The following components were evaluated by MWH to better understand seven potential expansion concept configurations: Additional raw water supply from Bullfrog Creek via potential new 10 MGD Pump Station Additional potential new 10 MGD Surface Water Treatment Plant Additional potential new 20 MGD Surface Water Treatment Plant Additional 20 MGD Expansion of potential new surface water treatment capacity at the David L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility to treat Alafia River supply Additional 6 BG potential new Reservoir The concept configurations components, yield and reliability are shown in the Table 11-4 below: Table 11-4 Surface Water Expansion Configurations Configuration No. Baseline Additional Reservoir Storage Capacity (Billion Gallons) Additional Treatment at the D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Plant Capacity (Million Gallons per Day) Potential New Surface Water Treatment Plant Capacity (Million Gallons per Day) Bullfrog Creak Pump Station Capacity (Million Gallons per Day) Reliability - Regional Reservoir in a Satisfactory State (% Days) *Annual Total Surface Water System Production Increase (Million Gallons per Day) % 94.62% 88.13% 89.81% 81.83% 91.55% 84.13% 92.86% *Figures represent average production increase Each of the surface water expansions configurations that were evaluated are described below: Tampa Bay Water Page 11-20

174 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Configuration No. 1 This configuration would include increasing Tampa Bay Water s raw water withdrawal capacity by adding a supply from Bullfrog Creek at the approximate location of the Symmes Road bridge crossing. This raw water supply would connect to the existing raw water conveyance system via diameter new raw water pipeline. This configuration does not include additional water treatment capacity. Table 11-5 Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 1 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property Bullfrog Creek Withdrawal Structure 10 MGD Bullfrog Creek Pumping Station No additional treatment 12,600 feet of 24-inch Raw Water Transmission Main 10 acre Pump Station Property Site Configuration No. 2 This configuration would include increasing Tampa Bay Water s raw water treatment capacity by 10 million gallons per day (firm capacity) with the construction of a potential New Water Treatment Plant. Configuration 2 includes additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water from the existing reservoir to the potential New Water Treatment Facility and from the potential new facility to a potential new delivery point. Table 11-6 Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 2 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property No new supply 15 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station 10 million gallon per day firm capacity Surface Water Treatment Plant 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 30 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station 18,500 feet of 30-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 1,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Finished Water Transmission Main 20 acre Surface Water Treatment Plant site Configuration No. 3 This configuration would include increasing Tampa Bay Water s raw water withdrawal capacity by adding supply from Bullfrog Creek, and a 10 million gallons per day (firm capacity) potential New Water Treatment Plant. This raw water supply would connect the existing raw water conveyance system via a raw water pipeline. The additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water from the existing reservoir to the potential New Water Treatment Facility and from the potential new facility to a potential new delivery point. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-21

175 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table 11-7 Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 3 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property Bullfrog Creek Withdrawal Structure 10 MGD Bullfrog Creek Pumping Station 15 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station 10 million gallon per day firm capacity Surface Water Treatment Plant 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 30 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station 12,600 feet of 24-inch Raw Water Transmission Main 18,500 feet of 30-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 1,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Finished Water Transmission Main 10 acre Pump Station Property Site 20 acre Surface Water Treatment Plant site Configuration No. 4 This configuration would include a potential New Water Treatment Plant and the addition of a 6 billion gallon reservoir for additional raw water storage. This configuration includes additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water to and from the new reservoir and to convey water to the potential New Water Treatment Facility, and then finally to a potential New delivery point. Table 11-8 Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 4 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property No new supply 6 Billion Gallon Reservoir Storage 200 million gallon per day Booster Pump Station to the new Reservoir 120 mgd pump station from the new Reservoir 30 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station 39,600 feet of 84-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 18,500 feet of 30-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 1,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Finished Water Transmission Main 500 acre Reservoir Site 20 acre Surface Water Treatment Plant site 20 million gallon per day firm capacity Surface Water Treatment Plant 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 40 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station Tampa Bay Water Page 11-22

176 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Configuration No. 5 This configuration would include receiving treatment at the expanded D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility, and the addition of a 6 billion gallon reservoir for additional raw water storage. This configuration includes additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water to and from the new reservoir, to pump water from the Alafia River to the D. L Tippin Water Treatment Facility, and finally to the potential New Delivery Points. Table 11-9 Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 5 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property No new supply 6 Billion Gallon Reservoir 500 acre Reservoir Site Storage 200 million gallon per day Booster Pump Station to the new Reservoir 120 mgd pump station from the new Reservoir 30 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station at the Alafia River 30 million gallon per day expansion of the Treatment Capacity at the D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 40 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station 39,600 feet of 84-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 114,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main from the Alafia River to the D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility 15,200 feet of 30-inch, 23,900 feet of 36-inch, and 15,800 feet of 42- inch Finished Water Transmission Main 2, 1-acre interconnection sites Configuration No. 6 This configuration would include adding new supply from Bullfrog Creek, increasing treatment capacity by 20 million gallons per day (firm capacity) and the addition of a 6 billion gallon reservoir for additional raw water storage. This configuration includes additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water from Bullfrog Creek to the raw water system, to and from the new reservoir, to the potential New Water Treatment Facility, and finally to a potential New Delivery Point. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-23

177 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 6 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property Bullfrog Creek Withdrawal Structure 10 MGD Bullfrog Creek Pumping Station 6 Billion Gallon Reservoir Storage 200 million gallon per day Booster Pump Station to the new Reservoir 120 mgd pump station from the new Reservoir 30 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station 20 million gallon per day firm capacity Surface Water Treatment Plant 12,600 feet of 24-inch Raw Water Transmission Main 39,600 feet of 84-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 18,500 feet of 30-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 1,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Finished Water Transmission Main 10 acre Pump Station Property Site 20 acre Surface Water Treatment Plant site 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 40 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station Configuration No. 7 This configuration would include adding new supply from Bullfrog Creek, receiving treatment at the expanded D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility, and the addition of a 6 billion gallon reservoir for additional raw water storage. This configuration includes additional raw water pumping capacity and piping to convey water from Bullfrog Creek to the raw water system, to and from the new reservoir, to pump supply from the Alafia River to the D. L Tippin Water Treatment Facility, and finally to the potential new delivery points. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-24

178 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table Surface Water Expansion Configuration No. 7 Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property Bullfrog Creek Withdrawal Structure 10 MGD Bullfrog Creek Pumping Station 6 Billion Gallon Reservoir Storage 200 million gallon per day Booster Pump Station to the new Reservoir 120 million gallon per pump station from the new Reservoir 30 million gallon per day Raw Water Booster Station at the Alafia River 30 million gallon per day expansion of the Treatment Capacity at the D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 40 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station 12,600 feet of 24-inch Raw Water Transmission Main 39,600 feet of 84-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main 114,000 feet of 42-inch diameter Raw Water Transmission Main from the Alafia River to the D. L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility 15,200 feet of 30-inch, 23,900 feet of 36-inch, and 15,800 feet of 42- inch Finished Water Transmission Main 10 acre Pump Station Property Site 500 acre Reservoir Site 2, 1-acre interconnection sites Water Quality Tampa Bay Water has over ten years of experience treating surface water from the existing Alafia River and Tampa Bypass Canal raw water sources. The treatment process at the existing Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant uses the ACTIFLO process by Veolia Water to remove the color and particles from the water. Ozone oxidation is used to kill any microorganisms. Biologically active filters then remove any remaining organic particles and the water is disinfected with chloramines. For the concepts that include a new surface water treatment facility, it was assumed that the treatment process would be similar. One water quality constituent that is not removed by the existing surface water treatment process is Fluoride. Tampa Bay Water is required to deliver supply with fluoride below 0.8 milligrams per liter, per Exhibit D of the Master Water Supply Agreement. Fluoride concentrations in the Tampa Bypass Canal and Bullfrog Creek average 0.3 milligrams per liter with minimal seasonal variation, while the Alafia River fluoride concentrations average approximately 1.22 milligrams per liter with considerable seasonal fluctuations. Previous surface water expansion evaluations have estimated higher fluoride levels for configurations that included lower Tampa Bypass Canal flow, or increased supply from the Alafia River, which could require reverse osmosis treatment. The current configurations would not require this treatment based on the simulation results for average fluoride concentrations. The Fluoride concentrations in the sources, storage and at the treatment facilities that were simulated in the modeling are listed in Table EPA is currently evaluating the secondary drinking water standard for fluoride. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-25

179 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Tampa Bay Water should continue to monitor the proposed rule development to reduce the secondary drinking water standard for fluoride to see if additional evaluations are needed. Table Average Fluoride concentrations for the Surface Water Expansion Configurations. Configuration No. Baseline Annual Average Regional Reservoir Fluoride Concentration (milligrams per liter) Annual Average New Reservoir Fluoride Concentration(milligrams per liter) Annual Average Regional SWTP Fluoride Concentration(milligrams per liter) Annual Average New SWTP Fluoride Concentration(milligrams per liter) Water samples from Bullfrog Creek were collected by Tampa Bay Water staff monthly from February 2011 to November Concentrations were compared to the drinking water primary and secondary standards and to the existing Tampa Bypass Canal and Alafia River sources. The overall water quality was similar to the Alafia River and the Tampa Bypass Canal sources, with low fluoride levels. As expected, levels of iron, color and total organic carbon exceeded the drinking water standards. One sample showed concentrations for antimony, arsenic, radium and thallium that exceeded drinking water limits. The proposed treatment process would remove the contaminants in the raw water that were above the drinking standards; therefore, this should be an acceptable additional source of supply. Tampa Bay Water should continue to sample this source quarterly as long as this source remains a potential water supply source for the future. The existing reservoir uses aeration to maintain water quality. It is assumed that a similar system would be used at the potential new reservoir. The D.L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility expansion would need to be considered and discussed further with the City of Tampa to assure that the additional flow would not disrupt the City of Tampa s ability to meet its own customer needs. Additional study may be needed to determine which processes would require expansion within the facility. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-26

