r: Abbotsford rr ¢VI/ Mission Water & Sewer Ser vices REPORT

To: Abbotsford Mission Water & Sewer Commission

From: Tracy Kyle, Director of Water & Solid Waste

Date: February 22, 2012

Subject: Future Water Source Options - Next Steps

File: 5330-60

Report No.: WSC 5-2012

UTILITY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (UMC) RECOMMENDATION

THAT Report No. WSC 5-2012, dated February 22, 2012, from Tracy Kyle, Director of Water & Solid Waste, regarding the Water Source Options - Next Steps, be received.

BACKGROUND

Future Abbotsford-Mission water source planning has been an ongoing process for over 20-years (as summarized in Attachment A). Up until November 2011 , the AMWSC intended to develop as a new water source by 2016. However, following the public referendum outcome on November 19, 2011, all work on Stave Lake ceased.

Both Abbotsford and Mission are growing. Even with a water conservation program and existing system improvements, a new water source will eventually be needed to meet future demands and provide water system redundancy.

DISCUSSION

Future Water Source Timing

Staff propose to update water demand projections in 5-year increments between 2012 and 2037, along with those for 2062 and 2112 (i.e. 50-year and 100-year planning horizons). The timing for a new water source will be clarified from the projections compared against the known system capacity. This work will be completed in-house.

Water demands are calculated by:

Total Demand = Total Equivalent Population x Per Capita Consumption

Where: "Total Equivalent Population" is the sum of the residential population plus a conversion of water needed by non-residential sectors into 'equivalent numbers of people'. "Per Capita Consumption" is the amount of water consumed per person per day. WSC Report No. 5-2012 Page 2 of 4

Residential population projections will source from the latest BC Stats' mid-year estimates and projections, which are considered the best estimates available in . Equivalent non-residential populations will be determined for industrial, commercial, institutional and agricultural sectors using non-residential growth projection information from the Abbotsford & Mission Planning Departments' . Per capita consumption values will source from existing data and the 2012 Water Efficiency Studl. The ultimate deliverable will be a graph, accompanied by an explanatory report, which presents both best-case and worst-case water demand projections, similar to the schematic shown below. The objective will be to provide the AMWSC with a draft 3 report/graph by mid-year , with a final version available in early Fall 2012.

Conservative, Best Estimate and ------Aggressive Demand Projections ~ }to be considered j ...... / .. ,, " -.... :~ _-. ::~:.I ::.:. ;.~ .~. ~ . : .-. ~. : .-\: : .~ ~: i ~~.~;;;~.~;. ~;~-~~~~:y .; ... '" I .. ) .. I .. " ,," I r ," I I .. I I Non-linear demand curve ~ Per capita consumption may decrease with time as water conservation success improves.

'---v--' 2012 Year , Earliest & Latest New Source Required

Future Source Sizing

Previous Water Master Plans reviewed long term water source options, as they typically represent the best economic long-term solution. For this next review, staff propose that additional options be considered. From the demand projections, AMWSC staff will propose new source development capacities that would be required in the: 1) Short Term (5-years) - i.e. sizing of a solution that defers a larger investment while Abbotsford and Mission collect further reserve funds. 2) Moderate Term (20-years) - i.e. sizing of a solution that may not be the most cost-effective in the long run, but allows Abbotsford and Mission to afford the capital costs with minimal debt financing. 3) Long Term (50+ years) - i.e. sizing for the best economic long-term solution

1 Mission is currently completing an independent water supply and demand study; AMWSC staff will align regional projections with information from Mission's study. 2 The 2012 Water Efficiency Study will begin in May/Jun after 1-year of Abbotsford Smart Meter data is available.

3 Since the Water Efficiency Study 'per capita consumption' conclusions will not be known when staff start working on demand projections, a first draft will be developed using best staff estimates and then a final version will be refined later in the year. WSC Report No. 5-2012 Page 3 of4

Future Source Selection

Considering that there have been significant past investments into water source studies, staff propose that a further in-house study be completed. As needed, consultants will be retained for specialized work (geotechnical, environmental, archeological & technical cost estimates) to provide technical memos for incorporation into the final report. Once there is AMWSC consensus on the sizing for short, moderate and long term planning horizons, staff would review historical work and deliver a report that recommends what past options warrant re-assessment. If relevant, staff may also recommend options not previously contemplated. For each option approved by the AMWSC, staff would complete Class 0 4 cost estimates. From these, one preferred option for each planning horizon will be refined to Class C5 (subject to budget constraints) cost accuracy. A final report will detail these costs, and all other relevant considerations, to the AMWSC. Public consultation and input would be included throughout this process.

All source options shall be evaluated using: • Lowest cost (Capital, 5-year, 20-year & 50-year Net Present Value). • Implementation timeline (i.e. solution ensures that, at no time, will water demands exceed available supplies). • Technical viability (i.e. anticipated ease of construction, water treatment requirements). • Permitting viability (i.e. risk of project refusal or delays associated with Environmental Assessment, water licensing, First Nation consultation, or other permitting). • Providing system redundancy (i.e. if the primary source fails, there are sufficient alternate sources to meet minimum system requirements). • Construction options.

