Laserfiche WebLink
draw from the Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA) for potable use within the urban service area of <br />the unincorporated Indian River County. <br />• A 10% redundancy was added for operational flexibility to the additional demand described <br />above for a total of 5.02 mgd. <br />• Adding 5.8 mgd of additional agricultural demand to the 5.0 mgd for a total 10.82 mgd. Note <br />the 5.8 mgd will not be treated to potable water standards. <br />For the above mentioned criteria reservoir sizes were evaluated based on side water depths. The <br />cost estimates for the three criteria above were calculated based on an optimal side water depth of <br />10 -feet. The cost estimate for each water supply option is a conceptual estimate of probable cost <br />and has been generated based primarily on historical unit prices with appropriate construction cost <br />adjustments applied. The following table is a summary of the results: <br />Surface Water (SW) Option: <br />Additional <br />Demand, mgd <br />Reservoir <br />Size, Acres <br />Land Acquisition <br />Cost, ($ millions) <br />Capital Cost, <br />($ millions) <br />Total Annual <br />O&M Cost, <br />($ millions) <br />Unit Production <br />Cost ($/1,000 <br />gal) <br />3.74 <br />44 <br />0.6 <br />80 <br />2.2 <br />5.17 <br />5.02 <br />64 <br />0.76 <br />81 <br />3.1 <br />4.37 <br />10.82 <br />132 <br />1.42 <br />104 <br />3.2 <br />2.41 <br />As discussed earlier a desktop evaluation of the other options were provided in the report. The <br />table below is a summary of the findings. <br />Other Options: <br />Options <br />Area Needed <br />Capital Cost, <br />($ millions) <br />Total <br />Annual <br />O&M <br />Cost <br />Unit <br />Production <br />Cost <br />($/1,000 <br />gal) <br />Limitations <br />ASR <br />Typically 2 -Acres per <br />well <br />Require 6 wells; <br />$1 to $2 per well. <br />$100 K to <br />$200 K <br />for 5 <br />mgd <br />$ 0.52* <br />Finding good vertical confinement <br />separating ASR zone to water <br />production zone, initial monitoring <br />is expensive; wells can be <br />susceptible to clogging. <br />Desalination <br />Far less than a <br />Reservoir. R/W or <br />easements for <br />transmission lines. <br />$ 200 million for 5 <br />mgd <br />Not <br />available <br />$6 to $10* <br />Greater energy consumption & <br />associated greenhouse gas <br />emissions, ROW issues & permitting <br />challenges <br />Well <br />Abandonment <br />Upper Floridan <br />Aquifer (UFA), <br />Existing Source <br />N/A <br />None. N.RO plant <br />expansion completed <br />in 2006; Permitted <br />Plant Capacity 11.44 <br />MGD** <br />$0.02 per well <br />Add 5.0 MGD; <br />Permit Revision, <br />modeling + 1 skid <br />$ 350,000.00 <br />N/A <br />$ 565 K <br />to 600 K <br />N/A <br />$ 2.20 <br />Permitting challenges to allocate <br />the reduce withdrawal to IRC <br />Consumptive Use Permit <br />Consumptive Use Permit (CUP) <br />renewal will face challenges. <br />Challenges may not be limited to <br />impacts on other users of the UFA, <br />but also to regulatory changes. <br />*In addition to the current rate <br />**Current AADF at N.RO: 5.83 MGD <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\WATER\Alternative Water Supply\2014 Alternative Water Supply\Admin\Agenda - Alternative Water Supply <br />Evaluation -Draft Report.docx <br />151 <br />