Community-Based Regional Water Supply Planning Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental...

Community-Based Regional Water Supply

Planning

Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations: Briefing

TN Duck River AgencySeptember 9, 2010

By Doug Murphy, Executive Director

Presentation Outline

• DRA Organization

• Why the need for Regional Water Supply Planning

• The Water Supply Plan Process– “WORKING TOGETHER WORKS”– “GROWTH PAYS FOR GROWTH”

Duck River Agency Mission

“To develop, protect and sustain a clean and dependable water resource for all citizens in the Duck River Region”

Bedford, Coffee, Hickman, Marshall, and Maury Counties

“To develop, protect and sustain a clean and dependable water resource for all citizens in the Duck River Region”

Bedford, Coffee, Hickman, Marshall, and Maury Counties

DRA Organization• Established: 1965

• 17 Member Board Appointed by the Governor

• Represent 5 Counties: Coffee, Bedford, Marshall, Maury, and Hickman

• 7 Water Systems: Columbia, Lewisburg, Spring Hill, Bedford County, Shelbyville, Manchester, Tullahoma

• Funding: Water Systems pay a nickel per 1,000 gallons of water sold

Citizens

Board of Directors

Executive Director

Finance Director

DRATAC WRC

Duck River Agency Organization Chart

Regional Planning• Multiple Uses depend on the Duck River and Normandy Reservoir

– 250,000 resident customers– Industrial and commercial use– Agricultural– Waste load assimilation– Recreation– Biologically diverse river

• 2007 Drought of Record – Normandy Reservoir reached 42% capacity– Flow in the upper Duck River was dependent on Normandy Reservoir

• Politics– House Bill 3545– Senate Bill 2464

• Emotions– Public perception

• No long term creditable regional plan– Good science– Proven decision making model

Project Planning Area

“You are only as good as your help” hdm

WSP Strategic Team

• O’Brien & Gere – Principal consultant

• CTI Engineers, Inc.– TN engineering firm

• BDY Environmental, LLC– Environmental permitting

• HydroLogics, Inc– Modeling

• Trauger & Tuke– Legal

Comprehensive Regional Water Supply Plan

Duck River Development Agency

Project Approach and Decision Making Process

June 2009 August 2010

Workshop 1

Goals / Kick-off Meeting

Week 2

Workshop 2

Preliminary Feasibility

Week 12

DRA goals and policies

Key issues review Establish

information collection program

Demand projections

Reliability goals Approach to

water supply

permitting Environmental

impacts

Review funding options

Agree on cost estimating techniques

Stakeholders and roles Community impacts

review

Review key issues memo on water

quality / capacity

Select alternatives

Review preliminar

y costs

Review policy

impacts on

alternatives

Screen Alternative

s Review

Tech. Memo

Review key issues memo

Finalize reliability approach

Review draft report

Sensitivity analysis on

present worth

Workshop 3

Developing Alternatives

Week 23

Workshop 4

Evaluating Alternatives

Week 33

Workshop 5

Implementation Planning

Week 42

Workshop 6

Conclusions

Week 50

Water Quality and Capacity

Reliability and Permitting

Financial

Community Impacts and

Public Policy

Data Collection and Initial Investigations

Alternatives Development

Alternatives Evaluations

Report and Decision-Making

Next Steps

Meetings with regulators

Community issues Water supply attitudes

Review stream hydrology and water quality

data Review

population and demands

Peaking factors

Meetings with participants

Review reservoir release

requirements and NPDES

permits Revisit redundancy approaches

Develop basis for costing for

each participant

Review unit costs

Gather input on non-cost factors

Website development

Interview key stakeholders

Refine service

areas and demands

Identify supply

alternatives

Review demands / capacity policies

Regulatory

discussion

Develop cost estimate, based

on technical studies (above)