180 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Property Considerations Property would be needed at several locations in southern Hillsborough County for the Bullfrog Creek withdrawal structure and Pump Station, the potential new water treatment facility, the 6 billion gallon reservoir, and the interconnections where the supply would be delivered. The Bullfrog Creek withdrawal location would need to be upstream of the tidal salt water interface. A study completed by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1981 showed that the interface occurred at the approximate location of the East Bay Road crossing. For the planning purposes, the parcel would be a 10-acre parcel in the vicinity of Symmes Road. The potential new surface water treatment plant could be located on at least 20 acres near Hillsborough County s Lithia Water Treatment Facility. An analysis of available property has not been completed for either of these properties. The expansion of the D. L Tippin Plant would be completed on the existing plant site. Two of the interconnection locations are at facilities either owned by Tampa Bay Water or a Member Government. For cost estimating purposes, a third 2 acre interconnection site would be needed in the vicinity of Busch Boulevard and Orange Grove Drive. Tampa Bay Water and MWH Inc. completed a study titled Enhancements Phases C & D Planning Analysis-Land Acquisition Screening Report in 2008 to look at potential locations for a second regional reservoir. The Analysis narrowed the potential sites down to four sites in southern Hillsborough County. These sites were approved by Tampa Bay Water s Board of Directors for continued consideration. For conservative cost estimating purposes, the location that was furthest away from the existing reservoir site was used for the cost analysis. Pipeline easements may be needed for the pipeline construction. We assumed that easements would be required for a width of 35 feet for 25% of the length of the potential pipelines. Additional property evaluations would need to be conducted in the next phase of planning work for these infrastructure components. Ease of Permitting Expanding the surface water system would meet the intent of the Local Sources First provision of Florida Statute since water from this project would be developed within the Tampa Bay Water service area. Siting and permitting of a second reservoir would be challenging. If Federal funds are pursued for it, as was the case with the original reservoir, an Environmental Impact Statement would need to be conducted for a second reservoir. This project would require permits for a second reservoir and for treatment plant construction, and pipelines construction through various agencies, including: the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and Tampa Bay Water Page 11-27

181 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Hillsborough County. A water use permit for Bullfrog Creek and/or a modified permit for expanded use of the Alafia River would be required. If downstream augmentation of the Alafia River is pursued, a NPDES permit would be required. Cost Effectiveness The Planning-level cost estimates prepared by MWH, Inc. for the seven evaluated concept configurations are presented below. Concept Configuration 1 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 38.5 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $2.06 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $7.73 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 2 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $10.5 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $2.06 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $3.93 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 3 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $11.3 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $1.96 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $3.98 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 4 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $27.8 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $1.13 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $6.08 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 5 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 60.5 per million gallons per day Tampa Bay Water Page 11-28

182 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Operation and Maintenance Costs: $2.07 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $12.85 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 6 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 27.2 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $1.27 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $6.11 per 1,000 gallons Concept Configuration 7 Capital Cost (in million dollars): $ 60.5 per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $1.95 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $12.76 per 1,000 gallons The planning study to complete the analysis of these seven options was co-funded by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Funding for implementation of the surface water system capital cost may also be possible for this alternative water supply project. Environmental Stewardship Energy consumption for the project is expected to be moderate for the surface water treatment. This future water supply option is very susceptible to climate variability, and could produce a wide range of potential yield from year to year. The Bullfrog Creek watershed is vulnerable to spill contamination and non-point source pollution from roadway runoff, farming and mining in the area; however, having another surface water supply alternative could help mitigate the vulnerability of the other two surface water sources. Future Recommendations The following next steps are recommended: Further evaluate the seven potential project configurations to determine the optimal one for implementation. This should include an evaluation and optimization of potential yield versus reservoir reliability. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-29

183 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Continue coordination with the City of Tampa regarding potential treatment at the David L. Tippin Water Treatment Facility. Perform further reservoir siting evaluations to determine the top site for a potential second regional reservoir. Monitor any regulatory rule making that would affect the regulated level of fluoride allowed in drinking water and evaluate if additional treatment might be required. Evaluate current permitting requirements and potential feasibility versus need for downstream augmentation. Perform more detailed evaluations of permit timing including the expansion of the Alafia water use permit withdrawal percentage from 10% above the minimum flow to 19% above the minimum flow. Conduct public involvement program activities with the general public and interested stakeholder groups. Explore opportunities to obtain State and Federal grant funding. References The following documents were reviewed to prepare this project concept evaluation. Surface & Recharge Water Projects Final Report (2013) by MWH Regional Water Supply Plan by Southwest Florida Water Management District. Future Surface Water Expansion Study (2008) by MWH Long-Term Water Supply Plan (2008) by Black & Veatch. Enhanced Surface Water System Model Modifications to Support Alternatives Evaluation for Tampa Bay Water s Surface Water Expansion Study (June 10, 2008) by Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. Enhancements Phases C & D Planning Analysis-Land Acquisition Screening Report and Recommendations Presentation (January 11, 2008) by MWH. Reclassification of the Alafia River and Tampa Bypass Canal from Class III to Class I, PBS&J Technical Memorandum No. 3 Potential Cost Ramifications for Tampa Bay Water of Source Water Quality Degradation (December 2007) by Black & Veatch. Alternative Water Supply Yield Evaluation (June 2006) by MWH. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-30

184 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Relation Between Freshwater Flow and Salinity Distributions in the Alafia River, bullfrog Creek, and Hillsborough Bay, Florida, (1981) US Geological Survey. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-31

185 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources AQUIFER RECHARGE This project concept involves recharging the Floridan aquifer with highly treated reclaimed water and a remote groundwater withdrawal for potable supply such that a net benefit to Floridan aquifer levels is achieved. This aquifer recharge could be achieved by installing Upper Floridan aquifer recharge wells or surficial rapid infiltration basins. Reclaimed water from the City of Tampa s Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant could be a major supply source for the recharge locations. In 2009, Tampa Bay Water with Montgomery Watson Harza (MWH) began additional analysis to further determine the feasibility of aquifer recharge as part of the Surface & Recharge Water Projects; this preliminary work identified areas feasible for aquifer recharge. MWH estimates that an aquifer recharge project could take up to 13 years to complete pilot testing, design, permitting, construction and obtaining the resulting groundwater supply credits. Concept Components Supply - The City of Tampa performed a reclaimed water master plan study to investigate reclaimed water utilization opportunities.. Tampa s Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant has a design capacity of 96 million gallons per day and much of it is used beneficially by the City or has planned uses by them. Future work with the City will be required to determine the quantity of reclaimed water supply that would be available for this project concept. For planning cost estimating purposes, a potential quantity has been used in this evaluation. Aquifer Recharge Wells - New reclaimed water recharge wells could be installed along coastal Hillsborough County to recharge the Avon Park formation of the Upper Floridan aquifer. The locations for injection would be chosen where the total dissolved solids in the aquifer are greater than 500 milligrams per liter, to avoid additional treatment, and facilitate cost effective and reasonable permitting, and monitoring. Previous modeling has been performed for the Southwest Florida Water Management District predicted that the potentiometric surface of the aquifer could be increased upgradient into central Hillsborough County. The rise in the potentiometric surface was found to be proportional to the quantity of water recharged near the coast. This configuration would include reclaimed water supply from the City of Tampa s Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant, additional water quality treatment to meet primary drinking water standards and multiple barriers for organics and pathogens, reclaimed water storage, a redundant disinfection system, recharge pumps, pipelines, and wells. Evaluations by other governmental agencies on the use of aquifer recharge wells for reclaimed water are currently being conducted. Statewide discussions about facilitating the use of reclaimed water are also underway. In the feasibility phase of planning, the results of these activities and further coordination with the permitting agencies to understand the exact level of treatment required could potentially lower project costs. To be conservative in this phase of planning, the current cost estimate Tampa Bay Water Page 11-32

186 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources includes primary drinking water treatment. Also to be conservative for cost estimating purposes, a new groundwater wellfield, new groundwater treatment, storage and high service pumping, and associated pipelines for the water supply components are included. Future work could evaluate if existing Tampa Bay Water infrastructure could be used for this with an attendant project cost decrease. Figure 11-2 shows a diagram of this concept, and Table 11-2 lists the concept components. Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Existing Chlorination/ Dechlorination/ Post-Aeration Microfiltration Reverse Osmosis/ Alkalinity Adjustment Ultraviolet Disinfection New Storage Tank To Hillsborough Bay or Reuse Customers To Regional System New Storage Tank Gulf of Mexico Ultraviolet Disinfection New Groundwater Treatment Facility Coastal Aquifer Recharge Wells New Groundwater Production and Monitor Wells New Existing Figure 11-2 Diagram of the Aquifer Recharge Wells Concept Tampa Bay Water Page 11-33

