FIGURE 4-7 Area 6 – Strategy 4 – Town Identified Growth ...

SECTION 4 – WATER RESOURCES PORTFOLIO

4-11

FIGURE 4-7 Strategy 4 – Town Identified Growth Areas

• Area 6 – Southwestern Cary/Chatham County – Area 6 includes a portion of the area within Chatham County, east of NC Highway 751, for which the County and the Town of Cary adopted a Joint Land Use Plan (Chatham County/Town of Cary Joint Land Use Plan, June 2012). The County area is designated as primarily low density with a pocket of mixed use development near Highway 751 and Lewter Shop Road, and three pockets of very low density along headwater streams of Jordan Lake. The adjacent land within the Town of Cary is designated for very low density residential development. If the character of development moves from very low density toward low density, considerations would include possible effects on water quality and water demand. Because Area 6 drains to Jordan Lake, a key consideration is stormwater management. Requiring low impact development (LID) practices in Area 6 could help address nutrient loading issues while also reducing potable water demand in this area for outdoor irrigation. The Town of Cary is currently working with a developer to implement a LID pilot project in the Jordan Lake


4-12

watershed. As part of the project, the Town is also identifying regulatory barriers to LID that may exist in the Town’s policies and ordinances. Lessons learned from these efforts will be important for providing input to future policy development.

The Town of Cary already has a reclaimed water utilization policy in place, which is currently being reviewed as part of the Strategic Reclaimed Water System Plan (SRWSP) (CH2M HILL, 2012a, Appendix L). The SRWSP presents an evaluation of four future reclaimed water system scenarios in conjunction with the Reclaimed Water System Master Plan Update (CDM Smith, in progress).

The Town of Apex should consider the benefits and feasibility of a similar policy for an area encompassing Areas 1, 2, and 3 and located in the Town’s planning jurisdiction. Such a policy would require the use of reclaimed water for all new residences’ and business’ secondary water use (irrigation, cooling, etc.). For new development within the designated reclaimed water service area, the developer would be responsible for the installation and full cost of reclaimed water facilities within its own properties. The developer could also be responsible for the extension of the reclaimed water system to the development. Any infrastructure reimbursement for the system extension and infrastructure oversizing would be accomplished as established in the Town’s utility system extension policies.

Other land development policies would apply not only in the six planning areas described above, but for all new construction. Examples of other development policies that could affect water quality, water supply needs, distribution/ collection systems, and treatment are described in the Town of Cary Water Conservation Program Evaluation and Future Considerations TM (CH2M HILL, 2012d); this TM is presented in Appendix M. Similarly, some of the best practices identified in Strategy 5 could be incorporated into the Unified Development Ordinance, other Town development codes, or water service regulations.

4.5 Strategy 5 – Best Management Practices Through the LRWRP process, a number of water resources strategies described as “best practices” or “management tools” were identified. These best practices include internal operations improvements, measures to enhance customer water use efficiency, and the utilization of reclaimed water. Individually or collectively, these practices and tools provide a robust set of options when used along with other strategies to prepare the Towns and County for a range of future conditions such as those discussed in Section 3. They provide the Towns and County with a range of strategies: • To increase the flexibility available for the

management of available water supplies. • To increase the water resources resilience of each

jurisdiction, which will also improve regional resiliency.

• That will enable the Towns to adapt to a future affected by uncertainties related to the economic/business climate, technological advances, hydrologic/climate variability, and environmental regulatory changes.

Three Options Comprise Strategy 5

5A: Supply Side Management – Optimize Internal Operations

5B: Demand Side Management – Manage Customer Demands for Improved Efficiency

5C: Reclaimed Water


4-13

The Towns currently have programs in place that support the above attributes; this strategy continues and expands on a number of these efforts

Strategy 5A – Supply Side Management – Optimize Internal Operations Objective The objective of Strategy 5A is to optimize operations at the Cary/Apex WTP and the efficiency of the water distribution system operations and storage. The following practices are under the complete control of the Towns of Cary and Apex.

Description Cary /Apex WTP Optimization The Cary/Apex WTP uses approximately 10 percent of the raw water withdrawn from Jordan Lake for internal plant process uses. The State of North Carolina currently permits “recycling” of this process loss by returning the water to the head of the WTP up to a maximum of 10 percent of the raw water withdrawn. The DWR Public Water Supply Section (PWSS) has granted approval to Cary to recycle treated residuals handling effluent, but only during unusual or emergency events such as a water supply emergency or peak flow condition. The Towns must obtain approval from PWSS prior to recycling. PWSS also requires additional water quality monitoring during recycling. Recycling must be stopped if there is a negative impact on the water treatment process. Water quality and operational considerations limit the ability of this option to be considered as a regular component of the treatment process. Until recycling is tested and proven over an extended period of time, recycling treated residuals handling effluent to the head of the Cary/Apex WTP is a contingency planning option. The Towns have been conducting water quality monitoring on the recycled flow and have seen no negative impacts on the plant’s treatment performance to date.

In the short term, due to limited operational experience at Cary/Apex WTP, permit limitations, and the need to meet water quality standards, the recycle system cannot be considered a reliable source of, or offset to, raw water supply. In the future, the ability to recycle treated residuals handling effluent may provide the Towns with an additional raw water source from the recycled plant water, up to 4.7 mgd on an average day basis and 6.8 mgd on a maximum day basis in 2060, based on current regulatory flow limits for recycling. This would increase base water supply available to meet demand.

Water Distribution System Operations and Storage The Towns of Apex and Cary have individual, independent hydraulic models of their water distribution systems that can be applied to determine optimum operation of the distribution system and storage tanks for each Town and to identify potential modifications to improve the efficiency of each system to meet peak water demands. In early 2012, Cary developed scenarios to be analyzed with the goal of creating a more reliable water distribution system and ensuring better utilization of the full range of storage in both elevated and ground water storage tanks. A number of these scenarios have been modeled using the Town’s hydraulic model and have identified capital projects that the Town is moving forward with. It is recommended that Cary continue these evaluations, starting with the following scenarios: • Management of overall system water storage volumes to optimize energy use and existing

distribution capacity as water from storage is used to meet daily demands


4-14

• Water system transfers to and from the City of Durham (this is also linked to Strategy 3 – Increase Water Supply and/or Storage via Interconnections)

The Town of Apex has a hydraulic model of its system; updating and applying the model to determine optimum operation of the Town’s distribution system and storage tanks would identify potential modifications to improve the efficiency of Apex’s system to meet peak water demands. In addition, linking the Town of Apex and Town of Cary hydraulic models would be beneficial to evaluate any potential combined benefit of distribution system storage or more integrated operation.

Continue Annual System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair, and Meter Calibration Other measures to optimize the Towns’ treatment and distribution infrastructure include:

• Continue annual system-wide water audits, using the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Water Loss Control Committee water audit method and software (AWWA, 2009), and take actions to address possible future trends showing increases in apparent or real water loss.

• Continue using the Towns’ hydraulic distribution system models to evaluate and further optimize pressure and water delivery to customers.

• Continue to regularly calibrate meters.

• Maintain leak detection and repair program and consider expanding it to include leaks on the customer side of the meter.

Strategy 5B – Demand Side Management – Manage Customer Demands for Improved Efficiency Objective The objective of Strategy 5B is to influence customers to use water wisely – resulting in reduced water demand - through policies. Demand side management approaches are increasingly relied upon for water resource management, and complement more traditional supply side management measures. A combination of price-based and alternative (non-price-based) demand side management policies could be most beneficial.

Description Price-Based Demand Side Management As water rates and charges increase over time, consumers become increasingly interested in the cost of water. With heightened focus on conservation and water use efficiency, water utilities are also recognizing the effect that rates and charges can have on customer use patterns. The following price-based demand side management strategies were considered: • Time of use rate structures involve applying different

water rate structures for daily, seasonal, and drought periods to encourage efficient water use, especially during periods when maximizing the water supply is most critical (while balancing rate impacts when water supply and capacity is available).

• The inclining block rate structure is designed such

Three rate structure, or price-based, demand side management strategies were identified as most viable: • Time of Use Rates • Inclining Block Rates • Water Budget Rates


4-15

that the cost per unit of water increases with consumption. The objective is to encourage the wise use of water and to discourage unnecessary water use by seeking to reduce both average and peak water demand.

• A water budget is a set amount of water allocated to a customer to meet the customer’s anticipated efficient water needs; the amount of water within the first block is based on the estimated, efficient water needs of an individual customer. Those with usage above the efficient budget pay a significantly higher rate for “inefficient” or “wasteful” usage.

Before any changes in rate structure are implemented, the effect of the changes on the amount of customer water use must be carefully evaluated. The types of rate structures considered above are designed to encourage customers to use water wisely. However, if customers use less water than what is assumed when the unit rates are adopted along with the new rate structure, the result can be an unanticipated reduction in revenue, followed by higher-than-desired rate increases to compensate, which in turn erodes customer confidence. Therefore, how customers will respond to the change in rate structure and rates must be considered to ensure that the Towns realize the intended water efficiency improvements, while at the same time minimizing reductions in utility revenue, negative economic impacts, and affordability issues.

Additional details on these demand side management strategies can be found in Appendix K and Appendix M, the Town of Cary Water Conservation Program Evaluation and Future Considerations TM (CH2M HILL, 2012d).

Alternative Demand Side Management (Non-Price-Based) Alternative demand side management (ADSM) strategies are those that do not directly change the unit price of water, but may include water use restrictions, rationing, public education, and incentives for adoption of more water-efficient technologies. The following non price-based demand side management strategies were considered: • Peak load management in a water system is a strategy to balance the supply of water with

the water demands by adjusting or controlling the demands rather than providing additional water. While there is currently no known peak load management in operation by a U.S. water utility, discussions of such capabilities in water-scarce areas are occurring.

• Future efficient water use will be driven by technology combined with the use of social norms to change customer behavior. Water providers can link new technologies such as automated metering infrastructure (AMI) systems with web portals to communicate with customers about their individual water consumption in new ways and on a near real-time basis, and to receive customer feedback in innovative ways. This has the potential to be a powerful tool that can influence customers’ water usage based on social norms such as knowing where one “ranks” against an average or similar customers.

• Both the Towns of Apex and Cary have water conservation programs in place and this strategy should remain as an important tool to manage potable water demands. Many water customers support water conservation (CH2M HILL, 2012d), and their motivations include the following:

These ADSM strategies were identified among the most viable: • Peak Load Management • Communications Technology • Water Conservation


4-16

o Many have a strong belief that conserving is “the right thing to do” to ensure there is enough water for others and also to protect the environment.

o Saving money is a key driver for conserving water, and the cost of water is an important factor in using water outdoors.

o Compliance with water-use ordinances is a factor in outdoor water use.

• Other ADSM strategies include: o Incentives for emerging water-efficient technologies/fixtures: New technologies will

continue to support the development of improved water-efficient fixtures. o Incentives for outdoor watering efficiencies: Interest is growing in the potential of smart

irrigation controller technology designed to improve irrigation water management and efficiency. A recent innovation in outdoor irrigation is the use of precision spray nozzles, designed to significantly reduce the volume of water used for landscape irrigation and to improve coverage efficiency.

As with price-based incentives, the effect of any ADSM program on the amount of customer water use must be carefully considered in order to avoid unintended negative impacts on revenue. Also, with non-price based incentives, it is easy for customers to assume that when they reduce their water use, their bills will go down. However, since most water utility costs are fixed, higher unit rates will likely be needed to maintain sufficient revenue (relative to rates when there is higher total demand). As a result, customers total water bills will not likely decrease much, if at all. This heightens the need for effective communication about the long-term cost benefit of avoiding or deferring capital costs for more water supply capacity.

