1. Broward County-wide Master Reuse Plan
Southeast Florida Utility Council March 10, 2014
Develop a regional reuse master plan
Broward County, Municipalities, and Water Providers
Short term
Work to establish a regionally coordinated master plan for the development and delivery of reclaimed water on a county-wide basis.

2. Presentation Overview - Road Map
Where we started:
Background
Goals
What we did:
Team Selection
Scope Development
Project Tools Development
Where we’re going:
Implementation
Planning, and Data Collection

3. BACKGROUND

4. Background: Water Resources Task Force
Task Force Report - January 2011
Included 40 recommendations in the areas of:
Water conservation
Reuse planning and development
Regional water supply projects
Investigation and modeling
Recommendations addressed regional water resource needs ensuring the sustainability of the environment, the quality of life for the residents as well as the economic vitality of the region.
The Technical Team was directed to give special consideration to reuse opportunities as part of later
development of regional water supply alternatives for the Task Force’s consideration.

5. Background: Water Resources Task Force
Eleven (11) recommendations specific to reuse including;
Recommendation #19
Regional Reuse Master Plan
20) Recognize utility investments in reuse – Pursue a system of allocated alternative water supply credits for utilities that pay for reuse. (SFWMD and Water Providers – short term)
21) Develop and maintain a regional coverage of local reuse infrastructure – Support County efforts to develop a regional GIS coverage of local reuse infrastructure for use in future
22) Coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) – Work with the FDOT to obtain annual updates
23) Coordinate with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Reuse Work Group and related entities
24) Utilize corridors in reuse planning efforts – Investigate the use of rights-of-way, canals and other waterbodies for laying reuse lines.
25) Coordinate with the Broward County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
26) Update local 5-Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) – Phase into 5-year CIPs the necessary infrastructure to more fully utilize available reclaimed water supplies
27)Amend land use and comprehensive plans – Encourage better integration of reuse planning and projects in future development and redevelopment plans
28) Further the use of reclaimed water for irrigation – Develop new county and/or municipal ordinances, or amend current ordinances establishment of mandatory reuse zones, fully considering the availability of flows, proximity of irrigation systems to reclaimed water lines, costs and

6. Background: Water Reuse Challenges
Developed urban areas
25 distinct water providers
15 distinct wastewater providers
Seasonal demand fluctuations
Treatment costs/disposal options
RWAR- limiting traditional water sources
Ocean outfall legislation (Senate Bill 1302) requiring the elimination of treated wastewater disposal via ocean outfalls and the transfer of 60% of facility actual flow on an annual basis to beneficial reuse applications by Two of the six ocean in Broward County. The combined flows of these two facilities is approximately 77.5 MGD; hence, fulfillment of obligations under this legislation will require that 46.5 MGD of current wastewater flows be redirected to beneficial reuse applications within Broward County.

7. Background: Water Reuse Drivers
Key Drivers in the Past
Key Drivers Today
Water/Wastewater concurrency
Saltwater intrusion
Costs for alternatives
Regional Water Availability Rule
Ocean Outfall Rule
Climate Change
Regulatory Requirements
RWAR- limiting traditional water sources
Ocean outfall legislation (Senate Bill 1302) requiring the elimination of treated wastewater disposal via ocean outfalls and the transfer of 60% of facility actual flow on an annual basis to beneficial reuse applications by Two of the six ocean in Broward County. The combined flows of these two facilities is approximately 77.5 MGD; hence, fulfillment of obligations under this legislation will require that 46.5 MGD of current wastewater flows be redirected to beneficial reuse applications within Broward County.

8. Background: Regulatory Reuse Drivers
Reclaimed Water Feasibility Study
Renewing Facility Permits
Renewing Water Use Permits
Renewing UIC Permit

9. Background: Reuse Master Plan Goal
To develop a Regional Reuse Master Plan that will build upon current municipal and county efforts and coordinate a regional approach to reuse planning, maximizing cost-effective reuse development within Broward County
To create a platform for shared communication
To provide flexible and interactive planning tools
reduce demands on the Biscayne Aquifer, the development of alternative water supplies, and fulfills legislative and consumptive use permit requirements for reuse development.