187 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table 11-2 Aquifer Recharge Wells Configuration Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property 28 Million Gallon per Day 20 acre treatment Microfiltration and Reverse plant site Osmosis 11, 2.5-Million Gallon Per Day Capacity Coastal Recharge Wells 10, 2.5-Million Gallon Per Day New Regional Groundwater Production and Monitor Wells 20 Million Gallon per Day Annual Average Yield 22 Million Gallon per Day Alkalinity Adjustment and UV Disinfection Facility 5.5 Million Gallon Reclaimed Water Above Ground Storage Tank 22 Million Gallon per Day Reclaimed Water High Service Pump Station 11, 2.5-Million Gallon per Day Ultraviolet Disinfection at Recharge Well Sites 20 Million Gallon per Day Groundwater Treatment Facility 2, 5-Million Gallon Finished Water Above Ground Storage Tank 40 Million Gallon Per Day Finished Water High Service Pump Station 13.7 Miles of 36- inch Reclaimed Water Transmission Main 13.5 Miles of 42- inch Finished Water Transmission Main 11, 5-acre injection well sites 43.2 acres of pipeline easements 10, 1-acre wellsites 16, 0.5 acre monitoring well easements Rapid Infiltration Basins - New reclaimed water rapid infiltration basins could be constructed in the portion of Hillsborough or Pasco County where the general absence of an intermediate aquifer system and/or a contiguous semi-confining unit makes it possible to positively affect the potentiometric surface of the Floridan aquifer through rapid infiltration. The assumed construction costs and required land area for rapid infiltration basins are based upon the assumption that the project site is in an area with a highly pervious sandy soil and that an infiltration rate of 3 inches per day would be achieved. Based upon this assumed infiltration rate, multiple basins covering 400 acres would need to be constructed. Construction would include mobilization/demobilization of construction activities, excavation and site work, site Tampa Bay Water Page 11-34

188 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources restoration and sodding, stormwater controls, asphalt paved access roads, hydraulic structures, and other general requirements. The water depth assumed per basin is 5 feet; however, the feasibility of this assumption would depend on high water table elevations during the wet season. This project configuration would require reclaimed water storage and pumping facilities at the Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant, construction of rapid infiltration basins, an expansion of the Cypress Bridge Wellfield, potential expansion of the Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant, and all associated reclaimed water and groundwater supply pipelines. Existing New Rapid Infiltration Basins Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant Expansion Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Existing Chlorination/ Dechlorination/ Post-Aeration Potential Cypress Bridge Wellfield Expansion New Storage Tank To Regional System New Storage Tank To Hillsborough Bay or Reuse Customers Figure 11-3 Diagram of the Rapid Infiltration Basin Concept Tampa Bay Water Page 11-35

189 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Table 11-3 Rapid Infiltration Basin Configuration Components Supply Treatment Transmission Property 5 Million Gallon Reclaimed Water Above Ground Storage Tank 22 Million Gallon per Day Rapid Infiltration Basin System 10, 2.5 Million Gallon per Day Additional Groundwater Production Wells 20 Million Gallon per Day Annual Average Yield 22 Million Gallon per Day Reclaimed Water High Service Pump Station 20 Million Gallon per Day Expansion of Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant 5 Million Gallon Above Ground Finished Water Storage Tank 19.5 Miles of 36- inch Reclaimed Water Transmission Main 3.4 Miles of 36-inch Raw Water from New Wells to Cypress Creek Water Treatment Plant 400 acres of property for Rapid infiltration basin construction 36, 0.5 acre monitoring well easements 10.5 acres of pipeline easements 10, 1-acre well sites Yield - The estimated potable water yield for this project concept is 20 million gallons per day on an annual average basis pending more detailed site specific analysis. In order to achieve a net benefit to the Floridan aquifer system potentiometric surface, it is assumed that 22 million gallons per day of highly treated reclaimed water would be required for recharge. The actual quantities would be dependent on actual site and subsurface geology and the availability of reclaimed water for the project. Water Quality The existing treatment processes at Tampa s Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant includes preliminary treatment, secondary treatment, enhanced biological nitrogen removal, postaeration, chlorine disinfection, and dechlorination. Effluent is either received by Hillsborough Bay or delivered to reuse customers within the City or parts of Hillsborough County. This treatment is appropriate for aquifer recharge via rapid infiltration basins; however aquifer recharge wells would require additional treatment. Aquifer Recharge Wells - Advanced treatment technologies such as ultraviolet disinfection, microand/or ultrafiltration, and reverse osmosis could be required to treat the reclaimed supply for injection into the Avon park formation of the Upper Floridan aquifer. Evaluations by other governmental Tampa Bay Water Page 11-36

190 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources agencies on the use of aquifer recharge wells for reclaimed water are currently being conducted. Statewide discussions about facilitating the use of reclaimed water are also underway. In the feasibility phase of planning, the results of these activities and further coordination with the permitting agencies to understand the exact treatment level required should be conducted. Additionally, in order to prevent mobilizing arsenic, reclaimed water would need to be non-oxidizing and maintain a near neutral ph. This would require alkalinity adjustment, vacuum dissolved oxygen removal, and ultraviolet disinfection. The filtration and reverse osmosis treatment processes would create a waste concentrate stream, which would require disposal. For this analysis, it is assumed that obtaining an NPDES permit to discharge this to Tampa Bay would be difficult, and the waste stream would be discharged to the headworks of the Howard F. Curren Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant. This permitting aspect of the project would need to be further evaluated in the feasibility phase. These assumptions would also need to be confirmed through detailed effluent quality analysis and pilot treatment tests to verify actual treatment requirements and to ensure none of the suggested activities adversely affect plant operations. Rapid Infiltration Basins - The current assumption for use of rapid infiltration basins assumes that no additional treatment of the reclaimed water currently produced at the Howard F. Curren plant would be required. This assumption is based upon the requirements as set forth in Rule of the Florida Administrative Code. The Rule states that for rapid-rate land application systems, reclaimed water needs to have secondary wastewater treatment and basic disinfection. Additional requirements for nitrate levels are not expected to be problematic due the existing enhanced biological nitrogen removal capabilities at the plant. The treatment requirements would need to be verified with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Property Considerations Potential areas best suited for aquifer recharge wells and rapid infiltration basins were identified by MWH using a screening process based on physical, environmental, hydrogeological, regulatory and land use attributes. This screening process excluded areas unsuitable and/or unavailable for aquifer recharge. The criteria that were used in the screening to exclude unsuitable land parcels are listed below. Aquifer Recharge Well Threshold Screening Criteria: Parcels less than 5 Acres Wellhead Protection Areas Water and Wetlands Environmental Lands Acquisition and Protection Program Property Tampa Bay Water Page 11-37

191 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Environmental Resource Permit Conservation Easements Florida State Parks Total Dissolved Solids in the Avon Park Formation less than 500 mg/l Land parcels that were less than 5 acres in size were excluded from the potential aquifer recharge well sites because they would not provide adequate distance from the wellheads to adjacent property boundaries to limit potential effects on other groundwater users. A five mile radius from existing Tampa Bay Water public supply wells was also considered when locating potential indirect aquifer recharge facilities, to improve the amount of additional groundwater that could be developed. At least 11, 5-acre sites would be needed for the aquifer recharge wells. In addition, the project would require pipeline easements, and additional property for the advanced treatment to meet regulatory standards for injection into the aquifer. To be conservative, ten, 1-acre parcels are considered in the cost estimate for new groundwater supply wells, a 20 acre site for a new groundwater treatment facility and the associated pipeline easements for the raw and finished water piping would also be needed. The criteria that were used in the screening to exclude unsuitable areas are listed below. Rapid Infiltration Basins Threshold Screening Criteria: Parcels less than 10 Acres Wellhead Protection Areas Water and Wetlands Environmental Lands Acquisition and Protection Program Property Environmental Resource Permit Conservation Easements Florida State Parks Unfavorable Hydrogeologic Conditions Land parcels that were less than 10 acres in size were excluded from the potential rapid infiltration basin sites because the acquisition of the required number of small parcels would be complex, time consuming and costly. Approximately 400 acres would be needed for the rapid infiltration basins. In addition, the project would require pipeline easements, and potentially 10, 1-acre parcels would be needed for new groundwater supply wells. The use of existing wells and infrastructure could be considered further in the feasibility phase for use and potentially lower infrastructure and land acquisition needs. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-38

192 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources Ease of Permitting Permits would be required from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for the construction of enhanced treatment process required for the aquifer recharge wells or rapid infiltration basins, the new supply wells, and the groundwater treatment for the resulting groundwater supply and associated pipelines. An Underground Injection Control permit for aquifer recharge wells would require the source water to meet primary and secondary drinking water standard per of the Florida Administrative Code. The concept being evaluated assumes that the Avon Park Aquifer where the aquifer recharge wells are injecting reclaimed supply has total dissolved solids of greater than 500 mg/l; therefore, the requirements for extended pilot testing, mutagenicity testing and review by national experts per of the Florida Administrative Code would not be required. In some cases, aquifer recharge wells may have a zone of discharge (i.e. water quality criteria exemption) associated with them for secondary drinking water standard components. Modeling and pilot testing would need to demonstrate that lateral and upward migration of recharged water does not exceed criteria beyond the zone of discharge. The existing aquifer would need to be sufficiently characterized for total dissolved solids and any secondary water quality exemptions. Only a few reclaimed water injection wells have been pilot tested, permitted, constructed and operated to recharge the aquifer to date. These include installations in Texas, Arizona, California, Australia and one well in Gainesville, Florida. Not surprisingly, these project parameters are very site-specific. Rules through , FAC, provide regulations pertaining to constructing and operating rapid infiltration basins. Reclaimed water would be required to meet secondary treatment standards. Rapid infiltration basins are widely used for treated wastewater disposal in central Florida and in Pasco County. Sufficient monitoring would need to be in place to make sure that nitrate levels do no exceed 10 milligrams per liter at the one of the basins. In addition, the following setbacks are required: 500 feet to potable water supply wells 200 feet to non-potable water supply wells 100 feet to Class I and II surface waters 100 feet to buildings that are not part of the treatment facility, utilities system, or municipal operations; or to the site property line Located outside of wellhead protection zones (as per local ordinances) Tampa Bay Water Page 11-39