Timelines

No matter when a future source is required, planning needs to occur now. Regardless of whether the AMWSC wishes to pursue a short, moderate or long-term solution, one must be prepared for a minimum of 2-years for permitting and 3-years for design/construction before any new source is operational. The draft terms of reference and an approximate schedule for the studies are included in Attachment B.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Funds of $300,000 are included in the 2012 budget to clarify the AMWSC's future water supply plans.

COMMUNICATION PLAN

As with the development of previous Water Master Plans, open houses will be held in Abbotsford and Mission for comment at each key stage of the above proposed work: • Draft water demand projections report is completed - input for the final version . • Final water demand projections report is completed - report the final numbers. • Short-list of source options is recommended for Class 0 cost development - ensure no options have been dismissed due to overlooked information. • Recommended short, moderate and long term solutions - obtain feedback before investing in Class C cost analyses. • AMWSC final plan is adopted - input before permitting and engineering work begins.

4 Class D cost estimates are strictly an indication (rough order of magnitude) of the final project cost, and should be sufficient for relative ranking of options. 5 Class C Cost estimates are based on a full description of the preferred option, construction/design experience, and market conditions, this estimate should be sufficient for making the correct investment decision, and obtaining preliminary project approval. WSC Report No. 5-2012 Page 4 of 4

Assuming available resources in Abbotsford's Corporate Communications and IT Departments, interactive project info/feedback websites will also be explored to involve the public.

SUMMARY

Abbotsford and Mission are growing and a new water source will be needed to meet future demands and provide water system redundancy. Staff propose to re-assess the timing, sizing and selection of a future source throughout 2012. This will be accomplished by an in-house Water Dem r jection Study and Water Source Options Study.

rdon, P. Eng. Tracy Kyle, P. Eng. ral Manager, Eng ineering and Director of Water & Sol d Regional Utilities Attachment A - History of Future Water Source Master Planning & Studies

The Central Fraser Valley Water Commission (CFVWC)'s 1995/96 Master Plan Update was the first engineering study to contemplate a future water system expansionS. That Master Plan reviewed options including: Norrish Creek expansion, additional Fraser Valley groundwater extraction, connecting to the Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD)'s system , , Chilliwack River/Lake, Stave Lake, Hayward Lake, and /River. The CFVWC chose to focus on developing Harrison Lake or River, under the assumption that the GVWD (now Metro Vancouver) and/or other neighbouring municipalities would be a partner sharing the costs. Between 1996 and 2002, the CFVWC carried out conceptual level engineering work, pursued partnering discussions with the GVWD and began initial Environmental Assessment (EA) steps. The intent was to commission a Harrison water supply by 2015.

7 While preparing a Project Description to support the Harrison EA process in 2002/03 , revised engineering cost estimates suggested that a Harrison water supply scheme would be much higher than originally anticipated. Furthermore, it had become clear that the GVWD's long-range plans would not include Harrison. As such, the CFVWC's 2002 water supply Master Plan recommended that alternative sources be investigated"'

A 2004 high-level source study suggested that development of a new 25 MLD Abbotsford­ Sumas aquifer well field , followed by development of a Stave Lake supply would be the most 9 cost effective solution for the CFVWC to address anticipated supply shortages . The first recommended step was ultimately executed in the form of the Bevan Wells. The 2006 Water Master Plan supported further examination of Stave Lake's potential'O The next water Master Plan", which was finalized in early 2010, recommended the development of Stave Lake as the next water source for the region.

In 2010, a Stave Lake conceptual engineering study'2 was completed to examine the water intake, raw water pumping, water treatment and pipeline alignment options.

G Dayton & Knight, August 1996, 1995/96 Update of Master Plan, Section 5 1 Dayton & Knight, July 2003, Harrison Water Supply Project Description Report 8 Dayton & Kn ight. May 2003. 2002 Update of Master Plan \I EarthTech, May 2004, FVRD Water Source Options Financial Analysis 10 Dayton & Knight, September 2006, Master Plan Update " AECOM, April 2010, AMWSC Water Master Plan 12 AECOM, March 2010, Stave Lake Water Supply Conceptual Design Attachment B - Draft Terms of Reference and Schedule

Month Activity April Review historical documents and choose which of the past options Staff warrant re-assessment. April/May Public consultation to gather options that the public consider worth Staff consideration. Public April/May Choose options to be reviewed. AMWSC May Water efficiency study will begin in May/June so until the per capita Staff consumption conclusions are known draft numbers of best case and worse case per capita consumption will be used from existing data. With this consumption information the total demand can be obtained. May Receive draft report of water demand projections being carried out Staff by staff simultaneously. June/July Work on all of the options to include a review of: Staff - Implementation timeline - Technical - System redundancy - Amount of pumping required - Water quality - Permitting Viability - Construction options July Review each option in terms of any environmental concerns Consultant July Review each option in terms of any archaeological concerns Consultant July Review each option in terms of any geological concerns Consultant August Prepare Class D estimates for all options. Staff Consultant September Public consultation on options, costs and rankings. Staff Public September Choose one best option for the short term , medium term and long AMWSC term. October Model each of the three chosen options to ensure the water source Staff is feasible when integrated into the existing system. Consultant October Prepare draft report. Staff October Prepare Class C cost estimates for the three options. Staff Consultant October Public consultation on the three options. Staff Public November Prepare final report. Staff December Choose water source option. AMWSC