Load cost model

Draft Cost Model

Define evaluation factors

Website updates

Draft Key Issues Memo

Water Quality /

Regulatory Compliance


Reliability Goals and Approach

es


Cost Estimating Methods


Community Impacts

Service areas /

demands

Water

supply options

Review key issues memo on reliability

policy Approach

for supply

permitting and stream

quality

Finalize costing

methods

Identify evaluation

factors Develop

pair-wise comparison


Water Quality /

Treatment

Capacity Projection

s


Redundancy

Approach

Permitting Issues /

Obstacles

Review key issues memo – redundancy Discuss

permitting obstacles Adopt reliability approach

Decision Model

Finalize cost estimates

Compare PW cost / benefits

Meetings with

participants

Key Issues Memo Water

Supply Alternative

s

Compare PW cost / benefits

of alternative approach

es

Update Key Issues

Memo Permitting Issues and Approache

s

Present Worth Cost

Analysis

Draft report section on

costs Review

funding options

Update decision

model with PW costs and

revisit pair-wise

Finalize Community Impact

Assessment

Review draft report

Select alternatives

Draft report and executive

summary

Pre-scoping

meeting for permits

and obstacles

Refine costs and funding options

Briefings for elected officials

Public meeting

Briefings for elected officials

Open House Meetings

Review public input

Finalize alternative selection

Scoping meeting for permits and environment

al studies

Expert panel

discussion on

regulatory approache

s

Approve scope for

supplemental studies If

needed

Finalize report and executive

summary Draft

Implementation Plan

Adopt Implementatio

n Plan Authorize

design

Meetings with regulators

Updated Cost Model

Open House Meetings

Review input from

stakeholders Plan Public

meeting

Select preferred funding

plan

Select preferred

funding plan

Meetings with potential funding

agencies

Endorse funding plan

Retain legal and financial counsel for

bonding

Communication plan for

implementation phase

Draft Report Final

Report

Open House Meetings

Oasis Model

Schematic of Duck River System as Modeled with OASIS

110

Normandy

112

ResSpill

114

115

Manchester

120

Tullahoma

125

TimsFord

130

140

Shelbyville

150

Shelbyville Gg.

155160170

180

Bedford County

190

200 Lewisburg205

Big Rock Ck.

210

212

FountainCk

215220

230

Spring Hill

240

250

Columbia

260

Columbia Gg.

270280285

Kettle Mills

KettleBkPmp

290300999

Centerville Gg.

$$,$$$.$$

“The project goal is to have a Comprehensive Plan that will provide direction to the Duck River

Agency regarding the management of available water resources, including the implementation of

specific water supply infrastructure projects.”

“The project goal is to have a Comprehensive Plan that will provide direction to the Duck River

Agency regarding the management of available water resources, including the implementation of

specific water supply infrastructure projects.”

17File Location

Roles of Key Participants in the Decision Process

DRA Board (Decision-Maker)

Executive Director

Consultant Team

Recommendation

50-Year Plan

Public & Stakeholder

Input

Water Resources Council

Duck River Agency Technical Advisory

Committee

Public & Stakeholder Input (Workshops and Open

Houses)

Information Exchange

Input

Information Exchange

Recommendation

Collaboration or Recommendation

Open Process• 6 Workshops• 3 Public Open Houses• www.duckriveragency.org• Media coverage• Civic Group Presentations• Garden Club Presentations• One-on-One meetings

http://www.duckriveragency.org/

Participants• Water Systems

– Bedford County Utility District– Columbia Power and Water Systems– Duck River Utility Commission– HB&TS Utility District– Lewisburg Water and Waste Water – Manchester Water Systems– Maury County Water System– Tullahoma Utility Board– Shelbyville Water and Sewer– Spring Hill Water Systems

• Federal Agencies– Natural Resource Conservation Service– Tennessee Valley Authority– U S Department Agricultural– U S Fish and Wildlife Service– U S Geological Survey

• State Agencies/Committees– Tennessee Advisory Commission on

Intergovernmental Relations – Tennessee Department of Environment– Tennessee Water Resource Technical Advisory

Committee– Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency

• Legislators– Senator Bill Ketron– Senator Jim Tracy

• Non – Government Organizations

– Duck River Watershed Association– Friends of Short Springs– Tennessee Environmental Council– Tennessee Duck River Agency Board– Tennessee Farm Bureau Federation– The Nature Conservancy– World Wildlife Fund

• Municipals– Columbia– Lewisburg– Manchester– Tullahoma– Shelbyville– Spring Hill– Wartrace

• Companies/Professionals– AMEC Earth & Environment– BDY Environmental, INC– Consolidated Technologies, Inc– Energy and Water Economics– HydroLogic’s, Inc– Garver Engineers, Inc – Geoservices, LLC– Gresham, Smith and Partners– Obrien & Gere Engineers, Inc – Trauger & Tuke

Water Supply Plan: 3 Parts

• NEEDS ASSESSMENT

• ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS

• IMPLEMANTATION PLAN

Needs Assessment

Normandy Reservoir and the Duck River supply virtually all the public water supply needs in the five county planning area

The drought of 2007-2008 heightened awareness of the limitations of the Duck River, as Normandy Reservoir fell to approximately 42% capacity– Water use restrictions and emergency reductions to releases from

Normandy Reservoir were approved Population projections from CBER and current water usage patterns

were used to project future water usage, which will roughly double by 2060

OASIS model utilized the water demand projections, current flow constraints and 87 years of hydrologic data to assess the reliability of the Normandy Reservoir and Duck River to meet the water supply and environmental needs of the Duck River Region– A 4 mgd deficit currently exists under the drought of record and current

constraints– A deficit of up to 32 MGD in the year 2060 is projected under the drought of

record and current constraints which equates to 1.4 BG to 3 BG of storage

Projections

Need Assessment

Deficit

based on worst

case

drought of p

ast 87 years

(1-

year in 87-year e

vent)