193 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources A new water use permit or an increase to the existing water use permit(s) would be needed for the new wellfield supply. Additional, more refined modeling and analysis would be needed to verify the net benefit provided by the aquifer recharge. The Southwest Florida Water Management District allows for recharging the aquifer and withdrawing water such that there remains a net positive benefit to the Floridan aquifer potentiometric surface at least 10% greater than the impact of the potential withdrawal. In addition, a minimum of 1 year of pilot testing would be required to confirm the modeling results. Cost Effectiveness Planning-level cost estimates prepared for the two evaluated concept configurations are presented below. These costs do not include any potential agreement related cost aspects associated with use of the reclaimed water supply from the City. Aquifer Recharge Wells Capital Cost: $ 20.3 million per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 1.96 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 5.58 per 1,000 gallons Rapid Infiltration Basins Capital Cost: $ 11.7 million per million gallons per day Operation and Maintenance Costs: $ 0.33 per 1,000 gallons Total Cost: $ 2.41 per 1,000 gallons Aquifer recharge is included in the list of beneficial uses of reclaimed water instituted in Florida law to encourage water conservation. Recent efforts to further investigate the use of reclaimed water for aquifer recharge include cooperative funding initiative projects submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management District for various concepts. The District has performed and co-funded several studies, and could potentially fund aquifer recharge projects. Environmental Stewardship Energy consumption for this project is expected to be moderate to high. The advanced treatment and transmission of reclaimed water creates greater energy demands but will be variable depending on what Tampa Bay Water Page 11-40

194 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources type of treatment processes that are included. Appropriate treatment will need to be considered to assure that the receiving aquifer does not degrade over time. Public input and participation in the planning process would be critical in furthering the development of this potential project concept. All aspects associated with recharging a potable use aquifer with reclaimed water would need to be discussed along with the benefits of developing a safe method for creating a new groundwater resource through alternative means. Future Recommendations The following next steps are recommended: Work with the City of Tampa (and other potential reclaimed water providers if any) to understand the availability of reclaimed water and any agreement requirements for its use. Continue to track and monitor the legislative process for any new developments that relate to applying reclaimed water to aquifer recharge wells and the rapid infiltration basins, and the development of groundwater supply credits from aquifer recharge activities. Work with regulatory agencies to further define specific regulatory and treatment requirements for the project concepts. Monitor the progress of other municipalities that work to implement aquifer recharge, especially within Tampa Bay Water s service area to understand how their work might better define project requirements. Evaluate whether existing Tampa Bay Water infrastructure could be used for the groundwater benefit portion of the project or verify that additional infrastructure is required. Evaluate site specific opportunities for additional infrastructure siting if determined to be necessary. Perform technical analyses as outlined in this project overview. This includes such things as effluent quality analysis, aquifer characterization, pilot treatment testing, refined modeling, and net benefits confirmation. Explore opportunities to obtain State and Federal grant funding. Conduct public involvement program activities with the general public and interested stakeholder groups Explore opportunities to obtain State and Federal grant funding. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-41

195 Section 11 Future Water Supply Sources References The following documents were reviewed to prepare this project concept development. Technical Memorandum Predictive Groundwater Modeling Simulations for Proposed Hydraulic Barriers to Saltwater Intrusion (August 2004) by HydroGeologic, Inc. Indirect Potable Reuse and Aquifer Injection of Reclaimed Water (2001) by PB Water a Division of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. Feasibility of Using Reclaimed Water for Aquifer Recharge (2009) by MWH. Surface & Recharge Water Projects Final Report (2013) by MWH. Tampa Bay Water Page 11-42

196 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs A. Interlocal Agreement Requirements for Water Supply Planning The Interlocal Agreement requires that Tampa Bay Water actively monitor the members demands and the permitted capacity of Tampa Bay Water facilities as outlined below C. The General Manager shall actively monitor the quantity of Quality Water delivered to Member Governments and the aggregate permitted capacity of the Authority s facilities C.(1). If a Member Government demand exceeds the Authority s permitted capacity by 75% during any twelve-month period, the Authority shall initiate a preparation of Primary Environmental Permit applications necessary to ensure adequate supply C.(02). If Member Government demand exceeds the Authority s permitted capacity by 85% during any twelve-month period, the General Manager shall report to the Board and recommend that the Authority file Primary Environmental Permit applications to ensure adequate supply. The Authority shall file any such applications expeditiously Production Failure. Defined as when actual delivery by the Authority during any 12 month period to the Member Governments exceeds 94% of the aggregate permitted capacity. If the Authority has submitted a primary environmental permit and entered into final design and bid construction of the facilities, the additional capacity in the permit application can be included in the aggregate permitted capacity. Over the past 15 years, Tampa Bay Water actively sought permits and built its alternative water supply projects; as such these requirements were met for the prior Master Water Plan Updates. The timing of the agency s planning program (including choosing projects and preparing primary environmental permits) was guided by the commitments made with the Water Management District to reduce groundwater production and bring on new supply sources. With these commitments completed, Tampa Bay Water will not need to develop new water supply sources as frequently. The Interlocal Agreement requirements must now be monitored to determine the timing of preparation and submittal of future permit applications. One challenge associated with this is that the water use permits for Tampa Bay Water s surface water supplies are based on river flows and do not have a set capacity. This means there is no total aggregate water use permit yardstick against which demands in any twelve month period can be judged. To honor the intent of the Interlocal Agreement requirements, the agency must thus consider the available quantity of the agency s surface water supplies in evaluating its total capacity. Water demands and the quantity of available surface water supply can vary greatly between wet to Tampa Bay Water Page 12-1

197 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs normal rainfall years versus drought years and can also be different intra-annually due to expected seasonal rainfall patterns. Preparing and submitting water use permits is costly and resource intensive; it would be unwise to undertake the activity based on the agency s water demands versus capacity during expected seasonal dry periods. The agency could conceivably begin preparing water use permit applications each spring dry season and no longer need to do so each summer rainy season. The same is true of significant drought events which are likely to happen several times during long hydrologic periods (e.g., 100 years). It is unlikely that a water use permit quantity based on demands versus supply in a 1 in 100 or even a 1 in 25 year drought event could be obtained from the Water Management District as the need for additional water supply could not be demonstrated in most years. To address drought periods, Tampa Bay Water implements its Water Shortage Mitigation Plan. Tampa Bay Water monitors climatic and water supply conditions and provides this information to the member governments and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Section 2.09 (B) of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement states that Master Water Plan updates will include an evaluation of present and future sources of water and treatment requirements for those sources in terms of capacity, reliability and economy. This section of the Long-term Water Supply Plan addresses the evaluation of existing and future sources for capacity and reliability. B. Introduction The ability of a water supply system to operate satisfactorily under a wide range of possible future demands and hydrologic conditions is an important system characteristic, Hashimoto et al. (1982). Tampa Bay Water has developed a system-wide model which allows the entire regional supply and delivery system to be analyzed. Quantifying the performance of the regional system under varying demand and weather conditions is accomplished through the use of this simulation model. In the regional system model, operational rules and constraints for the groundwater facilities and desalination plant are combined with the river flow simulations and ESWS operational models. Flows through the regional system and deliveries at points of connection are simulated on a daily basis. Member government demands, at the various points of connection, are based on the Agency s long-term demand forecasting models (see Section 5). Figure 12-1 is a schematic of the regional system model. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-2

198 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Figure 12-1: Regional System Model This section of the Long-Term Water Supply Plan provides an overview of the System-Wide performance evaluation which accesses the reliability of the existing Regional Water Supply System and quantifies future water supply development needs. Additional information regarding model setup and analytical framework can be found in Tampa Bay Water (2012). Information provided in this section meets the requirements set forth in Section 2.09 B of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement to evaluate the capacity and reliability of existing and future water sources. C. Regional System Performance Evaluation Measures In evaluating water resource systems, three performance criteria have been widely adopted. Introduced by Hashimoto et al. (1982), the three measures are Reliability, Resilience, and Vulnerability (RRV) and they have gained popularity in recent years (for example, see Fowler et al., (2003) and Sandoval-Solis et al. (2011)). Each criterion assesses different aspects of a water resources system and complements the others. In conducting this approach, a definition of satisfactory and unsatisfactory states is developed for the regional system and then the occurrences of satisfactory and unsatisfactory states are quantified. For this analysis, unsatisfactory periods are defined as those Tampa Bay Water Page 12-3

199 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs periods when regional system demand can no longer be met while maintaining compliance with water use permits. Unmet demand is further defined for this analysis as not meeting the total regional demand for at least one month out of a year, then this year is counted as an unsatisfactory event. A secondary definition for unsatisfactory periods is when the regional reservoir stage drops below 85 feet and then recovers to 100 feet, at 100 feet the system returns to a satisfactory state. This analysis results in those times when regional demand cannot be met due to hydrologic drought conditions and it also identifies when the regional supply system has met is sustainable capacity even under normal hydrologic conditions. As noted, the performance of the Agency s regional system is quantified using three measures: reliability, resiliency and vulnerability, which are explained here. RELIABILITY: the probability of occurrence of satisfactory states (1 reliability = probability of experiencing unsatisfactory states). RESILIENCY: the probability of recovering from unsatisfactory states which includes the probable duration of unsatisfactory states (greater resiliency implies shorter expected durations of unsatisfactory conditions). VULNERABILITY: the consequences of underperformance during unsatisfactory situations. Vulnerability can be measured in several different ways including maximum extent or maximum duration for unsatisfactory periods and, for the most likely event, extent and duration of unsatisfactory periods. Reliability is concerned with the frequency or probability of success of the system by simply counting how often (i.e., number of days, months or years depending on the time scale of the analysis) the system was in satisfactory states compared to the simulation length, T. Reliability is determined without evaluating the statistics of unsatisfactory states (e.g., mean or variance of the unsatisfactory states). It simply estimates how many times within the total simulation the system was in a satisfactory state (see Equation (2) below). Resiliency measures how quickly the system rebounds on average from being in an unsatisfactory state. This is done by counting the number of rebounds (transition from unsatisfactory to satisfactory state) over the total amount of time the system was in an unsatisfactory state. Another way of expressing resiliency is to determine the duration of unsatisfactory states, given that an unsatisfactory event has occurred. The expected length of time (duration) that the system remains in an unsatisfactory state is the inverse of the resiliency value (see Equation (4) below). Vulnerability measures the consequences of unsatisfactory events. For Tampa Bay Water s regional supply system, consequences are expressed in terms of pumping more than water use permits allow or the loss of adequate reservoir storage. Generally, the emphasis is not on how long the Tampa Bay Water Page 12-4