Additional details and considerations on these demand side management strategies can be found in Appendix K and Appendix M, Town of Cary Water Conservation Program Evaluation and Future Considerations Technical Memorandum (CH2M HILL, 2012d).

Strategy 5C – Reclaimed Water Objective The objective of Strategy 5C is to offset potable water system demands through the beneficial utilization of reclaimed water. This potential is explored in the Town of Cary’s Strategic Reclaimed Water System Plan (CH2M HILL, 2012a) and is linked with Strategy 4.

Description Reclaimed water can be used for non-potable applications to help reduce potable water demands. Uses include irrigation, cooling water, manufacturing processes, and toilet flushing. As a result, reclaimed water use can help reduce or delay the construction of infrastructure needed for new potable water supplies. In addition to potable water use reductions, reclaimed water utilization reduces nutrient discharges to surface waters from reclamation facilities.


4-17

FIGURE 4-8 Town of Cary Strategic Reclaimed Water System Plan – Reclaimed Water System Scenario Maps (Reclaimed Water Service Areas depicted in purple)

Cary became the first city in North Carolina to pump treated wastewater effluent to homes and businesses for irrigation and cooling in 2001 and has expanded the system to serve over 600 customers in 2012. This program will continue to be a critical component of the Town’s water resources portfolio to meet current and future water supply needs and to extend the period during which the Cary/Apex WTP capacity is adequate. Cary’s SRWSP (CH2M HILL, 2012a) presents a number of different scenarios by which the reclaimed water system may be expanded in the future and the development of potential reclaimed water demands.

The use of reclaimed water to offset potable water demands is also linked to Strategy 4 – Integrated Master Planning and Strategic Utility Resource Utilization. Many opportunities exist for the Towns to expand the use of reclaimed water to each Town’s identified growth areas, some of which have the potential for intensive water use. The SRWSP for Cary identifies a number of future scenarios for its reclaimed system, including Area 5, identified in Strategy 4. Figure 4-8 displays a compilation of maps depicting these scenarios; these maps can be found in Appendix L. Strategy 4 identifies a number of opportunities within Apex’s urban service area, Areas 1, 2, and 3. Area 4 would require joint planning by the Towns of Apex and Cary.

Apex would benefit from identifying projected reclaimed water demand and infrastructure requirements to evaluate the cost-benefit comparisons of reclaimed water service to these areas. In addition, Apex should consider drafting policies related to reclaimed water services and service areas to ensure that policies are in place before development occurs in these areas and to take advantage of partnerships with developers in support of developing the reclaimed water system.

4.6 Residential Customer Water Bill Evaluation Town of Cary (including Morrisville) residential customer water bills were projected for Strategies 1, 2 and 3 based on projected future water rates necessary to cover debt service and operating costs for each strategy from 2013 through 2060. Future water consumption, water


4-18

meter counts, debt service payments and operating costs were all used as inputs for the Town of Cary’s rate model to determine future water rates. Additional details of the rate model input data development, including capital and operating cost schedules, can be found in Appendix N. The last year of the water bill evaluation period was determined based on the last year debt service would be associated with all strategies; this was projected to be 2053.

This evaluation was completed as a comparative analysis between the strategies; the intent of this analysis was to provide the ability to compare strategies and their relative impact on customers from an individual strategy’s capital and operating costs through the planning horizon. It is important to note that the impact on customer water bills is only from costs associated with the water supply strategies presented and from other utility capital costs already planned through 2032 – they do not include future capital costs for wastewater treatment, collection system, water distribution, or reclaimed water facility capital projects.

Figure 4-9 presents the results of the customer water bill evaluation, the future year cost of an average monthly water bill for the consumption of 7,000 gallons per month.