10. Coordination & Tool Development

11. Work Effort: Team Selection
Water and Wastewater Providers/Local Gov’ts
Consultants
Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.
Craven Thompson & Associates, Inc.
Cordova Rodriguez & Assoc., Inc.
Steve Lamb
Broward County:
Natural Resources Planning and Management
Development and Environmental Review
BC Water and Wastewater Services
FLDEP, DOH, DOT, SFWMD

12. Work Effort: Team Collaborations
Review of Previous Studies/Reports
Stakeholder Meetings
Stakeholder Specific Interactive Project Analysis
Reclaimed Water Planning Tools Development

13. Work Effort: Tool Production
GIS Reclaimed Water Planning Tool
Project Evaluation Model
...tools can be easily adapted and updated as reclaimed water needs and drivers change over time

14. Work Effort: GIS Planning Tool
Foundation for data storage and interpretation
Database of existing and planned reclaimed water infrastructure
Addition of planned County Public Works Projects
Google Earth platform allows for easy manipulations of alternatives
Tool was used to develop proposed regional projects

15. Work Effort: BC WWS Example
Broward NRWWTP
5 Miles
3 Miles
1 Mile
Broward WWS Utility Boundary
Evaluated potential users based on distance from WWTP
Two scenarios:
With utility boundaries
Without utility boundaries

16. Within Utility Boundary
Work Effort: BC WWS Example, cont.
Scenarios
Within Utility Boundary
No Utility Boundary
No. of Customers
Demand (mgd)
Potential Partners
One mile radius 3
0.37 4
0.39
Pompano Beach
Three mile radius 38
3.63 78
9.42
Pompano Beach, Deerfield Beach, Margate
Five mile radius 59
4.55
154
13.83
Pompano Beach, Deerfield Beach, Margate, Coral Springs, Fort Lauderdale, North Lauderdale, Parkland

17. Work Effort: Project Evaluation Model
Criteria were developed with stakeholders
Final criteria included the following categories
Project Benefits
Project Implementation
Project Reliability
General Acceptance of Project
Project Costs
Weights and scaling factors were established
Model is in Excel – simplifies revisions

18. Work Effort: Master Reuse Plan
Existing and planned reclaimed water infrastructure
Planned County Public Works projects
Costs and carbon footprint of potential reclaimed water projects
Climate change impacts on reclaimed water options
Potential reclaimed water opportunities by utility
Regional reclaimed water projects
Regional projects using Criteria Model
Guidelines for future maintenance of tools

19. Future implementation

20. Implementation: Benefits
Current:
Database of existing reclaimed water infrastructure-not previously available
Catalyst for multijurisdictional partnering
Documents reuse projects for future funding under SB 444 or other
Future:
Reduction in engineering costs for future planning efforts
Ability to visually analyze options
Platform to coordinate with future public works projects and potentially reduce construction costs

21. Implementation: Potential Projects for Analysis

22. Implementation: Criterion

23. Implementation: Initial
Initial Implementation Plan is based on criteria today
The Implementation Plan is flexible
Will be updated as drivers change over time
To be updated by utilities in the future

24. Implementation: Preliminary
Regional Projects
Implementation Phasing
Capital Cost per Gallon
Total Capital Cost
Reason for Grouping:
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Phase & Timing
MGD per Phase
Cumm. MGD
BC - PBC Agreement (to PBC)
15.00 I
24.54
$5.43
$104M
ongoing/ocean outfall requirement
BC - PBC Agreement (within BC)
4.2
Sunrise Sawgrass Large User - Phase A
2.00
$14.62
$29M
ongoing/ FDEP permit requirement
Davie Large User - Phase A
3.34
$10.23
$34M
ongoing/outfall compliance
Cooper City (credit sharing with other)
0.96 II
23.61
48.15
TBD
outfall compliance by 2025
Pompano Beach Residential Irrigation – Phase A for BC Outfall Compliance
2.25
Hollywood Aquifer project
20.40
$ $13.82
$182M - $282M
Plantation Large User
3.92
III
13.87
62.02
$6.66
$26M
score 40-50
Margate Large User
1.83
$9.10
$17M
Miramar Large User (across boundaries or with Pembroke Pines Effluent)
8.12
$8.64
$70M
Pompano Beach Residential Irrigation – Phase B
1.58 IV
9.12
71.14
$10.42
$16M
score 30-40
Davie Large User - Phase B
0.85
$9M
Sunrise Springtree
2.72
$8.14
$22M
Sunrise Sawgrass Large User - Phase B
3.97
$9.71
$39M
CSID Large User
2.17 V
3.86
75.00
$10.83
$24M
score <30
Sunrise Southwest Large User
0.69
$15.45
$11M
Fort Lauderdale - unidentified
1.00

