Raw Water Supply Master Plan Development

Stakeholder Outreach Meeting

21 June 2016

Welcome

Purpose

• Discuss the goals and objectives of the SJRA Raw Water Supply Master Plan (Plan)

• Summarize the information developed in the Plan

• Communicate the ongoing efforts and the project schedule

• Gather feedback

Introductions

Master Plan Goals and Objectives

• Refine our standard approach to long-term plan for securing raw water supplies

• Review needs and develop raw water supplies for Montgomery and Highlands system

• Develop an implementation plan for adding raw water supplies to SJRA portfolio

Approach

Develop Implementation Plan

Select Feasible Strategies by Screening

Determine Raw Water Strategies

Identify Needs

Assess Reliability of Available Supplies

Determine Demand Projections

Schedule

Feb 16 Mar 16 Apr 16 May 16 Jun 16 July 16 Aug 16 Sep 16 Oct 16 Nov 16 Dec 16

Raw Water Supply Master Plan

Demand Scenario Evaluation

Supply Scenario Evaluation

Preliminary Strategy Identification and Evaluation

Strategy Evaluation and Selection

Additional Services (Detailed Strategy Evaluation)

Focus for this Meeting

Approach

Demand Scenario Evaluation

Supply Scenario Evaluation

Needs Identification

Warnings and Disclaimers• This kind of planning has been made overly complicated and technical (probably

to ensure future work for consultants).

• These types of plans are designed to “sync” with regional water plans (which are also overly complicated and technical).

• This kind of planning is the primary statutory purpose of river authorities (it’s why we were created to begin with).

• These plans are designed to identify projects that anyone can implement (not so that river authorities can take over the world).

Preliminary Results DiscussionDemands, supplies, and needs

DemandsDemand scenario evaluation

Demand Projections

• Municipal Demands (includes Industrial and Irrigation demands supplied by municipalities)

• Non-Municipal Demands• Irrigation (Golf Courses, Agricultural)• Industrial• Steam Electric Power • Mining

Demand Projections

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

GALLONS PER CAPITA

DEMAND PROJECTIONS

Municipal Demands

Non-Municipal Demands

Based on recent trends, growth projections, special studies, and stakeholder recommendations

Demand Projections

Determine magnitude of future water demands

Present a range of alternatives

Select most likely alternatives

Focus on average daily demand

Consider impact of conservation efforts

Demand Projections Alternatives

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Minimum Demands Moderate Demands Maximum Demands

Conservation

Demand Patterns

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Dem

and

Fact

or (U

nitle

ss)

Industrial Irrigation Municipal

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Dem

and

Fact

or (U

nitle

ss)

HIGHLANDS SYSTEM

MONTGOMERY SYSTEM

Results - Highlands Selected Demand Scenarios

ScenarioIndustrial Projection

Irrigation Projection

Municipal Projection

1 Expanded Contracts

Current Contracts

Current Contracts

2Expanded

Contracts + Region H Growth

Current Contracts

Current Contracts +

Region H Growth0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Proj

ecte

d AD

F De

man

d (A

c-Ft

/Yr)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2

Montgomery County Municipal Demands

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Proj

ecte

d AD

F De

man

d (A

c-Ft

/Yr)

Range of Municipal Demand Projections

Results - Montgomery County Selected Demand Scenarios

Scenario Industrial Projection

Irrigation Projection Municipal Projection

1Expanded Contracts

Current Contracts

RGUP Pop + Region H GPCD + Region H Manufacturing

2Expanded Contracts

Current Contracts

RGUP Pop + Region H GPCD + Region H Manufacturing +

Baseline Conservation

3Expanded Contracts

Current Contracts

RGUP Pop + Region H GPCD + Region H Manufacturing +

SJRA Conservation

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Proj

ecte

d AD

F De

man

d (A

c-Ft

/Yr)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Proj

ecte

d AD

F De

man

d (A

c-Ft

/Yr)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Results - Montgomery County SJRA Demand Scenarios

Demand Scenarios Summary

• Two demand alternatives selected for Highlands System

• Three demand alternatives selected for Montgomery County System

• serves only current GRP

SuppliesSupply scenario evaluation

Supply Evaluation

• Existing supplies based on SJRA permits

• Reliability of supplies is maximum amount produced during a repeat of drought of record

• Availability of supplies determined using TCEQ Water Availability Models (WAMs)

Supply Evaluation

• WAM availability estimation• Annual output• Monthly output

• Monthly needs analysis using operations model• Determine needs based on operational and infrastructure constraints

2020

2040

2070

Base Condition

Sedimentation

Optimistic Condition

Annual AvailabilityTC

EQ W

AM SJ Basin

Trinity Basin

Return Flows

Sub-AreaPotential Return Flow Supply (ac-ft)

2020 2040 2070

West Fork (Lake Conroe & Lower) 2,535 5,681 14,855

Lake Houston 60,008 88,100 136,567

East Fork 40 42 45

TOTAL 62,583 93,823 151,466

SJRA Permits

LAKE CONROE

LAKE HOUSTON

HIGHLANDS

TRINITY BASIN

4963 (100,000 Ac-ft) – Lake Conroe Permit

4964 (55,000 Ac-ft) – SJRA Highlands Permit (Backup)5807 (14,100 Ac-ft) – Lake Houston Additional Authorization (SJRA)5808 (40,000 Ac-ft) – Excess Flow Permit5809 (14,944 Ac-ft) – Reuse Permit

5271 (56,000 Ac-ft) – Devers4279A (30,000 Ac-ft) – CLCND

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

Min

imum

Ann

ual R

un o

f Riv

er D

iver

sion

(Acr

e-Fe

et)

Highlands System Water Rights Availability

Results - Highlands

WAM = Water Availability Model

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Mod

eled

Firm

Yie

ld (A

cre-

Feet

per

Yea

r)

Lake Conroe Availability

Lake Conroe Permit Yield

Results – Montgomery County

WAM = Water Availability Model

Needs IdentificationNeeds evaluation

Needs Analysis

Supplies Demands Surplus/Needs

REGIONAL PLANNING APPROACH

Supply and Demand Trends

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Demands

Supplies

Detailed Needs Analysis – Why?