FIGURE 4-9 Comparison of Residential Customer Monthly Water Bill for Strategies 1 through 3, Future Year Costs Towns of Cary and Morrisville - Customer Average Monthly Consumption of 7,000 gallons

The following bullets outline a number of observations from the results of the evaluation of residential customer water bills as presented in Figure 4-9:

• Strategies 1, 2a, and 2b are the strategies with the smallest impact on customer bills. Strategies 1 and 2a have the lowest and effectively the same level of impact.

$-

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$-

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

FY 2

011

FY 2

012

FY 2

013

FY 2

014

FY 2

015

FY 2

016

FY 2

017

FY 2

018

FY 2

019

FY 2

020

FY 2

021

FY 2

022

FY 2

023

FY 2

024

FY 2

025

FY 2

026

FY 2

027

FY 2

028

FY 2

029

FY 2

030

FY 2

031

FY 2

032

FY 2

033

FY 2

034

FY 2

035

FY 2

036

FY 2

037

FY 2

038

FY 2

039

FY 2

040

FY 2

041

FY 2

042

FY 2

043

FY 2

044

FY 2

045

FY 2

046

FY 2

047

FY 2

048

FY 2

049

FY 2

050

FY 2

051

FY 2

052

FY 2

053

Mon

thly

7,0

00-g

allo

n W

ater

Bill

Strategy 1 - Increase Water Supply via Jordan Lake Allocation

Strategy 2a - Increase Jordan Lake Water Supply Pool

Strategy 2b - Water Supply from Crabtree Creek with Storage in Existing Triangle Quarry

Strategy 2c - Water Supply from Cape Fear River

Strategy 2d - Water Supply from Kerr Lake

Strategy 3 - Increase Water Supply and/or Storage via Interconnections


4-19

• Strategies 2c and 2d have a significant change in customer water bills from 2028 through 2032 due to the construction of new supply and treatment facilities creating the need for significant rate increases.

• Strategy 3 allows for each of the interconnections to be phased in over time as the needs develop, which is the reason for the steady incline in the water bills. At the end of the evaluation period (2053) Strategy 3 has the highest water bill due to the significant capital cost related to the treatment capacity purchases and the operating costs related to purchased water.

Potential residential customer monthly water bill impacts for Strategies 1 through 3 are provided in tabular format in Table 4-1. Although this customer bill impact analysis was completed for Cary only, the results can be considered as an indicator for the level of impact on Apex customer water bills as well.

4.7 Strategy Summary The water resources strategies outlined in the preceding sections comprise the Towns’ recommended future Water Resources Portfolio. Tables 4-1 and 4-2 contain a summary of each strategy, including potential water supply capacity, implementation requirements, regulatory considerations, policy implications, key uncertainties, other considerations, planning level capital cost estimates, and associated impacts to Cary residential customer monthly water bills. In addition, Table 4-1 presents the net present value (NPV) for capital and operating costs through 2060. Appendix K contains more detailed information on each strategy. Appendix N contains details related to the rate model input data development, including the capital cost and operating cost schedules, used to evaluate the impact of each strategy in Table 4-1 on customer water bills.


4-20

This page has been intentionally left blank.


4-21

TABLE 4-1 LRWRP Water Resource Strategies 1 through 3 Summary (Details on this information are presented in Appendix K)

Strategy 1 Strategy 2A Strategy 2B Strategy 2C Strategy 2D Strategy 3

Increase Water Supply via Jordan Lake Allocation

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage by Other Means: Increase

Jordan Lake Water Supply Pool

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage by Other Means: Water Supply from Crabtree Creek with

Storage in Existing Triangle Quarry

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage by Other Means: Water

Supply from Cape Fear River


Supply from Kerr Lake

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage via Interconnections

Potential Raw Water Supply Capacity,

identified need 8 – 12 mgd

This is a key uncertainty; possibly the full need for of 8 to 12 mgd could

be allocated.

This is a key uncertainty; possibly the full need for of 8 to 12 mgd could

be allocated. 8.5 – 12.5 mgd 8-12 mgd 8-12 mgd

Potential range: 4-11 mgd average day finished water supply to be

provided through interconnections; the total water supply required is expected to be provided through agreements with multiple utilities.

Implementation Requirements

Cape Fear River Basin Hydrologic model; Cape Fear River Basin Water

Supply Plan; Expansion of Cary/Apex WTP.

USACE Section 216 study; Expansion of Cary/Apex WTP.

Water quality study (Crabtree Creek and quarry); Treatability study; Water blending study; obtain

Triangle quarry and land for new WTP; design and construct

infrastructure.

Treatability study; Finished water blending study; Preliminary

Engineering Report for intake, WTP, pipeline route; approval from other

entities for construction of infrastructure within their

jurisdictions; wetland delineations.

Treatability study; Finished water blending study; Preliminary

Engineering Report for intake, WTP, pipeline route; approval from other

entities for construction of infrastructure within their

jurisdictions; wetland delineations.

Triangle Regional Water Supply Plan; Phase 2 Interconnect Study for

Jordan Lake Partnership; booster pumps or pressure regulating valves, and bi-directional metering; approval

from entities for construction of infrastructure.

Regulatory Considerations

Jordan Lake allocation process; IBT process; SEPA process (for WTP

expansion); Secondary and Cumulative Impact Management

Plan (SCIMP) updates; Authorization to Construct.

USACE Section 216 process could require EA or EIS; Allocation

process; IBT process; SEPA process (for WTP expansion); SCIMP

updates; Authorization to Construct.

Reclassification of Crabtree Creek and quarry; SEPA process; Crabtree

Creek passing flow requirements, 401/404 Permit; SCIMP updates,

Authorization to Construct.

Potential Jordan Lake water supply allocation; IBT process; SEPA/

(National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process; SCIMP updates; 401/404 Permit; Authorization to

Construct.

USACE Section 216 process could require EA or EIS; Allocation

process; IBT process; SEPA process (for WTP expansion); SCIMP

updates; 401/404 Permit; Authorization to Construct.

Potential Jordan Lake water supply allocation; potential need for IBT

certificate modification.

Policy Implications None likely. Potential programs to mitigate downstream water resources issues. None likely.

Interlocal agreements may be required. Potential programs to

mitigate downstream water resources issues

Memorandum of Agreement would be required between municipal

partners.

Interlocal agreements for finished water purchases will be required.

Key Uncertainties

Amount of Round 4 allocation from Jordan Lake to be received; increase in climate variability, regional water demands and the potential impact this may have on the safe yield of

Jordan Lake.

Federal funding for Section 216 study (federal portion); Section 216 study requirements; study outcome;

increase in climate variability, regional water demands and the

potential impact this may have on the safe yield of Jordan Lake.

Availability of quarry and timeframe of availability are not definite; cost of quarry could be much greater than assessed tax value; source water availability could be impacted by passing flow requirements; water

quality of Crabtree Creek and quarry; reclassification of Crabtree

Creek watershed and quarry; concerns about perceived indirect potable reuse; increase in climate

variability and the potential impact it may have on Crabtree Creek water

supply potential

May require a Jordan Lake allocation from NC DWR; increase in climate variability, regional water demands

and the potential impact it may have on Cape Fear River water supply

potential; availability of flow from the Cape Fear River and requirements

for instream flow studies.

Federal funding for Section 216 study (federal portion); Section 216 study requirements; study outcome;

increase in climate variability, regional water demands and the

potential impact this may have on the safe yield of Kerr Lake.

May require a Jordan Lake allocation from NC DWR; single agreement may not be able to provide entire additional water

supply needs; permanent water supply allocation from regional utility

is uncertain without capacity purchase or participation in joint

water supply capacity project; timing of agreements and availability of

water; other entities are also currently reviewing their own water supply options; variations between projections of future water demand and actual demand for the Towns and other regional utilities, climate

variability may impact available water supplies


4-22

TABLE 4-1 LRWRP Water Resource Strategies 1 through 3 Summary (Details on this information are presented in Appendix K)

Strategy 1 Strategy 2A Strategy 2B Strategy 2C Strategy 2D Strategy 3

Increase Water Supply via Jordan Lake Allocation

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage by Other Means: Increase

Jordan Lake Water Supply Pool

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage by Other Means: Water Supply from Crabtree Creek with

Storage in Existing Triangle Quarry


Supply from Cape Fear River


Supply from Kerr Lake

Increase Water Supply and/or Storage via Interconnections

Other Considerations

Level of stakeholder involvement and issues.

Favorable considerations: utilization

of the Town’s current treatment facility and expansion planning;

Jordan Lake is currently one of the most reliable water supplies in the

region; continue to leverage the work of the JLP.

Level of stakeholder involvement and issues.

Favorable considerations: Utilization

of the Town’s current treatment facility and expansion planning;

Jordan Lake is currently one of the most reliable water supplies in the

region; continue to leverage the work of the JLP; downstream users

support for a Section 216 study.

Chemistry of blended water in distribution system and operational

considerations.

Favorable considerations: Water supply diversification; potential for

increased operational flexibility and the management of finished water

supplies for planned WTP maintenance activities or unplanned

outages; finished water supply directly to Cary’s central pressure

zone areas furthest from the Cary/Apex WTP; helps to minimize

future IBT; quarry site is close to the Cary service area

Utilities currently withdrawing from the Cape Fear River; approvals needed from other local/county

governments to acquire land and easements for new infrastructure; indirect potable reuse concerns.

Favorable considerations: Water

supply diversification; potential for increased operational flexibility and the management of finished water


outages.

Utilities currently withdrawing from Kerr Lake and interested

stakeholders; approvals needed from other local/county governments to acquire land and easements for new infrastructure; Multiple party

partnerships agreement to execute project.

Favorable considerations: Water

supply diversification; potential for increased operational flexibility and the management of finished water


outages.

May involve addressing other interlocal issues not directly related

to drinking water; upfront fees to purchase capacity; cost may be

higher than current cost to produce water at Cary/Apex WTP; water blending issues; compatibility of source water qualities; pressure

differentials across systems.

Favorable considerations: Water supply diversification; potential for

increased operational flexibility and the management of finished water


outages; operational benefit if interconnections are created in

areas within the distribution system that have potential for water quality

of pressure issues; could help to minimize IBT.

Planning Level Cost Estimates

(2012 Dollars)

Professional Services: $7.5M Storage Allocation: $0.8M Construction and Land/ Easement Acquisition: $43.0M Total: $52.3M


Professional Services: $9.0M Construction and Land/ Easement Acquisition: $53.7M Total: $62.7M


Professional Services: $75.3M Storage Allocation: $6.7M Construction and Land/ Easement Acquisition: $474.9M Total: $556.9M Towns’ Share (32%): $178.2M

Professional Services: $4.1M Capacity Purchase: $77.0M Storage Allocation: $0.4M Construction and Land/ Easement Acquisition: $11.8M Total: $93.3M

NPV of Cumulative Capital Costs (2012 – 2060)

$48.6M $49.0M $55.5M $154.4M $157.0M $83.4M

NPV of Cumulative Operating Costs

(2012 – 2060) $1,646M $1,646M $1,647M $1,649M $1,649M $1,710M

Residential Customer Water Bill for the

Usage of 7,000 gallons per month

(Cary/Morrisville Only)

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.20 2033 - $70.60 2043 - $83.10 2053 - $98.90

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.40 2033 - $70.80 2043 - $83.30 2053 - $98.90

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.00 2033 - $72.60 2043 - $85.30

2053 - $102.80

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.20 2033 - $87.40 2043 - $98.80

2053 - $115.00

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.30 2033 - $85.00

2043 - $100.00 2053 - $116.90

2013 - $33.60 2023 - $48.20 2033 - $75.80 2043 - $98.20

2053 - $120.20


4-23

TABLE 4-2 LRWRP Water Resource Strategies 4 and 5 Summary (Details on this information are presented in Appendix K)

Strategy 4 Strategy 5A Strategy 5B Strategy 5C

Integrated Master

Planning and Strategic Utility

Resource Utilization

Best Management Practices: Supply

Side Management – Optimize Internal

Operations

Best Management Practices: Demand Side Management – Manage Customer

Demands for Improved Efficiency

Best Management Practices:

Reclaimed Water

Implementation Requirements

Master planning efforts linked directly with water resources

planning/management; use Strategy 4

information and the LRWRP as resource in

upcoming land use planning projects;

Apex to review reclaimed water

demand potential and planning level

identification of infrastructure

requirement in support of a reclaimed water policy for identified Areas 1, 2, and 3.

Recycling residuals process water

requires additional water quality

monitoring, I&C enhancements and additional pumping capacity (currently

part of WTP expansion project);

reducing system losses requires

continued audits, leak detection and

repair, and continued funding of

meter calibration program.

Rate study; budget allocation for new rebates; program/

method for incorporating AMI customer data into

email messaging and communication plan;

messaging should include the broad

perspective of water resources

management and include new demand

management programs developed;

Cary to implement recommendations in

the Conservation Program Evaluation

and Future Considerations TM

(CH2M HILL, 2012d).

Capital projects to extend transmission lines and/or service extension policies

requiring new development to

extend the lines and use reclaimed water for non-potable uses if available; Cary to select a preferred

alternative from the current reclaimed

water system master planning work.

Regulatory Considerations

No new regulations required; however,

some changes to the Unified Development

Ordinance can be considered.

Approval of PWSS for residuals process

water enhancements.

None identified

Compliance with 15A North Carolina

Administrative Code (NCAC).02U for

reclaimed water use.

Policy Implications

Policies to direct future growth to locations of available water supply

and infrastructure, including reclaimed water; continue the

Cary pilot LID project and gather lessons

learned to inform policy decisions; Apex to review the potential

benefit and feasibility of a reclaimed water

policy; Costs of regulations and

incentives require additional analysis.

Interlocal agreement to expand Cary

hydraulic modeling to include integration

of Apex system.

Affordability; revenue stability with decreased

consumption per connection.

Connection/development requirements and costs; capital costs of

expanding the reclaimed water

system; customer service adjustments to address issues

unique to reclaimed water.


4-24

TABLE 4-2 LRWRP Water Resource Strategies 4 and 5 Summary (Details on this information are presented in Appendix K)

Strategy 4 Strategy 5A Strategy 5B Strategy 5C

Integrated Master

Planning and Strategic Utility

Resource Utilization

Best Management Practices: Supply

Side Management – Optimize Internal

Operations

Best Management Practices: Demand Side Management – Manage Customer

Demands for Improved Efficiency

Best Management Practices:

Reclaimed Water

Key Uncertainties

Societal trends driving the development

market; Policies can be changed by governing

bodies.

Potential changes to PWSS

requirements; future operational duration

and capacity of recycling system.

Actual price elasticity of water demand

based on price may not reflect calculated

savings because factors other than

price influence water use; participation

levels in conservation programs may be

different than planned participation; rate

structures need to be easily understood by

the customer.

The level and timing of new growth will affect demand for reclaimed water;

water conservation impacts on indoor water demand and

the resulting influence on wastewater inflow to WRFs potentially

reducing future reclaimed water supplies; public

perception related to water quality.

Other Considerations

Public and rate payer acceptance of alternative rate structures; Rate

structure changes should be revenue

neutral, but decreased demand per customer will

have revenue implications; utility

billing software needs to be capable of

calculating and billing alternative rate

structures.

Demand for reclaimed water could exceed

supply available depending on growth

patterns; rates for reclaimed water

versus potable water to both encourage its

use and generate sufficient revenue

must be considered.

Date post:	25-Nov-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

FIGURE 4-7 Area 6 – Strategy 4 – Town Identified Growth ...

Documents