25. Implementation: Preliminary
Regional Projects
Implementation Phasing
Capital Cost per Gallon
Total Capital Cost
Reason for Grouping:
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Phase & Timing
MGD per Phase
Cumm. MGD
BC - PBC Agreement (to PBC)
15.00 I
24.54
$5.43
$104M
ongoing/ocean outfall requirement
BC - PBC Agreement (within BC)
4.2
Sunrise Sawgrass Large User - Phase A
2.00
$14.62
$29M
ongoing/ FDEP permit requirement
Davie Large User - Phase A
3.34
$10.23
$34M
ongoing/outfall compliance
Cooper City (credit sharing with other)
0.96 II
23.61
48.15
TBD
outfall compliance by
Pompano Beach Residential Irrigation – Phase A for BC Outfall Compliance
2.25
Hollywood Aquifer project
20.40
$ $13.82
$182M - $282M

26. Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Implementation: Phase I
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Total Capital Cost
Partners
BC - PBC Agreement (to PBC) 1
15.00
$104 M
Palm Beach County, Deerfield Beach, Coconut Creek
BC – PBC Agreement (within BC) 1
4.20
Sunrise Sawgrass Large User – Phase A 2
2.00
$29 M
Plantation
Davie Large User – Phase A 3
3.34
$34 M
Sunrise
PHASE I RECLAIMED WATER DEMAND
24.54
1 – BCWWS will progress in incremental amounts.
2 – City is required to construct 2 mgd but may install additional capacity.
3 – Town is presently constructing.

27. Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Implementation: Phase II
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Total Capital Cost
Partners
Cooper City Credit Sharing 1
0.96
TBD
Pompano Beach Residential Irrigation – Phase A for BCWWS 2
2.25 --
Hollywood Floridan Aquifer
20.40
$182 M –$282 M
PHASE II - RECLAIMED WATER ADDED
23.61
TOTAL RECLAIMED WATER DEMAND
48.15
1 – City will pay another utility to construct for ocean outfall compliance.
2 – BCWWS compliance alternative for ocean outfall compliance.

28. Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Phase III –
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Total Capital Cost
Partners
Plantation Large User
3.92
$26 M --
Margate Large User
1.83
$17 M
Miramar Large User (with additional effluent, if desired)
8.12
$70 M
Pembroke Pines, Cooper City
PHASE III - RECLAIMED WATER ADDED
13.87
TOTAL RECLAIMED WATER DEMAND
62.02

29. Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Phase IV –
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Total Capital Cost
Partners
Pompano Residential Irrigation – Phase B
1.58
$16 M --
Davie Large User – Phase B
0.85
$9 M
Sunrise
Sunrise Springtree Large User
2.72
$22 M
Lauderhill, Tamarac
Sunrise Sawgrass Large User – Phase B
3.97
$39 M
PHASE IV - RECLAIMED WATER ADDED
9.12
TOTAL RECLAIMED WATER DEMAND
71.14

30. Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Phase V –
Project Name
Reclaimed Water Demand (mgd)
Total Capital Cost
Partners
CSID Large User
2.17
$24 M
Coral Springs, Tamarac
Sunrise Southwest Large User
0.69
$11 M
FPL
Fort Lauderdale - Unidentified
1.00
TBD
PHASE V - RECLAIMED WATER ADDED
3.86
TOTAL RECLAIMED WATER DEMAND
75.00

31. Implementation: Phase I 2015-2020

32. Implementation: Phase II 2020-2025

33. Implementation: Future !!!

34. Questions?
Barbara A.Powell
(954)

35. Weights Established by Stakeholders
Example: Project Costs Criteria
Criterion No.
Criterion
Criterion Weight (Plantation)
Criterion Weight (others) 18
Available Funding Assistance 5% 19
Capital Costs
60%
45% 20
Operation and Maintenance Costs
18%
15%

36. Criterion Values Included in Model
No.
Criterion
Description
Criterion Values 2
Potable Offset
Indicates if Utility has a need for AWS
0 = No need
2 = Provides AWS 3
Susceptibility to Climate Change
Sensitivity of project to climate change/SLR.
0 = Benefits will be significantly lower
1 = Benefits will be moderately lower
2 = Benefits are NOT expected to change
3 = Benefits will increase 4
Complies with Outfall legislation or permit requirement
Indicates compliance with reuse requirements
0 = Does not meet/not required
1 = Project partially meets requirements
2 = Project fully meets