Supplies Demands NeedsCapacity

Supply

Timing

Operations

OPERATIONS MODEL

Operations Model - FeaturesMONTGOMERY SYSTEM

LAKECONROE

INFLOWS

IRRIGATION DEMAND

INDUSTRIAL DEMAND

MUNICIPAL DEMAND(EAST)

MUNICIPAL DEMAND (SOUTH)

NET EVAPORATION

LAKEHOUSTON

HIGHLANDSRESERVOIR

TRINITYSUPPLIES

HIGHLANDS SYSTEM

MAIN CANAL DEMAND

EAST CANALDEMAND

SOUTH CANALDEMAND

CWA CANALDEMAND

STRATEGIESSTRATEGIES

Needs Analysis Scenarios

HIGHLANDS•Two Demand Projections

MONTGOMERYThree Demand Projections

BASE (SEDIMENTATION)

OPTIMISTIC CONDITIONS

DROUGHT CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

SUPPLIES DEMANDS SURPLUS/NEEDS

HIGHLANDS

MONTGOMERY

Results - Montgomery County Needs

79,300 77,997 75,500

0

49,884

179,113

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2020 2040 2070

Annu

al A

mou

nt (A

c-Ft

)

Annual Demand

SHORTAGES

SUPPLIES

DEMANDS

79,300 77,997 75,500

031,948

141,099

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2020 2040 2070

Annual Demand

86,002 89,105 83,998

038,776

170,615

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2020 2040 2070

Annual DemandBASE SUPPLY SCENARIO

OPTIMISTIC SUPPLY SCENARIO

DROUGHT CONTINGENCY SCENARIO

Results - Highlands System Needs

158,105 156,696 154,397

2,528 4,120 5,441

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2020 2040 2070

Annu

al A

mou

nt (A

cre-

Feet

)

Annual Demand SHORTAGES

SUPPLIES

DEMANDS

171,604 172,076 172,358

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2020 2040 2070

Annual Demand

158,105 156,696 154,397

1,999 2,862 3,060

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2020 2040 2070

Annual Demand

BASE SUPPLY SCENARIOOPTIMISTIC SUPPLY SCENARIO

DROUGHT CONTINGENCY SCENARIO

Results - Highlands System Needs

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1940

1943

1946

1949

1952

1955

1958

1961

1964

1967

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

ANN

UAL

(ACR

E-FE

ET)

2020 Shortages

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1940

1943

1946

1949

1952

1955

1958

1961

1964

1967

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

ANN

UAL

(ACR

E-FE

ET)

2040 Shortages

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1940

1942

1944

1946

1948

1950

1952

1954

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

ANN

UAL

(ACR

E-FE

ET)

2070 Shortages

BASE SCENARIOAnnual Demand

Needs - Summary

• Both systems’ needs important

• Impacts of Optimistic and Drought Contingency scenarios

• Timing of shortages

Needs - Summary

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2020 2040 2070

Annu

al A

mou

nt (A

cre-

Feet

)

Highlands Shortages – Maximum Demand

Base Shortages

Optimistic Conditions Shortages

Drought Contingency Plan Shortages

Needs - Summary

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

2020 2040 2070

Annu

al A

mou

nt (A

cre-

Feet

)

Montgomery Shortages – Maximum Demand

Base Shortages

Optimistic Conditions Shortages

Drought Contingency Plan Shortages

Water Supply StrategiesPreliminary strategy evaluation

Strategies - Approach

• Detailed strategy analyses are costly

• High-level screening of universe of potential strategies

Evaluation Methodology

Universe of Identified Strategies

Strategies for Detailed

Evaluation

Identified Strategies

Name Details

Additional CWA Canal Capacity

Aquifer Storage and RecoveryDeveloped by SJRA CustomersDeveloped by SJRA (GRP Treated)Developed by SJRA (Mildly Treated)

Bedias ReservoirBrazos River Supplies

Catahoula Aquifer Supplies

Developed by SJRA Customers (Treated)Developed by SJRA Customers (Blended)Developed by SJRA (Lake Conroe)Developed by SJRA (Treated)Developed by SJRA (Blended)

COH Water Swap

ConservationTWDB BaselineSJRA Recommendations

Direct ReuseGRP ParticipantsWoodlands

East Texas Water TransferNeches BasinSabine Basin

Name Details

Lake Creek Reservoir

Lake Creek ScalpingRun-of-River DiversionStorage in Lake ConroeDedicated Storage

Lake Livingston TransferLivingston to ConroeLivingston to Highlands

Purchase GroundwaterPurchase from Eastern BasinsPurchase from Western Basins

Purchase Surface WaterTRACLCNDCOH

Regional Return FlowsLake ConroeLake HoustonLake Houston w/ South Plant

Seawater DesalinationTrinity Return Flows

Next Stakeholder Meeting

Questions??