200 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs unsatisfactory event persists, but rather the total magnitude of the deficit (Hashimoto et al., 1982). Vulnerability may be expressed in a number of ways: The average (over all events) of the maximum deficits of unsatisfactory events (Hashimoto et al., 1982) 1) The average cumulative deficit over a continuous unsatisfactory duration (Loucks, 1997; Sandoval- Solis et al., 2011) 2) The probability of exceeding a certain deficit threshold (Mendoza et al., 1997) 3) The single maximum deficit (Fowler et al., 2003) 4) A combination of maximum magnitude of deficit and/or a maximum duration of deficits (Loucks, 1997). Application of these methods to Tampa Bay Water system is reported in Adams (2012). For the purpose of this study, the reliability metrics were calculated over all realizations. Once performance measure definitions are selected, a method must be chosen for analyzing the results across multiple events. One approach is to develop metrics that are based on all simulated events, taken as a single set. This is a natural approach to apply when only a single time series is used to define the metric Hashimoto et al., (1982). Another approach is to aggregate the performance measure values by realization and then calculate ensemble metrics across realizations (e.g., McMahon et al., (2005). This approach makes sense when there are multiple realizations, but it sacrifices some valuable detail. Loss of detail can be avoided by aggregating values per realization (as in McMahon et al., (2005)), and then analyzing cumulative distributions instead of calculating ensemble statistics. The performance measures are time-based, which means that the measure may change with the length of record if the simulation period selected is not of sufficient length. Intuitatively, one would expect a more extreme event in terms of deficits and duration as the simulation time span increased. Given that the input time series of random variables were generated based on the 100-year historical records, it is not anticipated that the simulation time span affects resulting distributions of the performance measures. Mathematically, let X t(i), t = 1 T, be a simulated time series of a parameter of interest, such as supply sources, used as an indicator of a system s performance when compared with a criterion, C t(i), such as system demand for the i th realization. The comparison would then indicate the system being in either satisfactory, S, or unsatisfactory, U, states. Defining a state variable Z, Where, Tampa Bay Water Page 12-5

201 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Z t(i) = { 1, X t(i)ε S 0, X t(i) ε U, (1) Then the level of service or the policy level that the system is in satisfactory state is defined as C P(i) = T t=1 Z t(i) T, (2) where C P(i) is policy level criterion. For example, a 90% C P(i) value indicates that the system is in satisfactory state (meet demand) 90% of the time for the i th realization. Furthermore, Let W (i) be an indicator for the system meeting a predefined policy level of service p such that W (i) = { 1, if C p(i) p 0, otherwise (3) Then the system reliability over all realization to meet policy level of service p is given by C R(p) = N i=1 W (i) N, (4) where N is the total number of realizations. Performance indicators Indicators of system performance were selected to quantify the metrics of system performance. The three indicators used for evaluating Tampa Bay Water s regional system are: total regional demand, reservoir stage and Consolidated Wellfield pumpage. Consolidated Wellfield pumpage is the total of the 11 wellfields under the Consolidated Water Use Permit. Reservoir stage is directly linked to reservoir storage and reservoir storage is a primary measure of the reliability of the enhanced surface water system. Behavior of these indicators is simulated and the results analyzed against a criterion. In addition to these primary indicators, there are many other model outputs that can be evaluated. These performance indicators determine when the system is in a satisfactory state or unsatisfactory state. C1. System-Wide Operational Rules, Protocols, and Decision Criteria Prior to developing the regional system model, Agency staff documented operational rules, protocols and decision criteria used in the day-to-day operation of the regional supply and delivery system. Section 2 provides narrative descriptions of all components of the regional system and various pumping capacities. Section 7 describes the various source water and treatment facility permits. Operating protocols and rules have been defined by facility and not by components within a facility. The operating rules and protocols assume that ordinary maintenance and repair occur and account for pumps and motors being out of service. The role of the Agency s Renewal and Tampa Bay Water Page 12-6

202 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Replacement program is to ensure that a facility can meet the sustainable and peak day capacities that have been defined for each facility (see Table 12-1). A. REGIONAL SYSTEM OPERATING CAPACITIES One of the critical aspects of evaluating and quantifying regional system performance is determining appropriate operating capacities for our facilities. Several pumping capacities have been defined for all the major facilities within the current regional system. The pumping capacities are grouped into three areas: Rated (which includes design or permitted), minimum, and sustainable operating capacities. Sustainable operating capacities are further defined as peak day and greater than five days. Rated capacity, a term used by regulatory agencies in the issuance of drinking water permits, is based on the design treatment capacity of the facility and successful completion of performance testing which has demonstrated the capabilities of the facility. The rated capacity of Tampa Bay Water s facilities is part of a Drinking Water Permit issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation under criteria contained in Rule Florida Administrative Code (FAC). This rated capacity is the permitted maximum-day capacity or permitted peak operating capacity of the facility. The permitted plant operating capacity shall not be greater than the design treatment capacity. The rated or permitted capacity of a drinking water facility does not imply or guarantee the use of raw source waters which are permitted by a water management district. The term permitted capacity also refers to a water use permit limit on source withdrawal. Tampa Bay Water must obtain water use permits from the Southwest Florida Water Management District pursuant to rule 40D-2 FAC. Water use permits determine how much source water is available for use. Tampa Bay Water has seven water use permits which define how much water can be withdrawn: five permits are for groundwater sources and two are for surface water sources. Tampa Bay Water also has a water use permit to augment the City of Tampa s Hillsborough River Reservoir from the Tampa Bypass Canal. All groundwater permits and the augmentation permit provide 12- month running average limits on withdrawal quantities. The surface water permits have flow-based withdrawal limitations. Tampa Bay Water s Desalination Plant is not required to have a water use permit. The term Rated Capacity used in this evaluation is based on permitted capacity for facilities that require either a Drinking Water Permit or Water Use Permit and is based on design capacity for facilities that are not required to obtain a permit. Rated capacity is the maximum amount of water the facility can handle. Since Tampa Bay Water has both source water permitted capacities and treatment facility permitted capacities, which are based on different rules, and the water use permits can limit the amount of water available for treatment at a facility, adding up the Agency s permitted Tampa Bay Water Page 12-7

203 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs capacities incorrectly quantifies the production capability of the Regional System. In addition to the permitted or sustainable treatment capacity of the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant, production from the ESWS components is dependent upon actual surface water flow. The only way to assess the reliability of surface water is through a stochastic analysis which quantifies a range of flows and probabilities of occurrence. Tampa Bay Water and its consultant Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. have developed stochastic rainfall/river flow simulation models to support the Regional System performance evaluation. Given the uncertainty of rainfall and surface water availability, it is possible that the sustainable production capacity from the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant is less than the sustainable treatment capacity of 90 mgd. A result of this Regional System performance evaluation is to define the sustainable production capacity of the regional system (i.e., surface water production, desalination facility production, and groundwater production) for use in determining when new water supplies are needed. The minimum operational capacity is the lowest amount of water that a facility can pump or treat during a 24-hour period. When there is insufficient source water to meet the minimum operational flow requirements or the need for the water reduces below the pumping minimum, then the facility is taken out of service. The facility is returned to service when either the demand increases or sufficient source water returns to maintain production at or above operational minimum rates. Operational minimum capacities are determined based on design, hydraulic limitations, and operational criteria. For this system performance evaluation, the five-day sustainable operating capacity is used because this capacity represents the amount of water that can move through a facility dependably and meet demands at the daily time scale. Sustainable operating capacity is based on performance and operational experience. Peak day sustainable capacities are assumed available to meet specific events but these capacities are not included in this analysis since no operating rules exist which define all situations where a peak day capacity would be used. Factors considered in determining sustainable capacity include: chemical feed systems, facility hydraulics, one pump out of service, normal maintenance activities, water quality, compliance with drinking water permit conditions, and industry standards. Sustainable operating capacity assumes that source water is available. In addition to pumping capacities, the Agency also has defined two hydraulic operating modes for the regional system: normal and bypass. Normal mode, which is assumed for the regional system performance evaluation, uses pumping capacities at the regional High Service Pumping Station and the Cypress Creek WTP to distribute potable water through the regional delivery system. In bypass mode, potable water flows around the Cypress Creek WTP. Bypass mode is planned primarily for emergency use. Since system hydraulics change under these two operating modes, some five-day and peak day sustainable capacities change. A summary of the pumping capacities by facility is provided on Table Tampa Bay Water Page 12-8

204 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Table 12-1 Regional System Operating Capacities Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS WUP Design Minimum Peak Day > 5 Days Sustainable Capacity Considerations Wellfields mgd mgd mgd mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd A B C D E F G Brandon Urban Dispersed 9.24 / x x x x Carrolwood Wells x x x Cosme/Odessa WF CWUP x x x Cross Bar WF CWUP x x x x Cypress Bridge WF CWUP x Cypress Creek WF CWUP x x Eagles Wells x x Eldridge Wilde WF CWUP x x x x Morris Bridge WF CWUP x x x x x North Pasco WF CWUP x NW Hillsborough WF CWUP x x x 33 / SC Hillsborough WF x x x x Section 21 WF (NW7) CWUP x x x South Pasco WF CWUP x x x x Starkey WF CWUP x x x x Rated Capacity SW Pump Station/Supply mgd mgd mgd mgd Sustainable Capacity PWS WUP Design Minimum Peak Day > 5 Days Normal, Bypass, Normal, mgd mgd mgd Sustainable Capacity Considerations Bypass, mgd A B C D E F G Alafia River Pump Station x x x x x Cypress Creek 55 psig x x Cypress Creek 65 psig x x Harney Pump Station x x Morris Bridge PS x x x x Reg Repump (Alafia 52 mgd) x x x Reg Repump (Alafia Off) high head x x x Reg Repump (Alafia Off) low head x x x Reg Repump (SCH PS On) x x x Reservoir PS Influent x x x x Reservoir Effluent PS /Gravity limit / x x x x x x Regional HSPS 65 psig) x x x Reservoir PS 52 mgd) x x x Reservoir PS (Alafia Off) x x x SCH Booster to Reservoir x x x SCH Booster from Resr (PS off) x x x x SCHI Booster from Resr. (PS on) x x x TBC Pump Station - High Head x x x x TBC Pump Station - Low Head x x x x Tampa Bay Water Page 12-9

205 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Permit Design Minimum Peak Day > 5 Days Sustainable Capacity Considerations Tampa Bay Water WTP's mgd mgd mgd mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd A B C D E F G Bud 5 WTP x x x x Bud 7 WTP x x x Cypress Creek WTP (1) x x x x Lake Bridge WTP/Wellfield Chloramination x x x Keller H2S WTP x x x x x x Lake Bridge WTP Booster PS x Lithia Ozone WTP x x x x x Morris Bridge WTP x x x x x Regional SWTP x x Regional Desal 90 Degree x x x x Regional Desal 90 Degree x x x x South Pasco WTP x x x x x Rated Capacity Member Government WTP's mgd mgd mgd mgd Sustainable Capacity PWS Permit Design Minimum Peak Day > 5 Days Normal, Bypass, Normal, mgd mgd mgd Sustainable Capacity Considerations Bypass, mgd A B C D E F G Central Hillsborough WTP x Cosme WTP x Lake Park WTP x Lithia WTP x Little Road WTP Maytum WTP x NW Hillsborough WTP x Tampa Bay Water Page 12-10

206 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Rated Capacity Sustainable Capacity PWS Permit Design Minimum Peak Day > 5 Days Sustainable Capacity Considerations Member Interties mgd mgd mgd mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd Normal, mgd Bypass, mgd A B C D E F G Cosme TM to St. Pete x City of Tampa to Reg. Facility (301) x Maytum to Little Road (Regional) x Odessa Pump Station x Regional to COT (Morris Bridge) x Regional to COT (RFS) Regional to Lithia x x x Regional to Maytum x Regional to NW Hills WTP x Regional to Pinellas South Pasco Meter Pit x Tampa-Hillsborough Interconnect x x x x US 41 Pump Station x 1. The indicated machine capacity of the Cypress Creek WTP is based on the machine capacity of the two wellfields that provide supply to the Cypress Creek WTP. The actual machine capacity of the high service pumps at the Cypress Creek WTP is greater than 83 mgd. 2. CWUP - Permit limit control by Consolidated Water Use Permit for 11 Regional Wellfields. Sustainable Capacity Considerations A = hydraulic capacity limitations (venturi meter size, pipeline, drawdown, etc.) B = at least one pump and motor out of service C = process control (cleaning, chemical, WQ, production, etc.) D = sustainable capacity impacted by permit constraints E = operational control limitations F = requires a performance test or demonstration G = water quality considerations OPERATING MODE Normal Mode is High Pressure in the NCHI and BUD TM's < 85 psig Bypass Mode is High Pressure in the NCHI and BUD TM's > 85 psig C2. Groundwater System Operating Rules The Agency has five groundwater water use permits which limit the amount of source water that can be withdrawn during running 12-month periods. The 11 wellfields under the Consolidated Water Use Permit (CWUP) have a combined withdrawal limit of 90 mgd on a 12-month running average basis. However, during any 12-month period production from each individual wellfield can vary based on the number of active wells, well pumping capacity, and environmental conditions. The current regional system performance evaluation does not include the optimized well schedule currently performed on a weekly basis with the OROP software. Determining future water supply quantity and timing needs is not dependent on an optimized well rotation schedule. Table 12-2 identifies wellfield operating priorities including those facilities that must remain on line. Additional operating rules are: Tampa Bay Water Page 12-11

207 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs 1. Under normal hydrologic conditions, maintain at least a total of 40 mgd, on a weekly basis, from the following four wellfields; Morris Bridge, Cypress Bridge, Cypress Creek and Cross Bar Ranch. 2. Maintain the surface water/groundwater blend ratio at the Cypress Creek WTP effluent between 45 and 50 percent. The following equation is used to determine surface water percentage at the Cypress Creek WTP effluent: a. Percent SW = (SWTP Eff delivery to Litha WTP Delivery to CHPOC + Desal Eff COT MBR POC LBWTP) / (SWTP Eff + Desal Eff + BUD&SCH to Regional Site + Morris Bridge Wellfield + Cypress Bridge Wellfield + Cypress Creek Wellfield + Cross Bar Ranch Wellfield) Table 12-2: Groundwater Supplies Operating Priorities Group Wellfield Normal Operational Mode Priority Operational Rank Seasonal Offline Days Lead Time Out of Service Days Lead Time Return to Service Days Wellfield Bypass Priority Operational Operational Mode Rank Seasonal Offline Days Lead Time Out of Service Days Cypress Creek Seasonal Cypress Creek Always On 1 na na na Cypress Bridge Always On 1 na na na Cypress Bridge Seasonal Cross Bar Ranch Seasonal Cross Bar Ranch Always On 2 na na na Morris Bridge Always On 2 na na na Morris Bridge Seasonal South Pasco Seasonal South Pasco Seasonal Cosme-Odessa Seasonal Cosme-Odessa Seasonal Eagles Wells Seasonal Eagles Wells Seasonal Section 21 Seasonal Section 21 Seasonal Northwest Hills. Seasonal Northwest Hills. Seasonal Carrollwood Seasonal Carrollwood Seasonal Lead Time Return to Service Days 4 Eldridge-Wilde Seasonal Eldridge-Wilde Seasonal Starkey Seasonal Starkey Seasonal North Pasco Seasonal North Pasco Seasonal BUD wells Always On 1 na na na BUD wells Always On 1 na na na 7 South-Central Hills Always On 1 na na na South-Central Hills Always On 1 na na na C3. Tampa Bay Desalination Plant Operating Rules Table 12-3a shows the range of production rates based on seasonal intake water temperatures and the number of trains in operation at the Tampa Bay Desalination Plant. This is based on actual operating data at the desalination plant from October 2007 through April 2011 as shown in Table 12-3b. Specific operating rules are: 1. When operating the Desalination plant for LESS THAN 12 Months per year, the following are preferred months of use: February, March, April, May, June, September, October, November, and December. January is not preferred due to water temperatures. July and August are not preferred due to low regional water demands. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-12

208 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs 2. If the desalination plant is not operating year round (365 days) and the plant is in hot standby, then plan for a 30-day lead time to bring plant up to at least three-train sustained production. Hot standby means that water is circulating through the plant to keep pumps running and membranes wet. 3. If the desalination is going into hot stand-by then allow for 7 to 10 days to take plant off line. 4. When intake water temperatures drop below 80 degrees, operation of two trains is not sustainable because RO train production rates drop below the 8 mgd plant operating minimum. 5. Normal operating mode is 3 trains. The peak normal mode will be 5 trains. Going from 3 trains to 5 trains should happen within 24 hours. The main driver will be chemical inventory. Under the 3 to 5 train normal operating protocol, one train is expected to be down for cleaning and one train down for maintenance. 6. Do not plan on sustaining a 6-train or 7-train operation for an entire month. 6-train or 7- train production can be used to meet a high demand period of up to three weeks. Once in a 6-train or 7-train mode, the plant must remain in this mode for at least two weeks. Once out of a 6-train or 7-train mode, at least two weeks must be allowed before returning the plant to a 6-train or 7-train mode. 7. Plant will remain in hot standby status for no more than 60 consecutive days. 8. Plant will operate for a minimum of 90 days before returning to hot stand-by status. Table 12-3a: Tampa Bay Desalination Plant Production Rates No. of trains in service 2 Trains 3 Trains 4 Trains 5 Trains 6 Trains 7 Trains Intake Water Production Rate, Temperature Range, F o MGD Production Rate, MGD Production Rate, MGD Production Rate, MGD Production Rate, MGD Production Rate, MGD 65 to to to to to to to to Table 12-3b: Tampa Bay Desalination Plant Seasonal Intake Water Temperature and TDS Tampa Bay Water Page 12-13

209 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Month Intake TDS, mg/l Intake Water Temperature, F o Oct 07 to April 11 Monthly Average Minimum Oct 07 to April 11 Monthly Average Maximum Oct 07 to April 11 Monthly Average Minimum Oct 07 to April 11 Monthly Average Maximum Comments Oct 26,857 30, Cooling Water Pump In service Nov 28,470 31, Dec 28,493 32, Jan 28,430 32, Day shutdown - Plant Maintenance Feb 26,965 32, Mar 26,214 32, Apr 24,778 33, May 25,750 34, Cooling Water Pump In service Jun 27,571 33, Cooling Water Pump In service Cooling Water Pump In service and 7 Day Jul 27,444 31, Shutdown - Plant Maintenance Aug 26,111 27, Cooling Water Pump In service Sept 25,500 29, Cooling Water Pump In service C4. Regional Surface Water System Operating Rules Operating rules for the surface water treatment plant include: 1. Normal minimum operation is one train in service with one train standby. Absolute minimum plant production is 20 mgd. Baseload production is 40 mgd when source water is either not the limiting factor or reservoir stage is above 90 feet. 2. Surface Water Supply Priorities a. Tampa Bypass Canal Lower Pool always first withdrawal supply. b. Tampa Bypass Canal Middle Pool when S-161 diversion is greater than 100 mgd, Middle Pool becomes second withdrawal supply to balance withdrawals from Middle Pool and Lower Pool to meet total allowable Tampa Bypass Canal withdrawals. c. Alafia River third priority withdrawal supply and Alafia River withdrawal s first priority use is to replace storage in the regional reservoir. d. Regional Reservoir fourth priority use if river flows are available. Priority of regional reservoir storage increases as river flows decrease. Flow from the Regional Reservoir can be pumped or can flow by gravity to the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant. The minimum pumping rate from the Off-stream Reservoir Pumping Station is 40 mgd. If less than 40 mgd of stored water from the Regional Reservoir is needed, the pumping station will be taken offline and flow will be gravity-fed to the Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-14

210 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs C5. Additional Operating Criteria Tampa Bay Water and its consultant Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. developed an operational model for the Hillsborough River/Tampa Bypass Canal System. Documentation of this effort is provided in Hazen and Sawyer This operational model includes simulated flows in the Hillsborough River coupled with water routing or operational rules that capture both the City of Tampa and Tampa Bay Water s withdrawals from the Hillsborough River and Tampa Bypass Canal as well as flow over the Hillsborough River Dam and structures at the Tampa Bypass Canal. During the development of this model, City of Tampa staff provided input regarding operational rules used by the City to guide releases from the Hillsborough River Dam, activation of the water storage into the City s aquifer recharge wells and water recovered from these wells, and when Harney augmentation is started and stopped. The model does not include flood routing rules used by the water management district. The main reason is during these high flow times, Tampa Bay Water permitted diversions from the Hillsborough River or withdrawals from the Tampa Bypass Canal are not flow limited. All the operational and permitting rules that could be quantified were included in the model and used to simulate flows and diversions. The results of this operational rule include not only the amount of water available for Tampa Bay Water to withdraw from the Tampa Bypass Canal but also the amount of self-supply for the City of Tampa. The System-wide performance evaluation used this simulated self-supply for City of Tampa instead of assuming a fixed amount. The performance evaluation assumes that the City will implement its operational rules as expressed in this Hillsborough River/Tampa Bypass Canal operational model. This assumption may indicate that the City of Tampa can meet a higher quantity of self-supply than has been historically demonstrated. At this time no uncertainty analysis involving the City s operational rules has been performed. As additional information becomes available or changes in operational rules occur, updates to this operational model will be made. Additional information and details of the operating rules can be found in Hazen and Sawyer, D. Regional System Performance Evaluation D1. Regional Long-term Demand Projections Section 5 of the Long-term Water Supply Plan describes Tampa Bay Water s Long-term Demand forecasting system. For the Regional System Performance Evaluation, the demand forecasting methodology was expanded to generate a probabilistic demand forecast through the planning horizon by water demand planning areas and the regional total. There are two sets of drivers used to develop the long-term probabilistic water demand projections. The first set of drivers Tampa Bay Water Page 12-15

211 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs are the socio-economic variables used in the forecasting models, and the second set of drivers are the weather varilables. Tampa Bay Water engaged the services of Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., to complete a probabilistic regional demand forecast for the seven water demand planning areas. Documentation of this work is provided in Hazen and Sawyer (2012). Probabilistic demand forecasting is performed to assess the potential variation in predictions of actual future demand from the point forecast given the pointprojected ( expected ) future values of socioeconomic conditions and the observed historical variability in these conditions from year to year. The resulting probabilistic forecast therefore reflects a superposition of historical year-to-year variability in explanatory and driver variables, and resulting demand, on the point forecast. The probabilistic demand forecast was produced using probabilistic socioeconomic and weather projection ensembles. For the system-wide performance analyses additional work was performed to link the long-term demand projections with surface water availability simulations through common simulations of weather. The demand simulations are time series ensembles of demand by sector and WDPA that reflect 300-year-long simulated daily weather conditions that were derived from analogous weather simulations driving surface water flow models, and 300-year-long repetition of projected econometric data for a given time slice year of the probabilistic demand forecast, with each 300-year simulated demand ensemble receiving econometric assumptions from a different ensemble realization of the forecast. Each 300-year demand ensemble thus reflects the potential variability in weather conditions for each WDPA as may be witnessed over a 300 year period. Then, taken together, the collection of 300-year ensembles also reflects the collective uncertainty and potential range of realized econometric conditions in the time-slice year, using repetition of those conditions in simulations to support large sampling of weather conditions that could occur in the time-slice year. The weather simulations resulted in 1000 ensembles of weather; each time series was 300 years long. Each ensemble contained simulated weather variables (such as daily maximum temperature, daily precipitation) for each Water Demand Planning area and simulation day. The weather ensembles were ordered according to total precipitation across the Water Demand Planning areas and time. The forecast was produced by randomly pairing socioeconomic and weather ensembles, then applying each pairing to demand models (along with point-forecast assumptions for variables Tampa Bay Water Page 12-16

212 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs excluded from probabilistic projections). This application resulted in a set of forecasted realizations of demand time series for each sector (including wholesale and unbilled) and WDPA. The series within each demand realization were aggregated across space, time, and sector in the same manner as the point forecast, producing annual time series, for each realization, of total demand for each WDPA and the region as a whole. These total demand time series were then summarized across WDPA. The process for generating probabilistic weather ensembles was designed to support integrated demand-supply analyses. Through this process, probabilistic demand forecasts and supply simulations were produced using common weather simulations, allowing demand forecasts to be properly correlated, cross-correlated, to a degree indicated by historical data, with surface water supply simulations on a realization-by-realization basis. This sampling design resulting in 1000 demand-weather pairings, from which 334 demand-weather pairs were selected based on Latin Hypercube sampling. These 334 demand-weather pairs were used in the System-wide Performance Analysis. The probabilistic demand forecast results were used in the System Performance and Future Needs Analysis. Figure 12-3 depicts the results of the 5 th percentile to 95 th percentile probabilistic demand forecast from 2013 to Actual regional demands for 2010 through 2012 are shown on the figure. Table 12-4 shows the 1 to 100 percentile range of total regional demands for forecast years used in the system-wide performance evaluation. This represents the range of possible demands for each time slice in the planning horizon. The highlighted rows are demand projections shown in Figure Tampa Bay Water Page 12-17

213 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Figure 12-3 Tampa Bay Water Probabilistic Demand Projections Tampa Bay Water Page 12-18

214 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Table 12-4 Total Regional Probabilistic Demand Projections for Region System Performance Evaluation Percentile (%) Percentile (%) D2. System-wide Performance Evaluation The System wide Performance Evaluation uses seven annual time slices between 2015 and 2035 to evaluate the reliability of the regional system to meet a range of regional demands under varying weather and socio-economic conditions. Monthly weather and supply variability are captured along the 100-year time series for each realization. Monthly demand variability is evaluated across the 334 realizations which comprise the ensemble for each time slice. The 334 realizations are selected using Latin Hypercube sampling so that the entire probabilistic ranges of demand and weather are evaluated. The seven time slices used were the years 2015, 2020, 2022, 2025, 2028, 2030, and To summarize, each time slice contains an ensemble of 334 realizations of demand-weather pairing. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-19

215 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Each realization is 100 years in length. The time step for the system-wide performance model is daily. The results are evaluated monthly and annually. Varying weather across each realization also allows the analysis to evaluate the effects of changes in rainfall on supply availability through changes in stream flow. This is particularly important as surface water accounts for about 50% of the regional sources of supply. Prolonged periods of drought influence the total range of supplies that are available across the planning horizon. D3. System-wide Reliability Evaluation Results This reliability-based evaluation is used to provide a framework for determining the timing and quantity of future water supply needs using the System-wide performance model. The framework includes two components, a Level of Service concept and the reliability of meeting this level of service, to determine the timing and quantity of future water supplies. The Level of Service is tied to the frequency of drought events that could trigger the Agency s water shortage mitigation plan and lead to water use restrictions being imposed or other adaptive water supply management options being employed. The policy level of service under consideration for this reliability analysis asks the question, how many years out of 100 years would the agency plan to manage significant drought events through adaptive management options such as water use restrictions instead of building standby capacity? This policy level of service approach does not supplant the Agency s absolute and unequivocal obligation to meet the Quality Water needs of the Member Governments. This reliability-based approach allows the Board to plan for meeting those needs in a reliable and cost effective manner while meeting our environmental sustainability requirements. The benefit of a reliability-based approach is that it allows policy makers to evaluate use of adaptive water management strategies to handle the uncertainty of extreme event occurrences and develop supply in an incremental fashion. The four policy levels are shown in Table Policy Level of Service A will be used to show how these policy levels are interpreted. Policy Level of Service A means that the agency plans to build sufficient supply to meet the possible range of demand for a given time slice for 99 out of 100 years. An alternate explanation is the agency plans to not build additional supplies to meet a high demand that could only occur once in 100 years for a given time slice. The policy levels become less stringent as one goes from Policy Level of Service A to Policy Level of Service D. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-20

216 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Table Policy Levels of Service for Determined Quantity and Timing of Future Needs POLICY LEVEL of SERVICE A B C D INTERPRETATION 99 years out of 100 or 99% successful in meeting the range of possible demand in a given realization for the considered time slice (1 out 100 years adaptive management implementation is planned for). There is only 1% chance of event occurrence in a given year. 95 years out of 100 or 95% successful in meeting the range of possible demand in a given realization for the considered time slice given time slice (5 out of 100 or 1 out of 20 years adaptive management implementation is planned for). There is only 5% chance of occurrence in any given year. 90 years out of 100 or 90% successful in meeting the range of possible demand in a given realization for the considered time slice (10 out of 100 or 1 out 10 years adaptive management implementation is planned for). There is only 10% chance of occurrence in any given year. 85 years out of 100 or 85% successful in meeting the range of possible demand in a given realization for the considered time slice (15 out of 100 or 1 out 6.7 years adaptive management implementation is planned for) As described above, several definitions for determining an unsatisfactory event have been defined for the system-wide performance evaluation. To determine the timing and quantity of future water supply needs, this evaluation selects meeting a range of demands as its performance indicator, given water source availability and operating constraints. The evaluation defines the event and the probability of this event occurring for a given year and policy level of service. The event is defined as an unsatisfactory year when for at least one month in that year, simulated supply was not sufficient to meet the projected demand. Numbers of unsatisfactory and satisfactory years across the 100-year realization are counted to assess whether a given policy level of service is met or not for a given realization. The numbers of unsatisfactory and satisfactory realizations across the ensemble are then evaluated to estimate system reliability of meeting a given policy level of service. The reliability for each policy level of service over the planning horizon was determined. The reliability is determined across the ensemble of 334 demand-flow realization pairs for each time slice (Figure 12-4). The results shown in Figure 12-4 can be used to evaluate how the reliability of a policy level of service changes over the planning horizon (Years 2015 to 2035) and how the reliability changes across the four policy levels of service. For example, in the year 2015, all 334 realizations meet all policy levels of service except A. This means that for those three policy levels of service the regional supply system is 100% reliable across the entire range of possible demands in 2015 (see Table 12-4). However, for Policy level of service A, the regional supply system has a reliability of Tampa Bay Water Page 12-21

217 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs 83.5% (279 out of 334 realizations had no unsatisfactory years) for the year A reliability level of 83.5% for meeting such an extreme condition is very reliable. By the year 2035, the reliability in meeting the Policy level of service A has dropped to 25% (82 out of 334 realizations), meeting Policy level of service B reliability has dropped to 54% (180 out of 334 realizations), meeting Policy level of service C has dropped to 67% (224 out of 334 realizations, and the reliability in meeting Policy level of service D has dropped to 76% (255 out of 334 realizations). Figure 12-4 Changes in Reliability for a given Policy Level across the Planning Horizon From Figure 12-4 several facts can be evaluated. First obtaining and maintaining 100% reliability for all possible demands under extreme weather conditions is not economically feasible. This is shown by examining the Policy level of service A line. Next, the reliability drops below 80% for all policy levels of service by the year Reliability for the Policy levels of service D and C remains above 80% through Year The reliability of policy level of service C drops below 70% in Year 2035 and the reliability of Policy level of service D drops below 80% in Year Using the results shown in Figure 12-4, the reliability of meeting the range of demands for Policy levels of services B, C, and D remain above 90% through the year 2022 and remains above 80% through the year These results indicate that the Agency has sufficient supply to meet expected demands through at least 2025 with a high degree of reliability. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-22

218 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Additional analysis was completed to understand the reliability of meeting the most likely range of demands under each policy level of service for each time slice. The results are summarized in Table 12-6 for time slices 2020, 2025, 2030 and Table 12-6 Policy Level of Service Met Demands and Changes in Reliability Across the Planning Horizon Time Slice Policy Level of Service A Policy Level of Service B Policy Level of Service C Policy Level of Service D Most likely Demand Range Met Reliability Most likely Demand Range Met Reliability Most likely Demand Range Met Reliability Most likely Demand Range Met Reliability mgd 63% mgd 96% mgd 99.7% mgd 99.7% mgd 42% mgd 82% mgd 93% mgd 96% mgd 30% mgd 68% mgd 81% mgd 87% mgd 25% mgd 54% mgd 67% mgd 76% In order to use the information in Table 12-6 for determining the quantity and timing of additional water supplies, a decision needs to be made regarding the agency s policy level of service. Specifically the question is what is the agency s risk level for operating the regional system? At one end, Policy level of service A indicates a low risk tolerance to extreme hydrologic events, only accepting this occurrence once out of 100 years. At the other end is a higher risk tolerance to extreme hydrologic events that reduce supplies, planning for this occurrence once every 6.7 years (15 times out of 100 years). The reliability values reflect our success rate at meeting the entire range of possible demands for each policy level of service. The ranges of possible demands for each time slice are shown in Table Reliability values of 80% or more indicate very strong success at meeting demands. All of the boxes highlighted in blue indicate very reliable water supplies. As the colors turn toward red, the success rate of meeting demands under the varying policy levels of service decreases. Once a policy level of service and the desired reliability for this policy level are selected then the appropriate new supply plan and operating plan can be developed to ensure success at this policy level. An evaluation was performed to compare improvement in policy level reliability if additional supplies are added to the regional system. Additional supply was added in increments of five mgd for each time slice. For this analysis, additional supplies do not necessarily imply additional built capacity. Further analyses are needed to determine if additional supply can be realized from the existing regional system through changes in operational protocols. Results are shown in Figure 12-5 and discussed in following section. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-23

219 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Figure Improvement in Policy Level of Service Reliability by Adding Supply The results of this evaluation are shown in more detail in Table 12-7 panels A, B, and C. These results can help guide when new supplies should be added to the regional system to improve the reliability of meeting the projected demands for a given time slice. The improvements in policy level reliability for each increment of additional supply are summarized for the years 2025, 2030, and The supplies for each time slice are total supplies for the entire planning horizon. In other words, the interpretation is not 20 mgd for 2025 plus 20 mgd for 2030 plus 20 mgd in 2035 but rather a total of 20 mgd by This analysis can be used to guide how much additional supply the agency needs to improve the reliability of meeting the range of projected demands for a given policy level and when should these supplies be on line for use. Tampa Bay Water Page 12-24

220 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs Table 12-7 Improvement in Policy Level of Service Reliability for the Years 2025, 2030, and 2035 A) Results of Additional Supplies by 2025 Compared Against Existing System Policy Level Existing Supply 5 MGD 10 MGD 15 MGD 20 MGD Reliability Reliability Reliabiliy Reliability Reliability A 42% 60% 70% 79% 85% B 82% 90% 92% 95% 96% C 93% 95% 97% 99% 99% D 96% 98% 99% 99% 99% B) Results of Additional Supplies by 2030 Compared Against Existing System Policy Level Existing Supply 5 MGD 10 MGD 15 MGD 20 MGD Reliability Reliability Reliabiliy Reliability Reliability A 30% 45% 55% 62% 71% B 68% 77% 81% 88% 91% C 81% 87% 90% 93% 95% D 87% 91% 94% 95% 98% C) Results of Additional Supplies by 2035 Compared Against Existing System Policy Level Existing Supply 5 MGD 10 MGD 15 MGD 20 MGD Reliability Reliability Reliabiliy Reliability Reliability A 25% 39% 45% 51% 59% B 54% 63% 71% 78% 81% C 67% 78% 80% 86% 88% D 76% 81% 85% 90% 93% The results indicate that by 2035, the agency needs to have additional supplies in order to increase the reliability of the selected policy levels closer to existing reliability percentages. The results also show how building supplies incrementally can improve reliability. A more detailed cost benefit analysis is needed to fully understand the trade-offs between building supplies incrementally or coupled with operational changes that may also yield additional supplies for little or no capital costs versus one or more large projects. In order to select how much supply is needed and when, the policy level of service needs to be selected and the desired reliability of the system needs to be determined. The desired outcome is to balance reliability with the cost of providing a level of service. D4. Future Water Supply Planning Activities Using the reliability-based analysis results shown in Figure 12-4 and Table 12-6, the agency has sufficient time to continue evaluating the regional water supply system before additional water Tampa Bay Water Page 12-25

221 Section 12 System-Wide Reliability and Future Needs supplies are needed to meet demands or trigger any of the Interlocal Agreement requirements. It is recommended for Board approval that over the next 12 to 24 months additional modeling and analysis be conducted to determine if there are improvements in reliable supplies that can be achieved through changes in operating protocols or implementing capital improvements to the existing system. This evaluation would better define the quantity of new supplies that the agency would need to consider for permitting and feasibility studies to meet future (2035 and beyond) demands. Specifically this analysis would include a trade-off analysis to compare the cost of building new supplies with adaptation actions (e.g., mitigation actions, changes to operating protocols, adaptive supply management) and when new supplies should be available to meet reliability and service levels requirements. The results of this analysis can be used to help determine the timing of the next water supply project(s). In addition, it is recommended that the Board of Directors set the policy level of service so that operational and asset management plans can be developed to ensure that the agency meets this level of service balancing reliability with the lowest life cycle cost. In addition, the following comprehensive planning and management activities are recommended to the Board to be implemented as required over the new five year planning period: Continue implementation of the agency s Water Shortage Mitigation Plan Implement the Water Use Efficiency activities approved by the Board February 2013, in Resolution , including re-development of the Agency s long term demand forecast models to integrate passive water use efficiency Continue annual updates of Long-term Demand Forecasts and Evaluation Conduct feasibility planning activities for Master Water Plan projects Participate in State water policy and regulatory discussions to further the understanding of surface water supply use; explore any potential beneficial initiatives that may be proposed Complete the Future Needs Analysis References Tampa Bay Water Page 12-26