Deficit

based on droughts

that occu

r approxim

ately

1-year in 10-years

Alternatives

Started with over 40 then identified 26 non-structural and structural alternatives including:

Implementing additional water efficiency measures Implementing a regional drought management plan Changing operation of Normandy Reservoir Modifying river constraints Constructing pipelines from reservoirs, rivers or other water systems Constructing tributary reservoirs (Fountain Creek Reservoir) Building off-stream storage reservoirs (pumped storage) Utilizing quarries Raising Normandy Dam

Evaluation Criteria Reliable Capacity

Raw Water Quality

Cost

Implementability / Risk of Delays– permittable– public acceptance– property acquisition

Flexibility– phased implementation

Environmental Benefits Recreation

Alternative ScreeningAlternatives were sorted into one of these

groups:

– Baseline – an alternative that was selected to be a component of the recommended water supply plan

– Fatally Flawed or Highly Unlikely – an alternative that was eliminated from further consideration

– Back-up – an alternative that was not selected as a Cornerstone, but will be considered as a potential component of the 50-year water supply plan

– Cornerstone - an alternative in the “shortlist” that could satisfy the entire deficit, and is receiving further consideration as a key element of the 50-year water supply plan

Baseline Alternatives

Regional Drought Management Plan

Water-use Efficiency Program

Optimize Releases from Normandy Reservoir

Comprehensive 50-year Water Supply Plan with 100-year Vision

30

Relocate Columbia’s water withdrawal to a new intake approximately 25 miles downstream, where there is adequate flow to satisfy projected needs

Relocate Columbia’s water withdrawal to a new intake approximately 25 miles downstream, where there is adequate flow to satisfy projected needs

Implement a water use efficiency program and develop a regional drought management plan

Implement a water use efficiency program and develop a regional drought management plan

Raise Normandy Dam and optimize releases from Normandy Reservoir to enhance the reliable yield available for all Duck River uses

Raise Normandy Dam and optimize releases from Normandy Reservoir to enhance the reliable yield available for all Duck River uses

Advantages of Implementing all Components

Multiple sources of supply – Increases reliability by utilizing multiple sources of water supply

Regional solution with benefits beyond water supply– Enhances instream flow for entire Duck River region

– Extends recreation (reservoir and river) during droughts

– Reduces flood risk downstream of Normandy Dam Finances – Encourages financial support from entire region/ lower cost per

customer … “Working Together Works”

Flexibility – Combination of structural and non-structural components address uncertainty in future conditions including:– Alteration of instream flow conditions – Changes in projected water demands or water use characteristics – Changes in regulatory requirements– Likelihood of more severe hydrologic/climatic conditions– Changes in land use and hydrologic conditions in watershed

Estimated Project Cost

Williamsport Intake and Raw Water Pipeline to Columbia (with one 30-inch pipeline for 20 mgd)

Raise Normandy Dam

Baseline Alternatives

Total Costs

– $38 million

– $20 million

– $4 million

– $62 million

Philosophy

Cost sharing:

– “Growth Pays For Growth”

• System development charge for new services and

larger services

– “Working Together Works”

• Common charge based on all water withdrawals

Financial Strategy Three examples of initial estimated increase in cost per

household (typical usage = 5,000 gallons/month)1. Using solely water withdrawal fees:

• Approximately $3.00/month

2. Using water withdrawal fees (all customers) and System Development Charges (for new services and larger services):


3. Using water withdrawal fees (all customers) and System Development Charges (for new services and larger services), plus phasing the construction and using current reserve funds:


Potential Schedule and Phasing Approach

35File Location

Next Steps

Receive comments at Open House public meeting

Complete Report with Recommendations and

Implementation Plan

Develop Financial Strategy

Develop Communication Plan

Board endorses Report and Recommendations in

October

Implementation

Questions or

Comments

Doug [email protected]

(931)684-7820

mailto:[email protected]

TVA Normandy Operating Guidehttp://www.tva.gov/river/lakeinfo/index.htm

Operating guide

2007 Elevations

2008 Elevations

http://www.tva.gov/river/lakeinfo/index.htm

Comprehensive 50-year Water Supply Plan with 100-year Vision

• Implement Baseline Alternatives

• Increase Storage Capacity at Normandy Reservoir

• Locate new intake for Maury County

Community-Based Regional Water Supply Planning Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental...

Documents

Transcript of Community-Based Regional Water Supply Planning Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental...