2009 water comprehensive plan - alderwood water district

LDERWOODWATER & WASTEWATER

DISTRICT

Alderwood Water & Wastewater District

2009 Water Comprehensive Plan

August 2009

Summary

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District Water Comprehensive Plan – Summary Volume

August 2009

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District i Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

Acknowledgements

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District

Arden Blackledge, P.E., General Manager Nancy Davidson, P.E., District Engineer Brigitte McCarty, P.E., Senior Project Engineer Chris Schumacher, P.E., Project Engineer Dan Scheil, P.E., Engineering Services Manager Joe Bolam, M&O Director Mike Johnson, M&O Superintendent Brett Gehrke, Field Operations Manager Darren DeMontes, Water Quality Supervisor

HDR Engineering, Inc

Andrew Graham, Project Manager Paige Igoe, P.E., Lead Engineer Jeff Hansen, P.E., Project Engineer Kelly O'Rourke, Planner Cil Pierce, Financial Analyst Chris Sheridan, M&O Analyst Amie Hanson, Water Quality Specialist

Confluence Engineering Group

Melinda Friedman, P.E., Water Quality Engineer

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District ii Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. System Overview ..................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Planning Objectives ................................................................................................. 1

1.3. Organization of Water Comprehensive Plan ........................................................... 2

2. System Description ........................................................................................................... 3 2.1. Ownership and Management ................................................................................... 3

2.2. Service Area, Wholesale Customers and Adjacent Purveyors ................................ 3

2.2.1. Water Service Area ..................................................................................... 3

2.2.2. Wholesale Customers and Adjacent Purveyors ......................................... 4

2.3. System Facilities ...................................................................................................... 4

2.3.1. Source of Supply ........................................................................................ 4

2.3.2. Water Distribution Facilities ........................................................................ 7

2.3.3. Wells ........................................................................................................... 7

2.3.4. Interties ....................................................................................................... 8

3. Related Plans, Agreements and Policies .......................................................................... 9 3.1. Everett Supply Agreement ..................................................................................... 10

3.2. Wholesale Customer Agreements and Plans ........................................................ 10

3.3. Retail Service Area Agreements and Plans ........................................................... 11

3.3.1. City of Bothell ............................................................................................ 11

3.3.2. City of Brier ............................................................................................... 12

3.3.3. City of Lynnwood ...................................................................................... 12

3.3.4. City of Mill Creek ....................................................................................... 12

3.3.5. City of Mukilteo ......................................................................................... 13

3.3.6. Snohomish County ................................................................................... 13

3.4. Emergency Intertie Agreements ............................................................................ 16

3.5. Service Area Coordination Agreements ................................................................ 16

3.6. Other Agreements ................................................................................................. 16

3.6.1. Mutual Aid Agreement .............................................................................. 16

3.6.2. Clearview Operations Agreement ............................................................. 16

3.6.3. Clearview Pump Station Operation Agreement ........................................ 17

3.6.4. Brightwater Construction Agreement ........................................................ 17

3.6.5. Pump Stations Upgrade Study Agreement ............................................... 17

3.6.6. Cooperative Purchasing Agreement ......................................................... 17

3.7. District Service Area Policies ................................................................................. 17

4. Planning Data and Demand Forecast ............................................................................. 19 4.1. Demographic Data and Projections ....................................................................... 19

4.2. Water Use Characteristics ..................................................................................... 20

4.2.1. Water Purchased from Everett Regional System ..................................... 20

4.2.2. Water Delivered to AWWD Retail and Wholesale Customers .................. 21

4.2.3. Water Balance Calculations ...................................................................... 23

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District iii Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

4.2.4. Water Use Factors and ERUs .................................................................. 24

4.3. Demand Forecast .................................................................................................. 25

5. Conservation Program .................................................................................................... 30 5.1. Existing Conservation Program ............................................................................. 30

5.1.1. Measures .................................................................................................. 30

5.1.2. Estimated Savings .................................................................................... 31

5.2. 2009-2014 Conservation Program ......................................................................... 31

5.2.1. Goals ........................................................................................................ 31

5.2.2. Measures .................................................................................................. 32

5.2.3. Estimated Savings, Cost and Impact to Demand ..................................... 32

6. Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards ............................................. 36 6.1. Project Review Procedures ................................................................................... 36

6.2. Policies and Requirements for Outside Parties ..................................................... 37

6.3. Design Standards .................................................................................................. 37

6.3.1. Distribution System Pressure Requirements ............................................ 37

6.3.2. Fire Flow Requirements ............................................................................ 38

6.3.3. Source Capacity Requirements ................................................................ 38

6.3.4. Storage Capacity Requirements ............................................................... 38

6.4. Construction Standards ......................................................................................... 40

6.5. Construction Certification and Follow-up Procedures ............................................ 40

7. System Analysis .............................................................................................................. 41 7.1. Source Capacity Analysis ...................................................................................... 41

7.2. Storage Capacity Analysis ..................................................................................... 41

7.3. Distribution System Analysis ................................................................................. 42

8. Water System Reliability, Water Rights, and Source Protection ..................................... 45 8.1. Source Reliability ................................................................................................... 45

8.1.1. Adequacy of Existing Supply Sources ...................................................... 45

8.1.2. Interties ..................................................................................................... 46

8.1.3. Water Reuse ............................................................................................. 46

8.2. Water Rights .......................................................................................................... 47

8.3. Water Shortage Response Planning ..................................................................... 47

8.4. Source Protection .................................................................................................. 48

8.4.1. Everett Sultan River Source ..................................................................... 48

8.4.2. Wellhead Protection Plan ......................................................................... 48

9. Water Quality Compliance .............................................................................................. 50 9.1. System Overview and Water Quality Compliance Responsibilities ....................... 50

9.2. Overview of Drinking Water Regulations ............................................................... 50

9.3. Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations ................................................................ 52

9.4. Summary of Regulatory Status .............................................................................. 52

9.5. Summary of AWWD’s Monitoring Requirements ................................................... 54

9.6. Response to Customer Inquiries or Complaints .................................................... 55

10. Operations and Maintenance Program ........................................................................... 56

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District iv Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

10.1. Water System Management and Personnel .......................................................... 56

10.2. Operator Certification............................................................................................. 56

10.3. System Operations and Control ............................................................................. 57

10.3.1. SCADA and Telemetry System ................................................................ 57

10.3.2. Storage Reservoirs ................................................................................... 57

10.3.3. Pump Stations .......................................................................................... 57

10.3.4. Disinfection Facilities ................................................................................ 57

10.3.5. Pressure Reducing Valves ....................................................................... 58

10.3.6. Distribution Pipes ...................................................................................... 58

10.3.7. Preventative Maintenance Program ......................................................... 58

10.3.8. Equipment, Supplies, and Chemical Listing ............................................. 59

10.4. Comprehensive Monitoring Plan ............................................................................ 59

10.5. Emergency Response Program ............................................................................. 59

10.6. Safety Procedures and Programs .......................................................................... 59

10.7. Cross-Connection Control Program ....................................................................... 60

10.8. Record Keeping and Reporting ............................................................................. 60

11. Capital Improvement Program ........................................................................................ 61 11.1. Development of CIP ............................................................................................... 61

11.2. Planned Projects.................................................................................................... 62

12. Financial Program ........................................................................................................... 65 12.1 Past Financial History ............................................................................................ 65

12.2 Review of the District’s Water Rates ..................................................................... 65

12.3 Financial Plan ........................................................................................................ 66

12.5 Rate Impacts.......................................................................................................... 68

12.6 Summary ............................................................................................................... 68

Figures

Figure 1. Location Map ..................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2. Water Service Area with Wholesale Customers and Neighboring Purveyors .... 5 Figure 3. Pressure Zones and Distribution System Facilities ........................................... 6 Figure 4. Land Use in Service Area ................................................................................ 15 Figure 5. Breakdown of Water Sales, by Percent of Total (2004 – 2006) ....................... 22 Figure 6. Monthly Water Sales (2004 – 2006) ................................................................ 23 Figure 7. Demand Forecast Methodology ....................................................................... 26 Figure 8. Demand Forecast Summary ............................................................................ 29 Figure 9. Average Day Demand Forecast Details (with additional conservation) ........... 29 Figure 10. Estimated Cumulative Savings from 2009-2014 Conservation Program ......... 33 Figure 11. Storage Components ....................................................................................... 39

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District v Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

Tables Table 1. Water System Information ................................................................................. 3 Table 2. Interties with Adjacent Purveyors ...................................................................... 8 Table 3. Plans Reviewed ................................................................................................. 9 Table 4. District Agreements ......................................................................................... 10 Table 5. Demographic Projections ................................................................................. 19 Table 6. Annual Production Characteristics ................................................................... 20 Table 7. Monthly Water Purchases (2001 – 2006) ........................................................ 20 Table 8. Retail Water Service Connections (2001 – 2006)1 .......................................... 21 Table 9. Annual Water Sales by Customer Classification (2001 – 2006) ...................... 22 Table 10. District Water Balance1 .................................................................................... 24 Table 11. Water Use Factors ........................................................................................... 25 Table 12. Water Demand Forecast (mgd) ....................................................................... 27 Table 13. Existing Conservation Program ....................................................................... 30 Table 14. Estimated Savings Achieved by Existing Program .......................................... 31 Table 15. 2009-2014 Conservation Program ................................................................... 32 Table 16. Estimated Savings from 2009-2014 Conservation Program ............................ 34 Table 17. Demand Reduction Due to Conservation by 2014 .......................................... 35 Table 18. Source Adequacy ............................................................................................ 41 Table 19. Summary of Storage Capacity Analysis (in MG).............................................. 42 Table 20. Modeling Scenarios ......................................................................................... 44 Table 21. Existing Water Rights ...................................................................................... 47 Table 22. Effective Federal Drinking Water Regulations Applicable to AWWD1 ............. 51 Table 23. Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations .......................................................... 52 Table 24. Summary of Applicable Regulations and Compliance Status .......................... 53 Table 25. Summary of Monitoring Requirements ............................................................ 54 Table 26. Water System Certification Information ........................................................... 56 Table 27. Capital Improvement Program (2009 – 2028) ................................................. 63 Table 28. Summary of Five-Year Financial History ($000s) ............................................ 65 Table 29. Overview of the District’s Current Water Rates ............................................... 66 Table 30. Summary of the District’s Six-Year Financial Plan ($000s) ............................. 67 Table 31. Summary of the Six-Year Rate Adjustment Transition Plan ($000) ................. 68 Table 32. Summary of the Rate Impacts ($/Month) to a Typical Residential Customer .. 68

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District ES-1 Executive Summary Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

Executive Summary

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District (AWWD) operates a distribution system within its retail service area serving 158,000 people in several communities throughout southwest Snohomish County. The District has prepared a Water Comprehensive Plan to assess water system needs over a 20-year time frame. The Plan meets State Department of Health planning requirements for public water systems and enables the District to proactively plan system improvements. These improvements will enable AWWD to continue providing reliable service and high quality water as rapid growth continues to occur in Snohomish County.

As a basis for planning infrastructure, this Plan provides a forecast of water needs. Based on population forecasts consistent with comprehensive planning by the County and local Cities, water needs are expected to grow by 52 percent during the planning period. After adjusting for conservation, average day demands for the District’s retail customers, wholesale customers and the Clearview Project partners are expected to reach 47 million gallons per day by 2028. Maximum day demands are expected to reach 81 million gallons per day. The demand forecast reflects the changing character of demand in the District’s service area, as higher density developments become more common. It also reflects the planned addition of Mukilteo Water District as a new wholesale customer.

The District has participated since the 1990’s in a regional water conservation program administered by the City of Everett. Beginning with this Plan, the District also plans to expand its conservation activities by adding conservation services not currently available under the regional program. By 2014 these programs together are expected to reduce the need for water within the District’s retail service area by nearly 500,000 gallons per day, compared with demands that would occur without conservation.

AWWD uses a detailed computer model of its water distribution system to assess hydraulic conditions and explore effects of growth on the physical network of pipes, pumps and storage reservoirs. For this Plan, the model has been fully updated and improved. The model was used to assess needs under existing water demands; as well as higher demands forecast for 2014 and 2028. Areas where continued growth could compromise system performance were identified. A list of infrastructure projects was developed and the model was re-run to assess their effectiveness in correcting deficiencies where needed.

The result of this process is an updated Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifying approximately 75 capital improvement projects to be constructed over the next 20 years. Investments needed to complete these projects are estimated at $212 million over the next 20 years. Approximately half of this should be accomplished in the next six years, to address current deficiencies and near-term needs.

Projects identified address a variety of needs. Some projects are designed to correct current, localized deficiencies in water pressures available to customers or sufficiency of water for fighting fires. Some projects address periodic maintenance needs such as re-coating of water storage reservoirs and refurbishment of the District’s pump stations. Other projects will correct hydraulic problems that will occur as water use increases with population. The CIP also includes projects to improve operational performance, enhance security, meet water quality requirements and replace aging system components that could compromise reliability if not replaced.

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District ES-2 Executive Summary Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

Water distributed by AWWD comes from the regional supply system managed by the City of Everett. The regional supply system includes source, treatment and transmission facilities. AWWD pays wholesale charges for this supply to cover its share of capital costs and operating expenses associated with the regional system. Information on the regional system’s facilities and planned improvements is not presented here, but can be found in the City of Everett Comprehensive Water Plan (2007).

A financial plan was developed to evaluate how planned capital projects and expected operating costs will affect the District’s revenue needs and adherence to financial policies established by the Board. Revenues and expenses were projected for the next six years based on the District’s current budget; capital improvement plan, and projected growth in water sold. Rate adjustments will be required in order for the District to fund the capital plan and meet operating expenses. The financial plan applied rate adjustments ranging from three percent to 5.5 percent each year for the next six years. Based on these levels of rate adjustment, the financial plan presented in this WCP enables the District to meet annual expenses and remain within the desired ranges for reserve levels and debt service coverage ratios. AWWD will soon complete a detailed rate study to determine water rates at appropriate levels.

This Plan provides a thorough assessment of the District’s programs and needs. It will serve as the District’s “road map” over the next six years and provide a basis for biennial budget decisions. Consistent with DOH requirements, the Plan will be reviewed and fully updated again six years from now.

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District 1 Chapter 1 Water Comprehensive Plan Summary August 2009

1. Introduction

Alderwood Water and Wastewater District (AWWD) distributes drinking water within a large area in southwestern Snohomish County, Washington. This 2009 Water Comprehensive Plan (WCP) describes the District’s water distribution facilities, operations and compliance with state and federal drinking water regulations. It identifies capital project needs for the next six years and 20 years, as well as the District’s financial plan to fund these needs.

1.1. System Overview

The District was formed in 1931 to provide water service within Snohomish County. The rapid growth in the county in recent decades has made Alderwood Water & Wastewater District the largest special purpose district providing water service in Washington State. The District serves water directly to over 150,000 people in portions of Lynnwood, Mukilteo, Bothell, Brier, Mill Creek and unincorporated lands in southwest Snohomish County. Additional customers receive water through wholesale water connections to Lynnwood, Edmonds, Clearview Water Supply Agency, and Mountlake Terrace, which operate their own distribution systems.

Figure 1. Location Map

The District’s water comes from the City of Everett’s regional supply system, utilizing the Sultan River source. The District coordinates activities with Everett and other water systems that receive water from the regional source. Further information on the District’s service area, facilities and operations is presented in subsequent chapters of this WCP.

1.2. Planning Objectives

This WCP updates the previous Plan issued in January 2003 and has the following objectives:

Provide updated estimates of expected population growth in the District’s retail and wholesale service area, to enable planning for new facilities or upgrades to existing facilities. Until recently, growth in the service area had continued at a rapid pace. Despite the current downturn, further growth is expected. At the same time, the character of development in the service area is changing, with higher densities being developed in many areas.

Update the District’s computerized model of the distribution system to reflect construction of new mains and other facilities in recent years. This model is a key working tool to evaluate the adequacy of District facilities and to plan for needed improvements.


Update the District’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and review financial needs for implementation.

Reflect new conditions related to successful installation of the Clearview Project in 2002. The Clearview Project, constructed in partnership with Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District, consists of a booster pump station, transmission line and storage facility east of the District’s service area, allowing water from the Everett regional supply source to enter the District through new delivery points.

Address new provisions of State Law enacted in the Municipal Water Law (MWL) of 2003. These provisions include a new rule on water-use efficiency planning by municipal water systems; new requirements for documenting consistency of water system plans with local land-use plans; and other elements.

Plan for deliveries of water to a new wholesale customer, the Mukilteo Water District.

Evaluate the District’s rate structure applied to its wholesale customers.

Review opportunities for improving the District’s policies and procedures with respect to cross-connection control (CCC). The District’s CCC program is an important means of safeguarding public health.

1.3. Organization of Water Comprehensive Plan

This Water Comprehensive Plan is organized in the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: System Description

Chapter 3: Related Plans, Agreements and Policies

Chapter 4: Planning Data and Demand Forecast

Chapter 5: Conservation Program

Chapter 6: Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards

Chapter 7: System Analysis

Chapter 8: Source of Supply and Water Rights

Chapter 9: Water Quality Compliance

Chapter 10: Maintenance and Operations

Chapter 11: Capital Improvement Program

Chapter 12: Financial Program

This Summary Volume of the Plan has been prepared to provide a concise overview of the Plan and its findings for use by the public, the District’s customers, adjacent water supply systems and other interested parties. The complete plan document and associated appendices can be reviewed upon request at the District’s main office located at 3626 – 156th Street SW in Lynnwood, Washington.


2. System Description

This chapter provides a general overview of the water system, including information on the District’s management, water service area, history, wholesale customers and adjacent purveyors. A detailed description of the District’s existing water facilities is also included in this chapter.

2.1. Ownership and Management

The Alderwood Water and Wastewater District provides water service to retail and wholesale customers in its south Snohomish County water service area. Specific data about the system can be found in the Water Facilities Inventory that the District files annually with the Washington State Department of Health (DOH). Pertinent information from the District’s most recent Water Facilities Inventory is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Water System Information

System Name: Alderwood Water and Wastewater DistrictSystem Type: Group A Community Water System System ID Number: 01300E 164th Street SW Artesian Well ID Number1 01319B Owner Name: Alderwood Water and Wastewater DistrictOwner Type: Public Sector - Special District Owner Address: 3626 156th Street SW

Lynnwood, WA 98087 Location: Snohomish County, WA Service Connections: 44,320 Population Served: 157,760

1. The artesian well is a non-transient, non-community system.

The District is governed by a five-member Board of Commissioners, and operations are overseen by a General Manager.

2.2. Service Area, Wholesale Customers and Adjacent Purveyors

2.2.1. Water Service Area The District’s corporate boundaries and retail water service area are shown on Figure 2. The District boundaries reach from Puget Sound east beyond 35th Avenue Southeast; and north from the King-Snohomish County line to just south of Paine Field (116th Street Southwest). The District’s retail water service area encompasses the cities of Brier, portions of Mill Creek, the portion of Bothell north of the Snohomish County line, the City of Mukilteo south of Paine Field, portions of Lynnwood, and unincorporated areas of southwest Snohomish County. The District sells wholesale water to the cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace, as well as to the Clearview Water Supply Agency.

The retail water service area has changed slightly since the adoption of the District’s 2002 Water System Plan Update. These changes consisted of small perimeter and interior


annexations by cities. At this time it is not anticipated that the District will significantly expand the boundaries of its water service area, with the exception of a few smaller perimeter annexations which are expected. The District does anticipate providing wholesale water service to the Mukilteo Water District in the future.

The District also provides wastewater collection services. The wastewater service area is not the same as the water service area. The District’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan describes the wastewater system and service area and identifies needs, actions and capital projects for the wastewater system.

2.2.2. Wholesale Customers and Adjacent Purveyors As shown in Figure 2, the Alderwood Water and Wastewater District is bordered by Mukilteo Water District and the City of Everett to the north, the Silver Lake Water & Sewer District (Silver Lake) and the Cross Valley Water District (Cross Valley) to the east, the Northshore Utility District (Northshore) to the south, and the cities of Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood, and Edmonds to the west. All of the systems, except Northshore, obtain filtered water from the City of Everett supply, either directly or indirectly. In addition to the Everett supply, Cross Valley maintains a ground water supply.

The District’s current wholesale customers are the cities of Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood, and Edmonds. The District plans to add Mukilteo Water District as a wholesale customer in the future.

2.3. System Facilities The Alderwood Water and Wastewater District system has four pressure zones (Figure 3) served by two water supply pump stations, one booster pump station, eight storage facilities and over 638 miles of pipe. In addition, the District is part of the Clearview Water Supply Agency, which owns a separate transmission line, reservoir and pump station. The District operates the pump station under an agreement with Clearview Water Supply Agency. The District also owns two wells. Well No.5 is a separate artesian well that provides a local community amenity. Well No. 7 provides water for District equipment use. Neither Well No.5 nor Well No.7 is connected to the District’s distribution system.

The physical condition, capacity, and age of these facilities are all important in determining the adequacy of the water system for meeting future water demands. The District’s major distribution system facilities are shown on Figure 3. The following discussion provides additional information regarding these facilities.

2.3.1. Source of Supply The District purchases all of its water from the City of Everett. Everett’s regional supply is obtained from the Sultan River and treated to drinking water quality standards. Everett then delivers supply to its own citizens, as well as to various other cities and special districts in Snohomish County. Alderwood’s share of the regional supply enters the District’s distribution pipeline system and is delivered to the District’s own customers or to additional wholesale customers in nearby communities.

The District also participates with two other special districts in the Clearview Water Supply Agency. The Clearview Agency was formed to finance and construct facilities that improve delivery of supply on the east side of the District’s service area.

Snohomis

h County

King County

Snohomish County

Isla

nd County

Town ofWoodway

Olympic ViewWater District

City ofEdmonds

City ofLynnwood

City ofMountlake

TerraceCity of Bothell

City ofBrier

City ofMukilteo

Mukilteo Water District(Future Wholesale Customer) City of

Everett

Alderwood Water &Wastewater District

City ofMill Creek

Silver Lake Water& Sewer District

City of Bothell

WoodinvilleWater District

NorthshoreUtility Distirct

ShorelineWater District

City ofSeattle

Unserved

Unserved

SkyMeadow

!"̀$

AÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂB

%&e(%&e(%&e(

?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@

)g

CÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉD

Cross ValleyWater District

Water Service Area and Adjacent PurveyorsFIGURE 2

Alderwood Water & Wastewater District | Water Comprehensive Plan

Note: Snohomish County water service areas, including Alderwood’s service area,were extracted from Everett’s geographic information system in July 2007. All othermap data was obtained from Snohomish County GIS 2007.

D:\G

ISD

ATA

\pro

ject

s\w

ash\

ald

erw

ood

\Wat

erC

om

pP

lan2

007

\map

_do

cs\m

xd\F

igu

res\

serv

ice_

are

a_a

djac

ient

_pu

rve

yors

_m

ap_

AB

BR

EV

IAT

ED

_FIG

UR

E_2

.mxd

- 4

/20

/20

09 @

10

:28

:03

AM

Legend

Retail Service Area

Wholesale Customers(Existing & Planned Future)

Wholesale Customers(Potential Future)

Clearview Partners

Retail Service Area

District Corporate Boundary

Urban Growth Boundary

County Boundary

City Boundary

Highway

Local Road

Stream/River

Waterbody

0 5,000 10,000

Feet

I

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

Snohomish County

King CountySnohomish County

Island County

Town ofWoodway Olympic View

Water District

City ofEdmonds

City ofMountlake

Terrace City of Bothell

City ofBrier

Mukilteo Water District


City ofMill Creek

Silver LakeWater District

City of Bothell

!"̀$AÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂBAÂB

%&e(%&e(%&e(

?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@?|@ CÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCÉDCity of

Lynnwood

Cross Valley(Cross Valley

Water)

Existing Distribution Systemand Pressure Zones

FIGURE 3Alderwood Water & Wastewater District | Water Comprehensive Plan

Note: Snohomish County water service areas, including Alderwood's service area,were extracted from Everett's geographic information system in July 2007. All othermap data was obtained from Snohomish County GIS 2007.

D:\G

ISD

ATA

\pro

ject

s\w

ash\

ald

erw

ood

\Wat

erC

om

pP

lan2

007

\map

_do

cs\m

xd\F

igu

res\

exi

stin

g_d

istr

ibut

ion

_sy

stem

_a

nd_p

ress

ure

_zo

ne_m

ap_A

BB

RE

VIA

TE

D_

FIG

UR

E_3

.mxd

- 1

0/1

5/2

008

@ 9

:42:

13

AM

LegendPressure Zone

285

520

635

724

Pipe Less than or Equalto 6-inch Diameter

Pipe Greater than or Equalto 10-inch Diameter

#* PRV Location

Retail Service Area

District Corporate Boundary

Urban Growth Boundary

County Boundary

City Boundary

Highway

Local Road

Stream/River

Waterbody

0 5,000 10,000

Feet

I


2.3.2. Water Distribution Facilities

Storage Facilities

The District has eight storage tanks and reservoirs with a combined capacity of approximately 90 million gallons. The District also participates in the Clearview Water Supply Agency which has an additional 7.4 million gallons of storage capacity reserved for District use. The District’s own reservoirs were constructed at various times from 1961 to 2002. The Clearview facilities were completed in 2003. The District periodically assesses reservoir integrity and operational needs and performs structural upgrades or other improvements as needed. Over the six years since the prior Water Comprehensive Plan was completed, five of the District’s reservoirs have had significant work performed, such as recoating of interior and exterior surfaces, access improvements and security improvements.

Pump Stations

The District owns three pump stations that boost water to storage tanks at elevations needed to serve the various pressure zones. Each pump station contains multiple pumps, with pumping capacities ranging from 1,500 to 6,400 gallons per minute. In addition the Clearview Water Supply Agency owns a pump station that serves a portion of the District’s service area. Pumps owned by Clearview range in capacity from 3,900 to 7,800 gallons per minute. The District’s pump stations have all been either constructed or refurbished between 1986 and 2001. The Clearview pump station was constructed in 2003.

Transmission and Distribution Pipe

The District’s water system includes over 638 miles of transmission and distribution pipe ranging from 4-inches to 36-inches in diameter. Approximately 70 percent of the District’s pipes are 8-inches in diameter or larger. About 80 percent of the District's water mains are ductile iron pipe and about 15 percent is older cast iron pipe. Over the past several years, the District has replaced the majority of the asbestos cement pipe in the system with ductile iron pipe, or PVC pipe in areas of high electrolysis. These actions reduce the likelihood of leakage or larger breaks in water mains that can interrupt service to customers.

Other Distribution System Facilities

The District also has various other facilities such as disinfection facilities to maintain the required level of chlorine throughout the system, flow control valves and pressure-reducing valve stations that control pressure at pressure zone boundaries. In addition there are several hundred fire hydrants throughout the service area.

2.3.3. Wells

The artesian well (Well No. 5) located on 164th Street SW is currently used directly as a local community source of supply. There is no distribution piping associated with this well, nor is it connected to the District’s distribution system. Use of the artesian well is at the discretion of the public. The well serves less than 1,000 equivalent connections and less than 1,000 people per day. The District maintains this artesian well as a courtesy. It is not part of the District’s sources


of supply and the District is not dependent on it as a source. Well No.7 provides water for District equipment use. This well also is not connected to the District’s distribution system.

2.3.4. Interties

The District has a number of both non-emergency and emergency interties. Interties are defined under Washington State law (WAC 246-290-010) as “an interconnection between public water systems permitting the exchange or delivery of water between those systems.” Table 2 shows the District’s existing interties.

Table 2. Interties with Adjacent Purveyors

Purveyor Number of

Interties Purpose Mukilteo Water District 3 Emergency Supply

City of Everett 4 Emergency Supply Silver Lake Water & Sewer

District 1 Regular Supply

Silver Lake Water & Sewer District

5 Emergency Supply

City of Mountlake Terrace 1 Regular Supply City of Mountlake Terrace 1 Emergency Supply

City of Lynnwood 1 Regular Supply City of Lynnwood 4 Emergency Supply City of Edmonds 1 Regular Supply

City of Bothell 2 Emergency Supply Northshore Utility District 3 Emergency Supply

Cross Valley Water District 1 Emergency/Temp. Supply Interties may be added to deliver water to Mukilteo Water District.


3. Related Plans, Agreements and Policies

The District’s program to deliver water to its customers has been developed over many years in the context of various agreements, plans, and policies that address water supply and land use in southwestern Snohomish County. This chapter describes key agreements and plans and summarizes the District’s water service policies.

Table 3 lists the ten related plans that were reviewed for consistency with this WCP. These plans are discussed in the sections below. In addition Table 4 lists the 26 formal and informal agreements the District has with other communities and water purveyors in the region.

Table 3. Plans Reviewed

No. Planning Document

1 City of Everett, Comprehensive Water Plan (2007)

2 City of Edmonds, Water Comprehensive Plan (2002)

3 City of Lynnwood, Water System Plan (2005)

4 City of Mountlake Terrace, Water System Plan (2001)1

5 City of Bothell, Comprehensive Plan (2004)

6 City of Brier, Comprehensive Plan (2004)

7 City of Lynnwood, Comprehensive Plan (2006)

8 City of Mill Creek, Comprehensive Plan (2006)

9 City of Mukilteo, Comprehensive Plan (2005)

10 Snohomish County, Comprehensive Plan (2005) 1. A draft of Mountlake Terrace’s demand forecast for its 2008 Water System Plan was also reviewed.


Table 4. District Agreements

# Agreement Type

Year of Formal

Agreement Party to Agreement 1 Source of Supply 2005 City of Everett 2 Wholesaling Water 1978 City of Edmonds 3 Wholesaling Water 1978 City of Lynnwood 4 Wholesaling Water 1978 City of Mountlake Terrace 5 Wholesaling Water 2005 Clearview Water Supply Agency 6 Retailing Water 1994 City of Brier

7 Emergency Intertie 1999 City of Bothell and Northshore School District

8 Emergency Intertie 2003 City of Bothell 9 Emergency Intertie & Temporary Supply 2006 Cross Valley Water District

10 Emergency Intertie & Service Coordination

1986 Silver Lake Water & Sewer District

11 Service Area Coord. - Bristol Farms 1995 City of Bothell 12 Service Area Coord. - Fortin Property 1992 City of Bothell 13 Service Area Coord. - Jumanca Short Plat 2007 City of Bothell 14 Service Area Coord. - Phillips Property 2007 Cross Valley Water District

15 Service Area Coord. - Paine Field Property

1990 Mukilteo Water District

16 Service Area Coord. - Harbour Pointe Townhomes

1994 Mukilteo Water District

17 Service Area Coord. - Alderwood Transmission Line


18 Service Area Coord. - Urban Growth Area Property


19 Service Area Coord. - Hammit and UDC parcels


20 Mutual Aid 2006 Multiple

21 Clearview Formation and Construction Agreement

1998 Cross Valley Water District and Silver Lake Water & Sewer District

22 Clearview Operations Agreement 2005 Cross Valley Water District and Silver Lake Water & Sewer District

23 Clearview Pump Station Operation 2005 City of Everett 24 Brightwater Construction 2005 King County 25 Pump Station Study 2003 City of Everett 26 Cooperative Purchasing 2002 City of Seattle

3.1. Everett Supply Agreement

The District purchases its water supply from the City of Everett. A supply agreement with Everett was signed in 2005 and is valid until 2055. The agreement replaces previous supply contracts between Everett and Alderwood signed at various times since 1960.

3.2. Wholesale Customer Agreements and Plans

The District wholesales water to three water utilities: the Cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace. Supply agreements with each of these wholesale customers detail the


quantity of water, points of delivery, water quality, rates and charges, as well as other subjects. The wholesale supply agreement and water system plan for each wholesale customer are discussed below, and this WCP is consistent with information contained in the documents.

Additionally, as part of the Clearview Project, Alderwood wholesales water to the Clearview Water Supply Agency. The Clearview Agency is a partnership among the District, the Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District. The District has a supply agreement with the Clearview Agency that stipulates the District will provide and sell to Clearview a maximum of 48.5 mgd of water for the following uses: 18 mgd for Cross Valley, 12 mgd for Silver Lake, and 18.5 mgd for Alderwood. The agreement was signed in 2005 and is valid until January 1, 2055. It was a key element in the partnership that enabled the District and these partners to finance and construct the Clearview Project, improving water delivery to the east side of the District.

The District is negotiating an agreement with Mukilteo Water District to deliver water on a wholesale basis.

3.3. Retail Service Area Agreements and Plans

The District retails water to customers in five cities and in parts of unincorporated Snohomish County within the District’s water service area. The cities include Bothell, Brier, Lynnwood, Mill Creek, and Mukilteo. The District has a formal franchise ordinance with the City of Bothell and a franchise agreement with the City of Brier, and provides retail services to the other Cities under informal agreements. The 2003 Municipal Water Law requires water system planning documents be consistent with adopted local comprehensive plans and development regulations. Therefore, Comprehensive Plans for each of these jurisdictions were reviewed to verify consistency. The retail agreement with Brier and City/County comprehensive plans for each jurisdiction where the District retails water are discussed below, and this WCP is consistent with information contained in the documents. As required by the State, the District has submitted a Water System Plan Consistency Statement Checklist to each local planning jurisdiction in which it provides retail service.

3.3.1. City of Bothell

Bothell’s 2004 City Comprehensive Plan documents that the District is one of several utilities retailing water in Bothell. Bothell residents also receive water from the City of Bothell, Northshore Utility District, and Woodinville Water District. Bothell straddles Snohomish and King Counties and almost the entire portion of Bothell within Snohomish County is served by the District. The Bothell Comprehensive Plan contains the following policy, which is consistent with this WCP:

CF-P6 Potable Water Supply, Storage and Distribution Level of Service Guidelines.

o Potable Water Supply. Comply with Washington State Department of Health requirements concerning provision for peak day demands and maintenance of drinking water quality. In accordance with the Growth Management Act, the City shall monitor water supply and withhold development approvals if development would cause the level of service to decline below the adopted standard. The City should explore alternative sources of water supply.


o Potable Water Storage. Comply with Washington State Department of Health requirements for operational, equalizing, standby, fire suppression and dead storage.

o Potable Water Distribution. Comply with Washington State Department of Health requirements concerning minimum system pressure and fire flow.

3.3.2. City of Brier

The District has an agreement with the City of Brier giving the District permission to provide retail water service within Brier. The agreement details infrastructure ownership, water quality, rates and charges, as well as other subjects. No specific quantity of water is detailed, other than to say, “an adequate supply of water for domestic use and fire protection.” The agreement is in the form of a City of Brier ordinance (Ordinance 33c), granting the District a water franchise, that was then adopted by a District resolution (Resolution #2272-94) The agreement was executed in 1994 and was valid for ten years.

Brier’s 2004 City Comprehensive Plan documents that the District is the only utility retailing water in Brier. The Brier Comprehensive Plan contains the following policies, which are consistent with this WCP:

Policy UT 2.1. Coordinate with the Alderwood Water District to provide an efficient and adequate water supply to the residents and businesses of the City.

Policy UT 2.2. Design the size of new water utility systems to the anticipated future requirements of the area’s land use.

Policy UT 2.3. Design new water systems to allow for their extension into potential future service areas.

3.3.3. City of Lynnwood

In addition to wholesaling water to the City of Lynnwood (see Section 3.2), the District also retails water to a small number of Lynnwood residents.

Lynnwood’s 2006 City Comprehensive Plan documents that the District is the sole provider of water in Lynnwood. The Lynnwood Comprehensive Plan contains the following policies, which are consistent with this WCP:

WS-3.1. Maintain coordination and communications with the Lynnwood water supplier, Alderwood Water District as well as AWWD’s supplier, the City of Everett so that the contract with AWWD is adhered to and the City’s interests are protected.

WS-3.2. Conservation issues will be reviewed, goals and programs established relative to the impact conservation has on long term costs of water, summer flow and peaking issues, and regulatory and contract issues such that conservation efforts will be implemented that meet the established goal and regulatory standards.

3.3.4. City of Mill Creek

Mill Creek’s 2006 City Comprehensive Plan documents that the District is one of two utilities retailing water in Mill Creek. Mill Creek residents also receive water from Silver Lake Water &


Sewer District. The Mill Creek Comprehensive Plan contains the following policies, which are consistent with this WCP:

Policy 1.01. Urban development shall only be approved in those areas where services are available and are adequate to support the proposed demands without adversely affecting current users.

Policy 1.02. The City shall coordinate with other jurisdictions and the utility providers as appropriate to ensure that there is adequate utility system capacity to serve the land uses envisioned in each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and to identify areas and projects where interjurisdictional cooperation is necessary. This coordination will take place, at a minimum, through the SEPA determination review and comment process and/or any interlocal agreement.

Policy 1.03. The City shall provide annual updates of population, employment and development forecasts to the utility providers and adjacent jurisdictions to use in their long-range facility planning efforts.

Policy 1.04. Pursuant to RCW Chapter 57, the City will review Alderwood and Silver Lake’s Water Plan Updates, which are required every five years (sic), to ensure that the water plans' land development patterns and population and employment assumptions are consistent with the policies and assumptions of the City's Comprehensive Plan.

3.3.5. City of Mukilteo The City of Mukilteo’s 2005 City Comprehensive Plan documents that the District is one of two utilities retailing water in the City of Mukilteo. The other utility is Mukilteo Water District. The Mukilteo Comprehensive Plan contains the following policies, which are consistent with this WCP:

UT8. Development applications shall be reviewed by the appropriate water district and against either the Mukilteo Water District or Alderwood Water & Wastewater District Comprehensive Plans and Capital Facilities Plans, whichever is appropriate as determined by the development’s location. The water district responsible for the location shall conduct the application review.

UT9. The Mukilteo Water District and Alderwood Water District are encouraged to eliminate undersized water lines and to require fire hydrants where needed, utilizing the most current National Fire Protection Association standards to assure that development maintains the City's fire rating.

3.3.6. Snohomish County

The 2005 Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan guides growth and development in the unincorporated areas of Snohomish County to 2025. The General Policy Plan, which is the primary document of the Comprehensive Plan, includes four sections that are pertinent to the District’s WCP. Those sections are Population and Employment, Land Use, Utilities, and Interjurisdictional Coordination. A summary of those sections and their relevancy to the District are provided below, which demonstrates that the District’s WCP is consistent with Snohomish County’s Comprehensive Plan.

The Population and Employment chapter of the Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan provides projections for population and employment numbers for the year 2025. However,


those forecasts should not be compared directly with the population and employment numbers provided in Chapter 4 of this CWP due to differences in geographic boundaries. The population and employment numbers in the County Comprehensive Plan are presented for each city and the collective unincorporated area in the SW County urban growth area. Alderwood’s water service area does not align well with those boundaries since it serves portions of some of the cities and portions of the unincorporated area. Staff from Snohomish County’s planning department did review a technical memorandum documenting the District’s population estimates and demand forecast, and they indicated the population numbers used in this WCP appear reasonable.

The Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan characterizes land use classifications for all unincorporated land in the county. It also designates Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). One of the UGAs is the Southwest County UGA, which includes the Cities of Bothell, Brier, Edmonds, Everett, Lynnwood, Mill Creek, Mountlake Terrace, Mukilteo, and Woodway. The District’s entire retail and wholesale service is within this UGA. Other utilities also serve within other parts of this UGA. Figure 4 shows how the District’s water service area relates to the UGA. It also shows County land use classifications within the District’s water service area.

Snohomish County does not supply water, however, it has a vested interest in water supply since it is ultimately responsible for water service if a water district fails or becomes financially insolvent. The Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan identifies the following goals for utility planning:

Goal UT 1. Enhance the efficiency and quality of service from utility providers through the review and evaluation of utility, land use, transportation, and natural environment planning documents.

Goal UT 2. Work with provider agencies of Snohomish County and assist them to ensure the availability of a reliable, high quality water supply for all households within the county in a manner that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and protection of the natural environment.

The County Comprehensive Plan discusses the need for coordination across jurisdictions, since certain planning issues, such as water supply, cross jurisdictional boundaries. Additionally, as land is incorporated, governance shifts from county to municipal control. The Interjurisdictional Coordination chapter identifies the following goal:

Goal IC. Promote the coordination of planning, financing, and implementing programs between the county and local jurisdictions including tribal governments.

Snohomish County

King CountySnohomish County

Island C

ounty

Town ofWoodway

Olympic ViewWater District

City ofEdmonds

City ofLynnwood

City ofMountlake

Terrace

City of Bothell

City ofBrier

City ofMukilteo

Mukilteo Water District City ofEverett


City ofMill Creek

Silver Lake Water District

MaltbyUGA

Land Use in Service AreaFIGURE 4

Alderwood Water & Wastewater District | Water Comprehensive Plan

Note: Snohomish County water service areas, including Alderwood's service area,were extracted from Everett's geographic information system in July 2007. All othermap data was obtained from Snohomish County GIS 2007.

D:\G

ISD

ATA

\pro

ject

s\w

ash\

ald

erw

ood

\Wat

erC

om

pP

lan2

007

\map

_do

cs\m

xd\F

igu

res\

futu

re_l

u_m

ap_

AB

BR

EV

IAT

ED

_FIG

UR

E_

4.m

xd -

10

/14

/20

08 @

11

:39

:42

AM

Land Use Designationin AWWD Service Area

Urban Low DesityResidential (4-6DU/Ac)

Urban Medium DensityResidential (6-12 DU/Ac

Urban High DesityResidential (12-24DU/Ac)

Urban Commercial

Urban Village

Urban Center

Urban Industrial

Rural Residential(1DU/5 Acres Basic)

Public/Institutional Use

Transit Pedestrian Village

Incorporated Cities, Towns,Tribal Lands & Rights-of-Way

Waterbody

BoundariesUrban Growth Boundary

County Boundary

AWWD Boundary

Other Water District Boundary

City Boundary

0 5,000 10,000

Feet

I


3.4. Emergency Intertie Agreements

The District shares borders with ten water utilities (see Figure 2) and has emergency intertie agreements with all of them, except for Edmonds and Woodinville Water District. The agreements cover topics such as the intertie location, infrastructure ownership, metering, and rates, as well as other subjects.

3.5. Service Area Coordination Agreements

The District has entered into several agreements related to coordinating water service between itself and neighboring utilities. Typically, the agreements allow one utility to provide interim retail water service to customers in a specific portion of another utility’s service area. The agreements are listed in Table 4 above.

3.6. Other Agreements

The District has entered into several other agreements related to various topics, which are discussed below.

3.6.1. Mutual Aid Agreement

The District signed a Mutual Aid Agreement among a number of water and sewer utilities in Snohomish County for providing resources to each other in response to disasters and emergencies. Topics in the agreement include, in part, protocols for making a request, protocols for responding to a request, control of resources, and cost reimbursement. The Agreement was signed in 2006 and was an update of a 1995 version. Per the agreement, the City of Everett maintains the official list of signatories and sends an updated list annually to all signatories, or whenever a utility is added or deleted. Parties to the agreement, as of January 2007, include the following 11 utilities:

1. Alderwood Water and Wastewater District 2. Arlington, City of 3. Cross Valley Water District 4. Everett, City of 5. Highland Water District 6. Lynnwood, City of 7. Mukilteo Water District 8. Olympic View Water and Sewer District 9. Public Utility District of Snohomish County 10. Silver Lake Water & Sewer District 11. Snohomish, City of.

3.6.2. Clearview Operations Agreement

This agreement, called the Clearview Water Supply Agency Interlocal Joint Operating Agreement, addresses operation of the Clearview Project. It supersedes an earlier agreement called the Clearview Formation and Construction Agreement. Parties to this agreement include the District and Cross Valley Water District and Silver Lake Water and Sewer District. The agreement covers topics such as organization, governance, finances, and organizational


operations. It reconfirms Alderwood as the lead agency and reconfirms members’ ownership in the organization by their share of infrastructure capacity.

3.6.3. Clearview Pump Station Operation Agreement

The District has an agreement with the City of Everett (Everett) related to the operation of the Clearview Pump Station. The District is the official operator of the pump station, and as such, entered into the agreement which details the respective responsibilities of the District and Everett necessary in order to maintain optimal functioning of the Clearview and Everett systems.

3.6.4. Brightwater Construction Agreement

The District has an agreement with King County related to construction of King County’s new Brightwater Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is located in Cross Valley Water District’s service area. The agreement commits the District to provide a temporary water supply for Brightwater through construction, start up, and commissioning, which is expected to last until approximately 2011. This supply can also be used for emergency or permanent supply if the Brightwater construction were to negatively impact Cross Valley’s wells or private wells in the area.

3.6.5. Pump Stations Upgrade Study Agreement

The District has an agreement with the City of Everett (Everett) related to a joint study of certain pump stations owned by the City and District, respectively. The agreement was signed in 2003 and the study is currently in progress to identify upgrades needed.

3.6.6. Cooperative Purchasing Agreement

The District has an agreement with the City of Seattle (Seattle) that gives the District access to Seattle's competitively awarded contracts for the purchase of various supplies, materials, equipment, and services.

3.7. District Service Area Policies

The District has water service area policies, documented by District resolutions, covering a variety of topics. The policies include topics such as:

1. Rates and fees,

2. Customer categories,

3. Infrastructure ownership and maintenance,

4. Fire flow requirements,

5. Wholesaling and wheeling water, and

6. Conditions of service. These include District responsibilities; customer responsibilities; connection fee schedule; meter and material specifications; late-comer pay back provisions; developer extension requirements; design standards; financing responsibilities; and professional engineer design requirements.


The 2003 Municipal Water Law established municipal water suppliers’ “duty to serve” within their retail service area (RCW 43.20.260) and requires that water utilities document in their water system plan how the system responds to requests for new water service. The District’s Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions, which is made available to developers, comprehensively documents this process. Additionally, the District determines whether it has adequate capacity to provide new service through the analysis performed every six years for its Water Comprehensive Plan, including the demand forecast, system analysis and related agreements sections of the Plan.


4. Planning Data and Demand Forecast

This chapter presents the Alderwood Water and Wastewater District’s water demand forecast and documents the methodology and data used to develop the forecast. This information is presented in three main sections. The first section summarizes demographic trends in the District’s water service area. The second section summarizes water use characteristics, including production, consumption and related factors. The third section combines the demographics and water supply characteristics to develop a demand forecast for the 20-year planning period.

4.1. Demographic Data and Projections

Demographic data and projections for Snohomish County were obtained from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). In October 2006 PSRC issued updated data and forecasts covering the years 2000, 2010, 2020 and 2030, broken down by Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs). The TAZs are small geographic areas independent of the District’s water service area. The information is summarized here for the entire District.

The demographic data shown in Table 5 are used to develop the water demand forecast, as described later in this Chapter. The District’s retail water service area population is estimated to increase from 157,800 in 2008, to 223,200 in 2028. This yields a compound annual growth rate of 1.7 percent per year. Multifamily households are projected to increase more rapidly (2.8% per year) compared with single-family households (1.8% per year). Employment is projected to grow at a rate of 2.0 percent per year.

The data used in this WCP are drawn from the same source as data used by the District in its Sewer Comprehensive Plan. The population and other numbers differ from the Sewer Comprehensive Plan, due to differences in the service areas between water and sewer; different end dates for these two respective plans; and scale differences in the PSRC data utilized. However use of the same foundational data set means that the two plans are fundamentally consistent in terms of demographic projections.

Table 5. Demographic Projections

Demographic Category

Demographic Projection1 Base Planning Year Planning Year 6 Planning Year 20

2008 2014 2028 Population 157,800 178,700 223,200Single-Family Households 40,800 46,200 58,200Multi-Family Households 19,500 24,500 33,700Employees 41,900 46,900 62,000

1. Data adapted from Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Traffic Analysis for Zone-level (TAZ level) demographic forecast (October 2006). Data are interpolated from PSRC projections of years 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030.


4.2. Water Use Characteristics

4.2.1. Water Purchased from Everett Regional System

System water use characteristics are provided in Table 6, including average and maximum day demands, and peaking factors. In 2006, average day demand (ADD) was 23.127 million gallons per day (mgd), while the maximum day demand (MDD) was recorded as being 49.690 mgd. The 2004-2006 average maximum day peaking factor was 1.73.

Table 6. Annual Production Characteristics

Production Characteristics

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Average Day Demand (mgd)1 20.737 21.107 23.199 22.462 22.224 23.127Maximum Day Demand (mgd)2 32.680 36.640 43.670 39.940 35.860 49.690Date of Maximum Day Demand August 2 July 23 July 28 July 24 August 5 July 24Maximum Day Peaking Factor3 1.58 1.74 1.88 1.78 1.61 1.80Average Peaking Factor (2004-2006) 1.73

1. [Total Delivered Water to District] divided by 365 days (366 in 2004). Does not include water purchased by Clearview and then sold to Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District.

2. Highest recorded daily purchase. Value for 2006 includes Clearview Sales to Silver Lake and Cross Valley; value for earlier years does not include this volume. Source: District purchase records.

3. (Maximum Day Demand) divided by (Average Day Demand). The value for 2006 is calculated with an Average Day Demand that takes into account Clearview purchases (27.606 mgd), as opposed to the value shown in the table (23.127) which reflects the ADD delivered to District customers only. This is necessary to accommodate the fact that the MDD for 2006 includes water purchased by Clearview, unlike the MDD for previous years.

Table 7 illustrates the monthly purchase characteristics of the District. The amount of water delivered to the system increases during summer months, due to irrigation and other outdoor uses.

Table 7. Monthly Water Purchases (2001 – 2006)

Total Monthly Purchase (MG)1

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 January 556 524 666 572 625 618February 538 495 563 485 561 611March 563 551 501 555 643 722April 535 550 557 639 670 623May 666 555 672 673 787 833June 677 804 898 905 773 951July 824 914 1,176 1,141 1,069 1,360August 789 931 1,091 921 1,245 1,302September 719 799 757 646 922 959October 587 589 579 591 667 729November 523 566 527 557 670 662December 592 426 482 537 736 703Total 7,569 7,704 8,468 8,221 9,370 10,072MG = million gallons 1. Source: District records, Excel files named "Monthly billings [year] (Everett Purchase)".

Includes all water purchased from City of Everett, including water ultimately sold by Clearview to Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District (for years 2005 and 2006).


4.2.2. Water Delivered to AWWD Retail and Wholesale Customers

Retail Service Connections

Table 8 provides the number of retail water connections served by the District. In 2006, the District provided service to a total of 42,722 retail connections.

Table 8. Retail Water Service Connections (2001 – 2006)1

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Single-Family Residential (Subtotal) 31,472 32,353 33,209 34,308 35,738 37,670

Single-Family 31,440 32,321 33,177 34,276 35,706 37,638Subtract Accounts2 32 32 32 32 32 32

Multi-Family Residential (Subtotal) 2,210 2,277 2,317 2,340 2,348 2,370Multi-Family 2,147 2,213 2,249 2,272 2,280 2,301Mobile Home Parks 47 46 46 46 46 46R/V Parks 16 18 22 22 22 23

Non-Residential (Subtotal) 2,183 2,266 2,317 2,399 2,467 2,682Single Commercial 739 750 749 762 761 808Multi Commercial 259 270 269 279 290 301Irrigation 597 610 597 625 665 761Hotel/Motel 16 17 17 18 18 18Municipal 114 114 167 172 176 193Construction 10 7 10 13 6 21Fire Meters 181 223 227 239 248 268Detector Check (D/C) Meters 267 275 281 291 303 312

Total 35,865 36,896 37,843 39,047 40,553 42,7221. Source: District records, Excel files named "Active acct's [year]". Connection counts are as of December 31st of

each year. Includes retail connections only.

2. Accounts physically located within wholesale City service areas, but which receive bills directly from the District. These accounts are considered retail customers, with their associated water usage accounted for accordingly.

Retail Water Delivered

Table 9 presents a summary of water sales to District customers. In 2006, total recorded sales were 7,929 MG. Figure 5 illustrates the breakdown in consumption according to customer classification.


Table 9. Annual Water Sales by Customer Classification (2001 – 2006)

Annual Water Consumption (MG)1

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retail Sales Single-Family Residential (Subtotal)2 2,345 2,520 2,800 2,724 2,534 2,791 Multi-Family Residential (Subtotal) 1,071 1,053 1,065 1,061 1,022 1,040 Multi-Family 897 873 880 878 858 871 Mobile Home Parks 166 172 175 172 154 158 R/V Parks 7.9 7.9 9.2 10.4 9.6 10.2 Non-Residential (Subtotal) 692 747 825 801 739 805 Single Commercial 266 274 264 269 270 271 Multi Commercial 109 112 117 117 111 113 Irrigation 241 277 347 322 271 324 Hotel/Motel 27 29 30 34 35 33 Municipal 49 49 62 54 50 60 Construction 0.7 5.1 4.1 4.0 1.6 3.6 Fire Meters 0.2 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 D/C Meters 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 Subtotal - Retail 4,109 4,320 4,689 4,586 4,296 4,636Wholesale Sales Edmonds 1,194 1,298 1,336 1,312 1,163 1,194 Lynnwood 1,418 1,417 1,488 1,456 1,384 1,429 Mountlake Terrace 682 679 697 676 640 671 Subtotal - Wholesale 3,294 3,394 3,521 3,445 3,186 3,293Total Sales 7,403 7,714 8,210 8,031 7,482 7,929MG = million gallons 1. Source: District records for water sales. For retail consumption, Excel files named "[year] Yrly Cons by

Type". For wholesale consumption, Excel files named "[city name]". 2. Includes usage by Subtract Accounts (which represent retail customers whose water passes through

the master meter to a wholesale customer).

Figure 5. Breakdown of Water Sales, by Percent of Total (2004 – 2006)

Retail - Single Family35%

Retail - Multi-Family13%

Retail - Non-Residential10%

Edmonds16%

Lynnwood18%

Mountlake Terrace8%

Figure 6 provides the monthly water use characteristics of District customers, revealing a trend similar to that of purchases, with peak usage occurring during summer months.


Figure 6. Monthly Water Sales (2004 – 2006)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne July

Augus

t

Septe

mbe

r

Octobe

r

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Mo

nth

ly W

ate

r C

on

sum

pti

on

(M

G) 2004

2005

2006

4.2.3. Water Balance Calculations

Table 10 provides a water balance for the past three years, comparing water purchases with sales, in order to determine the amount of non-revenue water present in the District’s system. The two-year (2005-2006) average for non-revenue water, as a percentage of water purchased1, was approximately 6.9 percent. This level of non-revenue water is used in developing the water demand forecast, as described later.

A small portion of the non-revenue water is comprised of accounted-for uses, such as flushing, as tracked by District staff and depicted in Table 10.

1 The amount of total water purchased includes water sold to wholesale customers. This approach is consistent with the distribution system leakage template provided in DOH’s Water Use Efficiency Guidebook (Guidebook Appendix D).


Table 10. District Water Balance1

2004 2005 2006 2005-2006 Average

Water Purchases (MG)2 8,221 8,112 8,441 Water Sold to Wholesale Customers (MG)3 3,445 3,186 3,293 Water Sold to Retail Customers (MG)4 4,586 4,296 4,636

Non-Revenue Water5 as Volume (MG) 191 630 512 as % of Water Purchases 2.32% 7.77% 6.07% 6.92%

Accounted-For Non-Revenue Water6 Unidirectional Flushing Program (MG) 3.7 2.7 3.1 Dead End Flushing Program (MG) 0 0 0.6 Water Use Permits (MG) 2.2 1.1 0.4

Subtotal - Accounted-For (MG) 5.9 3.8 4.1 as % of Water Purchases 0.07% 0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

Unaccounted-For Non-Revenue Water7 as Volume (MG) 185 626 508 as % of Water Purchases 2.25% 7.72% 6.02% 6.87%

MG = million gallons 1. A water balance compares total water purchased to water consumption. 2. Total volume of water purchased and delivered to District, excluding water purchased by Clearview and then sold

to Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District. . 3. Total volume of water sold to wholesale customers, from Table 9 (Subtotal-Wholesale). 4. Total volume of water sold to retail customers, from Table 9 (Subtotal-Retail). 5. (Water Purchases) less [(Water Sold to Wholesale Customers) + (Water Sold to Retail Customers)]. 6. Tracked non-billed water uses, including flushing and contractor hydrant use. Source: District records for

authorized water use and water permit use. 7. Untracked non-billed water uses. Includes water lost due to leaks, etc.

4.2.4. Water Use Factors and ERUs

Based on the information presented above, Table 11 presents a summary of water use factors for District retail customers. The three-year average water use factors were used to develop the water demand forecast presented in the next section of this Chapter.


Table 11. Water Use Factors

Customer Classification

Single-Family Multi-Family Non-Residential 2004 Sales (gpd)1 7,443,965 2,898,852 2,187,532 Households or Employees2 34,308 16,848 39,689

Sales per Households or Employees (gpd)3

217 172 55

2005 Sales (gpd)1 6,943,557 2,799,996 2,025,842 Households or Employees2 35,738 17,472 40,229


194 160 50

2006 Sales (gpd)1 7,646,380 2,849,370 2,205,497 Households or Employees2 37,670 18,134 40,777


203 157 54

3-Year Average Sales per Household or Employee4

205 163 53

gpd = gallons per day 1. Based on sales data provided in Table 9. 2. For single-family, the number of households is assumed to equal the number of single-family connections (see

Table 8). For multi-family and non-residential, the number of households or employees is interpolated from the PSRC

demographics (see Table 5). 3. Sales divided by number of households or employees. 4. 2004-2006 average for sales per household or employee. The average water use factor for single-family households (205 gpd) is also the District's Equivalent Residential

Unit (ERU). ERUs are a method of representing all types of water use as an equivalent number of single-family households.

4.3. Demand Forecast

The methodology used to develop the demand forecast is shown in Figure 7. The basic process is to combine demographic projections to future years from Section 4.1 with the water use factors calculated in Section 4.2.4. These values are used to forecast the demand for retail sales. Demand components for wholesale water and non-revenue water are then added to project the total average day demand at any given year. A peaking factor is applied to forecast the total maximum day demand.


Figure 7. Demand Forecast Methodology

Puget Sound Regional Council

District's Water Use

Characteristics

Peaking Factor

Demographic Projections Water Use Factors

Retail Sales Demand

Wholesale Demand Non-Revenue Water+ + = Total Average Day Demand

Total Maximum Day Demand

Table 12 presents the detailed water demand forecast for the District (in millions of gallons per day). The forecast is arranged by retail versus wholesale demand, and by customer classification.

Average day water demands for Alderwood’s retail water service area are calculated by multiplying the demographic projections (from Table 5) by the water use factors (from Table 11). Average day water demands for wholesale deliveries to the Cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace are based on the demand forecasts for these utilities presented in the City of Everett’s 2007 Comprehensive Water Plan. These forecasts are based upon a regional demographic-based analysis conducted by the City of Everett, similar to the approach taken by the District with respect to its retail water service area.

Water demands for Silver Lake Water & Sewer District and Cross Valley Water District represent the portion of those utilities’ demands anticipated to be met via purchases from Clearview, based upon information provided by the utilities.

Mukilteo Water District (MWD) is a potential future wholesale customer of the District. Therefore, the wholesale water demand forecast presented in Table 12 includes a portion of MWD’s demand, based upon expected needs as provided by MWD.

The amount of non-revenue water expected is projected by adding the retail and wholesale demands and multiplying this by a non-revenue water factor as per the methodology in DOH guidance documents. As shown in Table 10, the 2005-2006 average non-revenue water was 6.9 percent of water purchases. This translates to 7.4 percent of total water sales. Therefore, 7.4 percent of projected water sold was used as the non-revenue water factor for future years.


Table 12. Water Demand Forecast (mgd)

2006

(Actual)

2008 (Base Planning

Year)

2014 (Planning Year

6)

2028 (Planning Year

20) Average Day Demand (ADD) Retail Water Service Area Single-Family Residential1 7.6 8.4 9.5 11.9 Multi-Family Residential2 2.8 3.2 4.0 5.9 Non-Residential3 2.2 2.2 2.5 3.3 Subtotal - Revenue Demand4 12.7 13.8 16.0 21.1 Non-Revenue Demand5 1.7 2.2 2.6 3.3 Subtotal - Retail ADD6 14.4 15.9 18.5 24.4 Wholesale Water Service Area City of Edmonds7 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.9 City of Lynnwood7 3.9 4.3 4.6 5.7 City of Mountlake Terrace7 1.8 2.2 2.4 2.8 Silver Lake Water & Sewer District8 3.9 5.0 5.6 6.6 Cross Valley Water District9 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.7 Mukilteo Water District 10 0.0 0.0 1.6 2.3 Subtotal - Wholesale ADD 13.5 15.5 18.8 22.9Total System - Average Day Demand 27.9 31.4 37.4 47.3Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs)11 136,300 153,400 182,400 231,100Maximum Day Demand (MDD)12 Retail MDD13 25.9 28.8 32.1 42.3 Wholesale Water Service Area City of Edmonds 5.9 5.7 6.1 6.8 City of Lynnwood 7.0 7.4 8.0 9.8 City of Mountlake Terrace 3.3 3.8 4.1 4.8 Silver Lake Water & Sewer District8 7.1 10.0 11.2 13.3 Cross Valley Water District 0.9 1.2 2.0 2.9 Mukilteo Water District10 0.0 0.0 3.0 4.4 Subtotal - Wholesale MDD 24.3 28.1 34.3 41.9Total System - Maximum Day Demand 50.3 56.9 66.4 84.1

1. 2006 demand calculated as single-family residential sales (see Table 4-9), allocated amongst pressure zones based upon distribution of households. Forecast demand calculated as single-family households (see Table 4-9) multiplied by 2004-2006 average water use factor for SFHH (205 gpd/; see Table 4-9).

2. 2006 demand calculated as multi-family residential sales (see Table 9), allocated amongst pressure zones based upon distribution of households. Forecast demand calculated as multi-family households (see Table 4-9 multiplied by 2004-2006 average water use factor for MFHH (163 gpd/; see Table 4-9).

3. 2006 demand calculated as non-residential sales (see Table 4-9), allocated amongst pressure zones based upon distribution of employees. Forecast demand calculated as employees (see Table 4-9) multiplied by 2004-2006 average water use factor for employees (53 gpd/; see Table 4-9).

4. Total of single-family residential, multi-family residential, and non-residential demand. 5. For 2006, non-revenue water equals 6.46% of total sales (based on 2006 data; see Table 4-7). For future years,

non-revenue water equals 7.43% of total sales (based on 2005-2006 average; see Table 4-7). Note: Non-revenue water as a percentage of sales is intentionally different than as a percentage of purchases, and is portrayed in this fashion for calculation purposes.

6. Total of retail (revenue and non-revenue) demand, for all pressure zones. 7. Forecast wholesale water demands obtained from City of Everett 2007 Comprehensive Water Plan (Final,

October 2007), Table 3-11. Water demands for these three customers are based on a demographic analysis conducted by the City of Everett, similar to the one prepared for the District's retail water service area. Average day demands for the District's key planning years were interpolated from the demand forecast provided in Everett's key planning years. Demands shown here for Mountlake Terrace differ somewhat from recent planning data provided by Mountlake Terrace. For further discussion see Section 3.2.3 of this WCP.


8. Forecast wholesale water demands from Clearview, as provided by Silver Lake Water & Sewer District (both average day and maximum day).

9. Forecast wholesale water demands from Clearview, as provided by Cross Valley Water District. The City of Woodinville has purchased capacity (up to 12 mgd) in Cross Valley Water District's share of the Clearview project. This additional demand is not included in this forecast, as Woodinville has not yet exercised their option to purchase this water.

10. Mukilteo Water District (MWD) is a potential future wholesale customer. Forecast water demands (both average day and maximum day) for the District's key planning years were interpolated from demand forecast information obtained from MWD.

11. Total average day demand divided by single-family water use factor (205 gpd). 12. Maximum day demand calculated as average day demand multiplied by system-wide peaking factor (1.80 in

2006 and 1.73 for forecast years), unless otherwise noted. 13. Includes an additional 1.224 mgd (850 gpm) of back-up water supply for King County's Brightwater Treatment

Plant, in effect only from 2008-2010. This volume is not included in the zone's average day demand.

Maximum day water demands are calculated by multiplying the average day demand (ADD) for each retail pressure zone and wholesale customer by the District’s system-wide peaking factor of 1.73, as determined in Table 6. It is important to note that the peaking factor will vary by demand sector. The use of a system-wide peaking factor is most informative in defining the District’s aggregate maximum day demand (MDD), and thus its overall water supply requirement. MDD by demand sector is presented in Table 12 to illustrate the approximate contribution of each sector to the aggregate MDD, although it should be recognized that some sectors may have lower peaking characteristics while others may have higher.

An additional maximum day demand of 1.224 mgd (850 gpm) is included in the 2008 forecast for the 520 Zone, representing the District’s agreement with King County to provide a back-up water supply during construction of the Brightwater Treatment Plant through approximately 2010. Because this is considered a back-up supply and will only be used for a short period of time, the demand is included only on a maximum day basis.

In total, the District’s 6-year (2014) average day demand (ADD) is projected to be 37.4 mgd, and the maximum day demand (MDD) is projected to be 66.4 mgd. The 20-year (2028) ADD is projected to be 47.3, while the MDD is projected to be 84.1 mgd. After adjusting for conservation activities, the 2028 ADD is projected to be 46.8 mgd, while MDD is projected to be 81.0 mgd.

Figure 8 shows the average day and maximum day demands, both with and without additional conservation. Figure 9 shows the three primary components of the average day demand, considering additional conservation, in order to understand the magnitude of each. Further information on the District’s conservation activities is provided in Section 5.

The demand forecast developed in this chapter has been used in analyzing system capacity and assessing hydraulic conditions within the District’s distribution system, as documented in Chapter 7 of this WCP.


Figure 8. Demand Forecast Summary

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Year

Mill

ion

Ga

llon

s p

er

Da

y

ADD without additional conservation MDD without additional conservation

ADD with additional conservation MDD with additional conservation

Actual Forecasted

Figure 9. Average Day Demand Forecast Details (with additional conservation)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

Year

Mill

ion

Gal

lon

s p

er D

ay

Retail Wholesale Customers Clearview Partners

Actual Forecasted

2001

2006

2028

2014


5. Conservation Program

The District’s conservation program is comprised of a combination of regional and local measures. The regional measures are implemented by Everett and its partner utilities in the Everett Water Utility Committee (EWUC). The local measures are specific to the District and are implemented by District staff in the District’s service area only.

A progressive conservation program has been developed for the next six years that includes both the regional EWUC program as well as the District’s local measures. The collective conservation program builds on the success of previous conservation efforts. The conservation program discussed in this chapter pertains to the District’s retail service area. The District is in compliance with applicable regulations of the Washington State Department of Health.

5.1. Existing Conservation Program

5.1.1. Measures

The District’s existing conservation program consists of nine conservation measures. A summary of the conservation measures which the District has implemented in the last six years is shown in Table 13.

Table 13. Existing Conservation Program

Measure Sectors* Local or

Regional Years Implemented

SF MF NR 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 1. Conservation Pricing X X X Local X X X X X X 2. Bills Showing

Consumption History X X X Local X X X X X X 3. Rain Barrels X Local X 4. School-Based Education n/a Regional X X X X X X 5. Public Outreach n/a Regional X X X X X X 6. Indoor Retrofit Kits X X Regional X X X X X X 7. Outdoor Irrigation Kits X X Regional X X X X X X 8. School Irrigation System

Audits X Regional X X X X X 9. Pre-Rinse Sprayheads X Regional X * SF = single family, MF = multifamily, NR = non-residential.

The District also has source and service meters although those activities are not counted as “measures” under the new conservation rule. In terms of leak detection and repair, the District is proactive about leak control, even though it is not required to have a water loss control action plan since its leakage is low. The District relies on system break history, pipeline condition assessments, and future demand needs to identify and prioritize rehabilitation and replacement projects. As shown in the District’s water balance in Section 4.2.3, the District’s 2004-2006 average distribution system leakage (which is defined as production and purchases minus authorized consumption) was less than seven percent of production. This result is well within


the ten percent standard established in the new Rule, and demonstrates that the District is successfully managing leaks.

5.1.2. Estimated Savings The estimated conservation savings the District has achieved in the past six years are shown in Table 14. The table shows both new savings added each year, as well as cumulative savings. It is estimated that the program saved approximately 370,000 gallons per day by the end of 2006. It should be noted that these are the savings that are quantifiable from the measures listed in Table 13. The other measures in that table save water, however the savings are difficult to quantify. For example, providing consumption history on bills can motivate customers to use water more efficiently; however, it is difficult to quantify those savings.

Table 14. Estimated Savings Achieved by Existing Program

Measure Average Annual Savings (gpd)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 School-Based Education & Public Outreach1

166,000

Indoor Retrofit Kits2 6,680 18,370 24,640 44,710 16,900 21,840

Outdoor Irrigation Kits2 1,590 1,980 5,730 8,030 3,800 3,500

School Irrigation System Audits2 0 5,280 2,640 5,280 5,280 0

Pre-Rinse Sprayheads2 0 0 0 0 30,000 0

Annual Total 174,270 191,630 199,010 224,020 221,980 191,340

Cumulative Total1 174,270 199,900 232,910 290,920 346,900 372,240 1. The education and outreach savings are not cumulative over the six years since a continuous effort must be made

to maintain savings each year. Therefore, the value in the Cumulative Total row is not simply the addition of the Annual Total rows.

2. Based on information from the City of Everett.

5.2. 2009-2014 Conservation Program

5.2.1. Goals

The goals of a conservation program should reflect the utility’s specific purposes, or “drivers,” for pursuing conservation. Conservation drivers can include meeting regulatory requirements, minimizing impacts on water resources, decreasing operating costs, deferring capital improvements, and obtaining new supply. The conservation driver(s) applicable to any one utility depend on that utility’s specific supply situation and cost structures.

The District’s conservation program is primarily driven by minimizing impacts on water resources and customer service (customers are requesting conservation assistance). The specific goal is to save approximately 450,000 gpd on an annual basis (as opposed to peak season) at full implementation of the six-year program by the end of 2014. This goal was established using a public process that included conducting a public meeting at the December 17, 2007 Board of Commissioners meeting to discuss the draft goal and conservation chapter.


5.2.2. Measures

The District’s conservation program for 2009-2014 will consist of the 12 measures shown in Table 15. These measures have been selected due to a combination of factors including applicability to the District’s service area, customer acceptance, cost effectiveness, and/or savings potential. Descriptions of each measure are discussed below. The District will continue to use source meters, service meters, and perform system leak detection and repair, although as noted earlier those activities are not counted as “measures” under the new conservation Rule.

Table 15. 2009-2014 Conservation Program

Measure

Sectors* Local or Regional

Relationship to Current Program SF MF NR

1. Conservation Pricing X X X Local Continuation 2. Bills Showing Consumption

History X X X Local Continuation 3. Toilet Rebates – 1.6 gpf X X X Local New 4. School-Based Education n/a Regional Continuation 5. Public Outreach n/a Regional Continuation 6. Indoor Retrofit Kits X X Regional Modification 7. Outdoor Irrigation Kits X X Regional Modification 8. Toilet Leak Detection X X X Regional Modification 9. Toilet Rebates – HET X X X Regional New 10. Clotheswasher Rebates X X X Regional New 11. School Irrigation System Audits X Regional Modification 12. Commercial Indoor Audits X Regional New * SF = single family, MF = multifamily, NR = non-residential.

The bulk of the District’s conservation program is delivered through the regional EWUC program, funded proportionately by the District. The District has also reviewed opportunities for supplementing the regional EWUC program to achieve expanded savings. Additional conservation can be achieved in two ways, either by implementing the same measures contained in the EWUC program but at a higher implementation level or by implementing additional measures beyond those included in the EWUC program. Both of these opportunities were examined during the water comprehensive planning process. Based on that analysis, a local 1.6 gallons-per-flush toilet rebate program was selected for implementation.

5.2.3. Estimated Savings, Cost and Impact to Demand

The estimated savings of the 2009-2014 conservation program are shown in Table 16. At full implementation of the program at the end of 2014, the program is estimated to save approximately 450,000 gpd in the District’s retail service area. The savings achieved by the program, and the corresponding progress towards reaching the District’s goal of saving 450,000 gpd by the end of 2014, will be estimated by tracking the number of devices and rebates distributed and multiplying them by their per unit savings. The number of devices and rebates planned for the program is included in Table 16.


The cost of the conservation program is primarily funded through the wholesale water rates the District pays to Everett. An exception to this is the new 1.6 gpf toilet rebate program which the District will administer locally. That program is budgeted at $20,000 per year for a total of $120,000 over the six-year period and will be funded out of the capital improvements program.

Figure 10 depicts how the savings grow over the course of the six year conservation program. The savings are generally expected to be achieved evenly over the six year planning period. The apparent “jump” in the first year is because the education savings are not cumulative, since they must be renewed each year. Those savings, which are a large portion of the overall savings, are essentially repeated each year rather than increased each year.

Figure 10. Estimated Cumulative Savings from 2009-2014 Conservation Program

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Year

Gal

lon

s P

er D

ay

The District’s demand will be reduced by the expected savings from the conservation program. The demand forecast presented in Section 4.3 includes two forecasts: one without additional conservation and one reflecting the savings from the conservation program. For the conservation-adjusted forecast, the estimated savings for years 2009-2014 have been subtracted from the demand without additional conservation. An exception to this is that the savings from the education program are not subtracted from demand without additional conservation. This is because the education savings are savings that have already been achieved but that require continued investment in order to be maintained.

Ald

erw

ood

Wat

er a

nd

Was

tew

ater

Dis

tric

t 34

C

hap

ter

5

Wat

er C

ompr

ehen

sive

Pla

n S

um

mar

y

Au

gust

20

09

Tabl

e 1

6.

Esti

mat

ed S

avin

gs f

rom

20

09

-20

14

Con

serv

atio

n P

rogr

am

2009

20

10

2011

20

12

2013

20

14

Tot

al

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Un

its4

Sav

ings

(g

pd)

Toi

let R

ebat

es -

1.

6 gp

f1 24

5 4,

200

245

4,20

024

54,

200

245

4,20

0 24

54,

200

245

4,20

01,

470

25,2

00

Edu

catio

n2,3

n/a

125,

800

n/a

128,

800

n/a

132,

000

n/a

134,

600

n/a

134,

600

n/a

134,

600

n/a

134,

600

Indo

or R

etro

fit

Kits

3 1,

650

13,8

00

1,65

013

,800

1,65

013

,800

1,65

013

,800

1,

650

13,8

001,

650

13,8

009,

900

82,8

00

Out

door

Irrig

atio

n K

its3

932

4,65

0 93

24,

650

932

4,65

093

24,

650

932

4,65

093

24,

650

5,59

027

,900

Toi

let L

eak

Det

ectio

n3

6,28

2 22

,917

6,

282

22,9

176,

282

22,9

176,

282

22,9

17

6,28

222

,917

6,28

222

,917

37,6

9013

7,50

0

Toi

let R

ebat

es -

H

ET

s3 31

0 2,

583

310

2,58

331

02,

583

310

2,58

3 31

02,

583

310

2,58

31,

860

15,5

00

Clo

thes

was

her

Reb

ates

3 29

7 4,

833

297

4,83

329

74,

833

297

4,83

3 29

74,

833

297

4,83

31,

780

29,0

00

Sch

ool I

rrig

atio

n S

yste

m A

udits

3 0.

7 20

0 0.

720

00.

720

00.

720

0 0.

720

00.

720

04

1,20

0

Com

mer

cial

In

door

Aud

its3

6 65

0 6

650

665

06

650

665

06

650

353,

900

Ann

ual S

ubto

tal

n/a

179,

633

n/a

182,

633

n/a

185,

833

n/a

188,

433

n/a

188,

433

n/a

188,

433

n/a

457,

600

Cum

ulat

ive

2 n/

a 17

9,63

3 n/

a23

6,46

7n/

a29

3,50

0n/

a34

9,93

3 n/

a40

3,76

7n/

a45

7,60

01.

B

ased

on

a to

tal o

f 982

sin

gle

fam

ily r

eba

tes

at $

75; 3

73

mu

ltifa

mily

reb

ate

s at

$75

; and

112

no

n-re

side

ntia

l reb

ates

at $

150.

Thi

s is

14%

of t

he p

ote

ntia

l sav

ings

ava

ilabl

e fr

om e

ach

sect

or o

f thi

s m

easu

re, a

s an

aly

zed

in th

e 1

0-30

-07

Co

nser

vatio

n M

easu

re A

naly

sis

Tec

hnic

al M

emor

and

um.

2.

Edu

catio

n sa

ving

s ar

e n

ot c

um

ulat

ive

over

the

six

year

s si

nce

a co

ntin

uo

us e

ffort

mus

t be

mad

e to

ma

inta

in s

avin

gs e

ach

year

. 3.

B

ased

on

the

EW

UC

reg

iona

l con

serv

atio

n pr

ogra

m in

the

200

7 E

vere

tt C

ompr

ehe

nsiv

e W

ater

Pla

n.

Ass

umes

20

% o

f th

e E

WU

C s

avin

gs w

ill b

e ac

hiev

ed in

Ald

erw

oo

d.

Ald

erw

oo

d re

pres

ente

d 24

% o

f th

e to

tal E

WU

C d

ema

nd (

2007

Eve

rett

Co

mpr

ehen

sive

Wat

er P

lan;

Tab

le 3

-11)

ho

we

ver

20%

wa

s u

sed

to b

e co

nser

vativ

e.

The

EW

UC

pr

ogra

m is

for

200

7-20

12.

It is

ass

umed

that

EW

UC

will

co

ntin

ue

pro

gram

s be

yon

d 20

12, t

here

fore

the

201

2 nu

mbe

rs a

re u

sed

for

2013

an

d 20

14 a

s w

ell.

4.

“U

nits

” ar

e re

bat

es, k

its, l

eak

dete

ctio

n d

ye t

able

ts, o

r au

dits

, as

appr

opri

ate

to e

ach

mea

sure

.


Conservation savings beyond 2014 have also been included in the demand forecast. While the conservation program outlined above is only for the next six years, it is anticipated that a conservation program would continue in the future. Therefore, continued conservation savings are applied to the demand forecast. Table 17 shows conservation savings as a percent of the District’s retail demand without additional conservation in the year 2014. The conservation program results in a 1.7 percent reduction without the education savings and a 2.5 percent reduction with the education savings. As noted above, the savings from the education measure have already been achieved and thus are already reflected in the baseline demand forecast. Therefore, the retail demand without additional conservation in years 2015 and beyond have been reduced by 1.7 percent, rounded up to 2 percent.

Table 17. Demand Reduction Due to Conservation by 2014

Cumulative Savings (gpd)

Forecasted Retail Demand3

(gpd)

Savings as Percent of Retail

Demand

Without Education Measure1

With Education Measure2

Without Education Measure4

With Education Measure5

323,000 457,600 18,530,000 1.7% 2.5%

1. Excludes savings from the education program, which have essentially already been achieved but require continued investment to be maintained. Represents only new savings achieved by conservation.

2. Includes savings from the education measure. Represents both new and maintained savings achieved by conservation.

3. Demand for AWWD’s retail service area, without additional conservation, as presented in Section 4.3

4. Represents only new reductions in demand due to conservation.

5. Represents both new and maintained reductions in demand due to conservation.


6. Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards

This chapter provides an overview of the District’s design and construction requirements for new facilities.

6.1. Project Review Procedures

For new water system facilities, the District has specific project review procedures. These review procedures are described in detail in the Introduction of the District’s Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions. The general steps that must be followed for project review are summarized below.

Applicant submits a written request for water and/or sewer availability.

After completing a review, the District will return a written response to the applicant summarizing the requirements and conditions for water service.

Applicant submits an application for a developer extension agreement (DEA) in person with payment of an administration fee.

District’s written response will either deny the DEA, approve the DEA, or approve the DEA subject to specific conditions.

Upon approval of the application the applicant and the District enter into a formal agreement.

Project designs are submitted to the District by the applicant’s engineer for review. All designs must include a current Professional Engineer’s (PE) stamp and signature.

Upon final approval of the construction drawings, and submittal of required permits and fees, a pre-construction conference will be held.

Construction may begin following the pre-construction conference.

Individual water system project designs must be forwarded to the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) for additional review and approval, except those distribution-related projects that are eligible for the alternative review process. As defined in WAC 246-290-125(2), projects related to the construction of new or upsized distribution mains do not need to be submitted to DOH if the utility meets the following criteria:

1. An approved updated WSP is on file with DOH that includes standard construction specifications for distribution mains; and,

2. A completed Construction Completion Report for Distribution Main Projects for each project is maintained on file.

The District meets both of these criteria and does not typically submit plans to DOH for new or replacement distribution mains.


Other types of distribution-related projects may not require a review by DOH if the District becomes eligible for a separate, though similar, submittal exception process defined in WAC 246-290-125(3). Projects that may be eligible for the submittal exception under this particular regulation include:

Storage tanks Booster pump facilities Transmission mains Pipe linings Tank coatings

The District is taking steps required to utilize this exception under State law.

Source of supply and water quality treatment projects are not eligible for either of the alternative review processes defined above. Such projects must be submitted to DOH for review and approval prior to construction.

6.2. Policies and Requirements for Outside Parties

Policies and requirements for outside parties, particularly for developer extensions, are provided in the Alderwood Water & Wastewater District Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions, originally developed in 2000, and most recently revised December 2006. The District anticipates adopting updated guidelines and standards some time in 2009.

6.3. Design Standards

The District’s design standards include performance standards (i.e., levels of service), and sizing criteria required in the design of all water system improvements. The District’s performance standards and sizing criteria meet or exceed the minimum necessary to meet standards established in WAC 246-290.

6.3.1. Distribution System Pressure Requirements

Minimum Service Pressure

The District’s minimum service pressure requirements meet or exceed requirements for all public water systems, cited in WAC 246-290-230. These criteria are:

A minimum pressure of 30 psi at the customer's meter during peak hour demand conditions

A minimum pressure of 20 psi during fire flow conditions with peak day demand conditions.

Maximum Service Pressure

Although WAC 246-290-230 does not establish maximum allowable system pressures, the District typically requires the design of new facilities to limit maximum system pressures to 100 psi. This criterion helps minimize the need for individual pressure reducing valves at customer taps, which the local plumbing code requires on new service lines with pressures greater than


80 psi. For service connections that receive water at a pressure greater than 80 psi, it is the responsibility of the customer to install and maintain a pressure reducing valve on their connection.

6.3.2. Fire Flow Requirements

Fire fighting requires a high rate of flow in a localized area for a relatively short period of time. Fire flow requirements typically are the highest level of service criteria that must be met by a water system. Required fire flows impact the sizing of distribution mains and storage facilities. The water system must have adequate supply, storage, and distribution capacity to supply fire fighting requirements, while maintaining an adequate level of service to residential and commercial customers. WAC 246-290-230 defines adequate service as a minimum of 20 psi residual pressure anywhere in the system during the time the water system is supplying both the design fire flow and the projected peak day demand.

The fire flow requirements within the District’s retail service area are based on the International Fire Code (IFC). Each of the local fire jurisdictions within the District’s service area utilize the IFC to determine fire flow requirements specific to each development application.

The IFC allows for reductions in required fire flows by modification to the structure (fire walls, building materials) and by providing building sprinklers. In cases where desired fire flows cannot be reasonably provided, other building options may be required.

The highest fire flow requirements typically occur at higher risk and higher demand areas such as commercial, industrial, and multifamily housing areas. The highest fire flow requirement in the District’s service area is 5,000 gpm for a duration of five hours at certain commercial areas in the City of Bothell. Minimum fire flow requirements are usually for single-family residences and typically are 1,000 to 1,500 gpm for 2 hours.

These service criteria are for new development and redevelopment projects. For existing structures, the distribution system must be able to provide the fire flow requirement that was in place at the time the distribution system was built.

6.3.3. Source Capacity Requirements

Source of supply facilities, including booster pump stations, will be designed to meet the maximum day demand (MDD). Supply will be provided at a hydraulic grade that meets replenishment needs of storage facilities.

6.3.4. Storage Capacity Requirements

For new storage facilities, system storage volume requirements are comprised of five separate components:

Operating volume Equalizing volume Fire flow volume Standby volume Dead volume


The minimum required storage volume for each pressure zone is computed by adding the five storage components described above. The District requires that storage facilities be designed such that the required sum of each of these components is met for pressure zone(s) which will be served by the facilities. The storage components are illustrated in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Storage Components

Operating and Dead Storage Volumes

Operating volume is the volume of water that lies between low and high water storage elevations set by District operations staff to control system pumps and flow control valves. Dead volume is the volume at the bottom of the tank that cannot be used because it is physically too low to provide sufficient pressures. Operational and dead volumes are subtracted from total storage to determine the storage available for equalizing, standby, and fire flow.

Equalizing Volume

Equalizing volume is the total volume needed to moderate daily fluctuations in diurnal demands during periods when the demand exceeds the capacity of the supply system. Equalizing volume requirements are greatest on the day of peak demand. Operation of a properly balanced system results in replenishment of storage facilities during those times of day when the demand curve is below the capacity of the supply system, and depletion of storage facilities when the demand exceeds the supply capacity.

Fire Flow Volume

The required fire flow volume for a given pressure zone is calculated as the required fire flow multiplied by the required duration.


The maximum fire flow volume required for the District is 1.5 million gallons (MG) for the 520 Zone, based on a maximum required flow rate of 5,000 gpm for five hours. The required fire flow volume for all other pressure zones is 0.96 MG, based on a maximum required flow rate of 4,000 gpm for four hours.

Standby Volume

Standby volume is required to supply reasonable system demands during a foreseeable system emergency or outage, such as a pipeline failure, power outage, valve failure, or other system outage. A key concept is that establishment of standby volume involves planning for reasonable system outages, outages that can be expected to occur under normal operating conditions. Major system emergencies, such as those created by an earthquake, are intended to be covered under emergency system operations planning, as construction of sufficient reserve volume to accommodate sustained system demands under emergency conditions is not economically feasible.

DOH has established guidelines for determining minimum required standby volume. This component is calculated as the greater of: 1) two times the average day demand served by the storage facility; or 2) 200 gallons times the number of ERUs served.

6.4. Construction Standards

Construction standard details and standard specifications are included in the District’s Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions.

6.5. Construction Certification and Follow-up Procedures

In order to assure that water projects are constructed to meet the District’s standards, the District reviews all design drawings and specifications prior to construction. In addition, District staff inspect water facilities as they are installed. At completion of the project there is an inspection and if the project fails to meet required standards, a punch list is made of the remaining items to be completed before District acceptance of the facilities. As outlined in the Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions, once the list has been completed, a final inspection is performed, all fees are paid, utility easement is completed, and bond completion guarantee is completed, then the project is accepted and use and operation may begin.

Requirements for record drawings are included in the Development Guidelines and Standards for Developer Extensions, in the “General Provisions” section. For projects designed by the developer’s engineer, the engineer is required to maintain and provide the District with record construction drawings. The District also reserves the right to request other information that it deems appropriate.


7. System Analysis

The District evaluated the water system’s ability to meet current and projected water supply needs. There are three main elements to this evaluation: source capacity analysis; storage capacity analysis; and analysis of the water distribution piping system. This evaluation identified key needs for infrastructure improvements. Those improvements are identified as capital projects, listed in Chapter 11 of this Plan.

7.1. Source Capacity Analysis According to DOH planning requirements, sources of supply must be sufficient to meet maximum day demands (MDD). This must hold true for each pressure zone within a system, as well as for the system as a whole. The source capacity analysis carried out for this Plan addressed this requirement. The analysis was conducted by comparing the District’s water demand forecast, presented in Chapter 4, with current source capacities.

At the system-wide level, current source capacities at the District’s pump stations, along with supply available from the Clearview Pump Station, provide adequate supply through 2028.

Table 18. Source Adequacy

Year

2008 2014 2028 Max(3) Projected ERUs and Demand (1)

Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs) 153,400 182,400 231,100 239,063 Average Day Demand (mgd) 31.41 37.35 47.32 49.00 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 56.94 66.38 84.11 84.80

Total Available Source - (gpd) (2) 84.80 84.80 84.80 84.80 Source Surplus/(Deficiency) - (mgd) 27.86 18.42 0.69 0.00

1. Projected demands taken from Chapter 4. Includes demands by wholesale customers and Clearview partners. ERUs calculated as Average Day Demand / ERU water use factor (205 gpd/ERU).

2. Source pumps are operating at the maximum production rate (i.e., for 24 hours per day). 3. Maximum ERUs to be served with current sources, based on maximum production rate (i.e., 24 hours per

day). Max ERUs = Total Available Source / Maximum Day Demand per ERU (355 gpd/ERU).

In addition to the system-wide evaluation, the District evaluated source capacity for the 724 Zone which receives water through a booster pump station. The source adequacy evaluation indicates that this source is deficient in meeting current and future needs. By 2014, the deficiency increases to 0.97 mgd, and by 2028, the deficiency is projected to be 2.47 mgd.

The District plans to address this zone-specific supply deficiency by upgrading booster station capacity serving this zone by approximately 1,715 gpm, as discussed in Chapter 11.

7.2. Storage Capacity Analysis

The District used DOH’s required protocol to evaluated current storage capacity of the District’s various water reservoirs. This protocol reviews the volumes of water required for different


system purposes including daily operations, firefighting needs and emergency supply needs. In addition, the District uses storage in part to minimize payment of higher wholesale rates for water received from Everett during periods of high customer demand. This element was also included in the storage evaluation. The evaluation used demand forecasts presented in Chapter 4.

At the system-wide level, the evaluation shows the District’s existing storage facilities are adequate to meet projected needs beyond 2028, including provision of standby storage for the City of Lynnwood. While localized deficiencies in storage volume are present in some pressure zones, these zones have access to excess storage volume located in other parts of the system. The total storage surplus anticipated at the end of the 20-year planning horizon in 2028 is approximately 10 million gallons in storage that provides at least 30 psi to all customers, and approximately 18 million gallons in storage that provides at least 20 psi to all customers. Therefore, there are no capital projects needed to add storage capacity. The capital improvements program described in Chapter 11 does, however, include maintenance projects such as periodic re-coating of interior and exterior surfaces of the District’s storage reservoirs.

Table 19. Summary of Storage Capacity Analysis (in MG)

Year 2008 2014 2028

Storage > 30 psi (1)






Total System Available Storage 42.08 88.32 49.48 95.72 49.48 95.72 Required Storage 38.42 64.14 38.91 69.41 39.15 77.43 Surplus/(Deficit) 3.67 24.18 10.57 26.31 10.33 18.29

Notes: MG = million gallons 1. Storage located at an elevation that provides at least 30 psi to the highest customer.

This includes operational, equalizing, and (where applicable) demand management storage components. 2. Storage located at an elevation that provides at least 20 psi to the highest customer.

This includes operational, equalizing, demand management (where applicable), standby, and fire flow storage components.

7.3. Distribution System Analysis

The District uses specialized computer software to model its distribution piping system, storage reservoirs, pump stations, pressure-reducing valves and related infrastructure. This software allows analysts to evaluate system performance, supplementing operational experience. The system can be modeled for both current conditions and projected future conditions as demands increase over time. This hydraulic model is an essential tool for identifying physical improvements such as increases in pipe capacity in localized areas. Using it, the District can test different ways of correcting deficiencies. The model is also used to inform decisions about physical improvements needed to serve new residential and commercial developments.

For this Water Comprehensive Plan, the District’s model was thoroughly reviewed, updated and upgraded. The previous version of the model was transferred to updated software that offers expanded capabilities for geographic analysis. New piping installed since the prior model was developed was added to the model, based on record drawings used in designing each individual project. Incorrect data identified in the model was corrected, and the model was calibrated using new data collected through field work. In addition, dimensions of storage reservoirs and


configuration of the District’s pump stations were checked and adjusted based on record drawings and discussions with District staff regarding facility controls and operations. Pressure-reducing valve settings were also adjusted according to staff input.

The updated model contains approximately 10,200 pipes and 9,000 junction nodes, along with pressure reducing stations, reservoirs, and pump stations. These improvements are expected to greatly improve model accuracy for identifying deficiencies and testing alternative solutions.

As required by DOH, the District’s water system was analyzed and deficiencies were identified for the following two conditions: peak hour demands, and maximum day demands plus fire flow. Demands were modeled for the six- and 20-year planning horizons, as presented in Chapter 4. These demand forecast numbers were used to determine the total demand for customers within the District’s service area and for wholesale customers, including Lynnwood, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace and Mukilteo Water District, which are served through master meters within the distribution system.

The District has an extensive distribution system with approximately 640 miles of pipe. Some of these pipes were installed more than 40 years ago and are reaching the end of their useful lives. Aging infrastructure, inadequately sized pipes and increasing demands all contribute to areas of low pressure during peak hour demands and substandard fire flows at locations or areas where the existing system cannot provide adequate service during existing and future maximum day demand conditions. The model was used to identify improvements that would increase the distribution system capacity to meet the required level of service for static pressures and fire flows.

A number of steady state hydraulic analyses were completed for each pressure zone for existing (2008), six-year (2014), and twenty-year (2028) demand conditions. These considered peak hour demand and fire flow demand (maximum day demand plus fire flow) conditions. Table 20 describes the modeling scenarios conducted. The results of the peak hour and fire flow analyses are described in greater detail below.


Table 20. Modeling Scenarios

Description Demand Purpose Existing Year, Peak Hour

2008 Peak Hour Demand Evaluate system

Existing Year, Fire Flow 2008 Maximum Day Demand plus fire flow

Evaluate system

Plan Year 6, Peak Hour Plan Year 6 Peak Hour Demand Evaluate system performance and develop CIP for peak hour conditions

Plan Year 6, Fire Flow Plan Year 6 Maximum Day Demand plus fire flow

Evaluate system performance and develop CIP for Plan Year 6 fire flow conditions

Plan Year 20, Peak Hour

Plan Year 20 Peak Hour Demand Evaluate system and develop CIP for Plan Year 20 peak hour conditions

Plan Year 20, Fire Flow Plan Year 20 Maximum Day Demand plus fire flow

Evaluate system performance and develop CIP for Plan Year 20 fire flow conditions

For each of these scenarios, the model produces output displaying areas where modeled fire flows or pressures do not meet desired standards. Potential physical improvements to the distribution system that could overcome these deficiencies were then identified. Typical improvements include installation of new pipe segments; or up-sizing of existing pipes, connection of pipe segments (looping) to improve flow, and adjustments to the District’s pressure zone configuration through modifications to the system of pressure-reducing valves at zone boundaries. Alternative projects were evaluated and a set of desired improvements was then selected, as described in Chapter 11 of this Water Comprehensive Plan.

The primary issues addressed through this process were:

Large areas experiencing either high and low pressures, under current conditions for peak-hour demands. These conditions can be addressed primarily through adjustments to the District’s pressure zone configuration, together with increasing piping capacity in select areas.

Areas where fire flows do not meet desired flow levels. These conditions can also be addressed through proposed improvements to the District’s piping system. This process is not designed to address adequacy of fire flow at every hydrant in the system, but it will improve overall system performance in delivering desired fire flow levels. It is the intent of the District to work with owners of existing facilities, and developers of future facilities, at these locations to ensure that appropriate system improvements are made such that required fire flow can be provided or that the facilities served are designed and built in such a way as to allow for a reduction in fire flow requirements (e.g., via sprinkling or building material selection).


8. Water System Reliability, Water Rights, and Source Protection

This chapter provides an evaluation of system reliability, with respect to the ability of the District’s supply strategy to meet system demands under a variety of conditions, including during emergency situations. Descriptions of the District’s water rights, water shortage response plan, and source protection efforts are also included in this chapter.

8.1. Source Reliability

8.1.1. Adequacy of Existing Supply Sources

Everett Regional Supply

The District purchases the water needed to satisfy all of its water supply requirements from the City of Everett. Everett’s regional supply comes from the Sultan River A supply agreement with Everett stipulates that Everett will supply the District with a maximum of 106 mgd (on a peak day basis). Further details of the supply agreement are provided in Chapter 3.

Everett’s 2006 Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP) documents that the Everett regional system has sufficient capacity to supply the needs of its wholesale and retail customers well into the future. Everett’s water rights are sufficient to supply its combined retail and regional wholesale average day demand through at least 2035 and to supply the maximum day demand through at least 2045. The District’s supply is included in the regional wholesale quantity.

The Everett CWP also shows that the safe yield of the watershed is greater than Everett’s current water rights. The CWP also considered the potential impacts of global climate change on watershed yield. This evaluation determined that climate change has the potential to negatively impact Everett’s safe yield, both under best- and worst-case conditions. However, the degree of impact results in safe yield remaining greater than Everett’s water rights beyond year 2100, based on the present reservoir operational approach. Therefore, Everett’s source of supply appears capable of accommodating variability due to climate change well beyond the 20-year planning period.

In addition, the reliability of Everett’s supply is bolstered by the utility’s emergency response program, which includes emergency planning, a vulnerability analysis, specific standard operating procedures for emergency conditions, and supply contingency operations plans. Everett Public Works has assigned one full-time employee to emergency planning and preparedness, in order to ensure the emergency response program is well maintained and that the City can provide water service under a range of emergency conditions.

District Wells

The District also maintains an artesian well located on 164th Street SW that is a public source of supply. Although the well is not connected to the District’s distribution system, public water consumers fill their own containers at their discretion. The District maintains a wellhead


protection program, as described in Section 8.4.2, to provide adequate water quality protection and safety. This well provides a community benefit, but is unrelated to the overall reliability of the District’s water supply system. The District operates Well No.7 to provide water for District equipment. It is not connected to the distribution system and does not affect system reliability.

8.1.2. Interties

In addition to its three source of supply connections to Everett (including the Clearview connection), the District has a number of interties. The District’s three non-emergency interties are with its wholesale customers: the cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace. The District’s 26 emergency interties are with ten neighboring utilities. These emergency interties provide contingency supplies in the event the District’s supply from Everett becomes constrained or unavailable under emergency conditions. Chapter 3 provides details of the intertie agreements the District maintains with neighboring utilities.

8.1.3. Water Reuse

The District has evaluated the potential for using reclaimed water for purposes such as landscape irrigation and industrial uses. As documented in the District’s Draft Comprehensive Sewer Plan (February 2008), three opportunities for future production and distribution of Class A reclaimed water have been identified, as summarized below.

Picnic Point Wastewater Treatment Facility. The District’s Picnic Point Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), located in the northwest portion of the District’ service area, offers a potential source of reclaimed water. As a part of the most recent WWTF upgrade (which began in 2008 and is scheduled for completion in 2011), space was reserved at the WWTF site for the future addition of equipment and facilities necessary to convert the current quality of treated effluent (the equivalent of Class C reclaimed water) to Class A reclaimed water, which can be used for a wider variety of applications. The necessary improvements would include the addition of chlorination facilities, chemical storage, pumping equipment, and controls.

The primary use of reclaimed water generated at this site would be irrigation at Harbour Pointe Golf Course, located approximately 1.3 miles to the north of the WWTF. Along with a small amount of reclaimed water use for irrigation at the WWTF site, the total projected reclaimed water demand associated with the Picnic Point WWTF is approximately 0.53 mgd on an average seasonal basis, and 0.83 mgd on a peak demand basis.

Satellite Reclaimed Water Facility. Another potentially significant user of reclaimed water located within the District’s service area is the golf course at Mill Creek Country Club, in the northeastern portion of the District. Due to its location, conveyance of reclaimed water from the Picnic Point WWTF would be costly. A more feasible approach to provision of reclaimed water would be the construction of a satellite facility in close proximity to the country club. Projected reclaimed water demands are similar to those for the Picnic Point WWTF: 0.52 on an average seasonal basis, and 0.8 mgd on a peak demand basis.

Brightwater Treatment Plant. King County’s Brightwater Treatment Plant, being constructed adjacent to the southeastern portion of the District’s service area, offers another potential source of reclaimed water. By 2010, the facility is anticipated to be


online and producing up to 5 mgd of reclaimed water. Although no treatment facilities would be required by the District to utilize this source of reclaimed water, significant investment would be needed to connect to the Brightwater reclaimed water transmission line and then convey the resource to potential use areas.

The District has no plans to invest further in a reclaimed water program at this time, due to the significant cost of required facilities, the limited potential use of reclaimed water within the District’s service area, and the ability of the Everett regional system to fully meet water demands well into the future. However, the District remains open to proposals from Snohomish County, King County, or other parties related to reclaimed water, if alternative funding sources can be identified to finance the necessary construction projects.

8.2. Water Rights

The District developed ten deep wells in 1954 and holds 11 Certificates of Ground Water Rights. Table 21 summarizes the quantities associated each water right. The total instantaneous quantity (Qi) of all of these water rights is 6,470 gallons per minute (gpm). The total annual quantity (Qa) is 9,984 acre-feet per year (afy). This equals 8.91 million gallons per day (mgd).

Table 21. Existing Water Rights

Well No. Certificate No. Location Date Qa (afy)1 Qi (gpm)

1 3258-A Sec. 21, T27N, R4E October 1953 1,200 750 2 2034-A Sec. 21, T27N, R4E July 1953 1,130 700

3B 2536-A Sec. 16, T27N, R4E September 1955 896 560 4 2920 Sec. 27, T27N, R4E June 1956 576 360 5 3227 Sec. 2, T27N, R4E August 1956 240 150 6 3398 Sec. 12, T27N, R4E September 1957 1,600 1,000 7 3174 Sec. 15, T27N, R4E December 1957 1,600 1,000 8 3401 Sec. 10, T27N, R4E September 1958 1,120 700 9 3814 Sec. 14, T27N, R4E December 1957 400 250 10 4251 Sec. 16, T27N, R4E January 1960 480 300

1499 Sec. 28, T27N, R4E August 1953 742 700 Total 9,984 6,470

afy = acre-feet per year; gpm = gallons per minutes 1. All listed certificates are associated with primary water rights for municipal or community domestic use. Although the District currently relies on the Everett regional system for its supply, the District’s existing water rights are retained to allow for backup, emergency, or supplemental supply to help meet system demands. The District does not anticipate any need to apply for new water rights within the 20 year planning period of this Water Comprehensive Plan.

In addition to the groundwater certificates summarized in Table 21, the District has a water right claim on the Sultan River (i.e., the source of Everett’s supply). The claim is dated June 20, 1974, and is for 16,250 gpm and an annual quantity of 26,220 afy.

8.3. Water Shortage Response Planning

The City of Everett has developed a Drought Response Plan (DRP) that describes what steps it would take in the event that water supplied to its retail and wholesale customers became limited or unavailable. The DRP establishes procedures for managing water supply during periods of


weather-related shortages. It is a general framework of actions that will be tailored to meet the specific needs of a drought-related supply limitation. The DRP outlines data needs, coordination, internal operational adjustments, and management of supply and demands. The plan provides a four-stage approach to addressing a shortfall event. Each stage provides an increasingly aggressive set of actions to be implemented as drought conditions become more severe. The four stages are:

Advisory Stage. The public is informed that a water shortage may occur and is encouraged to use water wisely.

Voluntary Stage. This stage relies on voluntary cooperation to meet demand-reduction goals. During this stage, Everett and its purveyors will implement supply-side actions and recommend voluntary actions for their retail customers.

Mandatory Stage. Everett and its purveyors will implement more aggressive supply-side actions and will limit or prohibit certain retail water use activities.

Emergency Stage. If supply conditions worsen and the mandatory stage does not meet the required demand reduction, this stage will establish emergency restrictions, which may include rate surcharges.

As outlined in its supply agreement with Everett, the District will share in implementing conservation and emergency measures as necessary during times when the DRP is in effect.

8.4. Source Protection

8.4.1. Everett Sultan River Source

The City of Everett has had a source water protection plan in place for many years to protect its Sultan River Basin supply from water quality impairment. The protection program was updated and provided to DOH recently, as an element of Everett’s recently completed Water Comprehensive Plan. This plan covers the regional surface water supply system, including supplies received by the District.

8.4.2. Wellhead Protection Plan

As noted in Section 8.1.1, the District maintains a flowing artesian well (Well No. 5), which is used by some local residents who fill their own water containers and use the untreated water for potable purposes. In 1997, the District prepared a wellhead protection plan (WHPP) for the well, pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act. The WHPP addresses the following four main elements.

A delineated wellhead protection area for the well.

An inventory of potential wellhead contamination sources within the wellhead protection area.

A management plan that will reduce the likelihood that potential contaminant sources will pollute the drinking water supply.

Contingency plans for providing alternative sources of supply should contamination occur.


The inventory of specific sites and activities having contamination potential was updated in the summer of 2007, in conjunction with development of this Water Comprehensive Plan. The inventory indicated relatively low risk to ground water in the area supplying this well.

If Well No 5. should become contaminated or unusable, the District’s supply would not be impacted in any way. Well No. 5 is maintained only as a courtesy to the District’s customers, not as a normal source of supply. The District has developed emergency shut-down procedures for Well No. 5 in the event that the well is no longer a viable source.


9. Water Quality Compliance

This Chapter reviews applicable state and federal drinking water regulations and evaluates the District’s compliance between 2003 and 2007.

9.1. System Overview and Water Quality Compliance Responsibilities

As of 2007, the District serves a population of more than 157,760 within the retail service area. The District purchases 100 percent of its drinking water supply from City of Everett. This source of supply is surface water from the Sultan River and is treated by the City of Everett. The District adds chlorine to the water within the distribution system to ensure the presence of a disinfectant residual throughout the District’s distribution system.

As a system which distributes purchased drinking water, the District is responsible for meeting water quality requirements that apply to distributing a drinking water supply while the City of Everett is responsible for meeting regulations applicable to operating this source of supply.

In addition, the District operates an artesian well (Well No. 5 located on 164th St. SW) as a non-transient, non-community water system. In Washington State, a water system that serves 25 or more of the same non-residential people for 180 days or more during a calendar year is considered a non-transient, non-community water system. This well serves fewer than 1,000 customers per day. It is not connected to the District’s distribution system and does not receive treatment or chlorination. With respect to Well No. 5, the District is responsible for ensuring that this source of supply meets drinking water source requirements.

Well No.7 provides water for District equipment, and is not connected to the distribution system. It is not used for potable purposes and is not treated or monitored for drinking water quality.

9.2. Overview of Drinking Water Regulations

Washington State drinking water suppliers are subject to both federal and state drinking water regulations. At the federal level, the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (1974) and SDWA Amendments (1986 and 1996) give the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) the responsibility of developing and administering national standards for drinking water quality. Table 22 presents a list of federal drinking water regulations that have been developed as part of the SDWA and amendments that were in effect between 2003 and 2007, which is the period under review for this WCP update. Regulations that will be effective after 2007 are discussed later.

The regulations presented in Table 22 apply to the District because they cover operation of groundwater drinking water sources (Well No. 5), distribution of chlorinated drinking water which originates from groundwater and surface water sources (Everett supply), and communication with customers regarding presence of contaminants in the drinking water.


Table 22. Effective Federal Drinking Water Regulations Applicable to AWWD1

Rule and Date Rule Became Effective Parameters Regulated Applicable Source

National Primary Drinking Water Requirements (1976)

Physical and chemical Well No. 5

Phase I (VOCs) and Phase II and Phase V (IOCs and SOCs) - 1989

and 1993, respectively

Volatile organic chemicals (VOCs), inorganic chemicals (IOCs), and

synthetic organic chemicals (SOCs)

Well No. 5 and Everett supply in distribution system

(asbestos cement)

Surface Water Treatment Rule (1990)

Turbidity, disinfection, viruses, Giardia lamblia, and disinfectant

residual

Everett supply in distribution system

Total Coliform Rule (1990) Coliform bacteria Well No. 5 and Everett supply

Lead and Copper Rule (1992) and Lead and Copper Rule Minor

Revisions (2000)

Lead and copper and treatment for corrosion control

Everett supply

Consumer Confidence Rule (1998) Water quality compliance reporting to customers

Well No. 5 and Everett supply

Public Notification Rule (2000) Notification of public after water quality violation

Well No. 5 and Everett supply

Arsenic Rule (2001) Arsenic Well No. 5

Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products Rule (2002)

Disinfectant residual, total trihalomethanes, and haloacetic

acids

Everett supply

Stage 2 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products Rule (2006)

Total trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids

Everett supply

Groundwater Rule Indicators of fecal contamination at groundwater source

Well No. 5

1. These regulations were in effect between 2003 and 2007.

The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) is the primacy agency responsible for ensuring that drinking water laws are implemented and enforced. Washington State must adopt laws at least as stringent as federal regulations. During the period of time when a federal drinking water law has yet to be included in state drinking water codes, drinking water suppliers are responsible for meeting federal regulatory requirements as put forth by the USEPA.

The Washington State law incorporating federal drinking water requirements is Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-290 - Group A Public Water Systems. The District is a Group A system: a drinking water system that provides water to 15 or more service connections used by year-round residents for 180 or more days within a calendar year, or regularly serving at least 25 year-round residents. Well No. 5 also qualifies as a Group A system.

The regulations listed in Table 22 have been incorporated into WAC 246-290 except for the Stage 2 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Product (D/DBP) Rule and Groundwater Rule.


9.3. Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations

Table 23 presents a list of anticipated regulations, dates (some anticipated) of regulatory milestones, and regulated parameters. In addition to these anticipated regulations, the District can track potential regulations by keeping up-to-date with the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). The CCL is the primary source used by the USEPA for establishing priority contaminants that may face future regulation. In February 2005, the USEPA issued the second CCL, which is comprised of 51 contaminants (9 microbial and 42 chemical) included on the previous list. In July 2008, EPA published a final determination that no regulatory action was necessary for 11 of the 51 contaminants.

It is important that AWWD keep track of developments with respect to these proposed or anticipated regulations over the next six years.

Table 23. Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations

Regulation Anticipated Date Parameters

Radon Rule Proposed: 1999

Radon

Revised Total Coliform Rule/Distribution System Rule

Promulgation after 2010

Total Coliform Fecal Coliform

E. coli

9.4. Summary of Regulatory Status

A review of the District’s monitoring and compliance procedures and water quality monitoring results indicates that AWWD was generally in compliance with all State and Federal regulations during the review period. Exceptions include the number of samples collected under the TCR, and an administrative requirement associated with the Consumer Confidence Rule, and the District is now taking steps to address these items. Table 24 summarizes AWWD’s regulatory status from 2003 to 2007, including regulatory requirements and recommendations for continued compliance.


Table 24. Summary of Applicable Regulations and Compliance Status

Regulation Requirements Status Compliance? Actions

Surface Water Treatment Rules

Operate treatment such that removal credit

requirements are met. Meet turbidity

performance criteria Monitor chlorine

residuals throughout the distribution system. Maintain Watershed

Control Plan

Must meet disinfectant

residual requirements only.

Yes

Phase I, II, V Rules

Monitor finished water for IOCs, SOCs, and

VOCs. Monitor distribution

system for asbestos.

Must conduct monitoring at Well

No. 5 per requirements and

DOH waivers.

Yes

Arsenic Rule Meet MCL for Arsenic

Must conduct monitoring at Well

No. 5 per requirements and

DOH waivers.

Yes

Total Coliform Rule

Written Plan; Monitoring

Must conduct monthly

monitoring within distribution

system and also collects monthly samples at Well

No. 5

Yes with MCLs No, with

updated Plan

The District will collect an additional

20 samples per month to reflect

current population of approximately

157,000.

Stage 1 D/DBP Rule


Must conduct quarterly


system.

Yes

Stage 2 D/DBP Rule

IDSE Plan and Report, Monitoring

Must conduct quarterly


system.

Yes

Lead and Copper Rule


Must conduct monitoring per

Everett’s Regional monitoring plan

Yes

It may be informative to report AWWD-only tap sample results in water quality report.

CCR and Public Notification

Rules

Annual Reports. Reporting as needed.

Must produce an annual report and

follow public notification

requirements during water

quality events.

Yes, except an administrative requirement

Address administrative

deficiency


The District will track the progress of anticipated drinking water regulations that will affect AWWD’s regulatory compliance activities in the future, especially Lead and Copper Rule Revisions, and the Total Coliform Rule Revisions/Distribution System Rule.

9.5. Summary of AWWD’s Monitoring Requirements

Table 25 presents a summary of water quality monitoring requirements. The table includes the parameters to be monitored, sampling location, and frequency for existing and applicable future regulations.

Table 25. Summary of Monitoring Requirements

Parameter Regulatory

Requirement Location Frequency

Current Regulations

Chlorine Residual Surface Water Treatment Rule

Entry points to distribution system 1

Continuously

Chlorine Residual Surface Water Treatment Rule and

Stage 1 D/DBP

Throughout distribution system

Monthly

Inorganic chemicals – except asbestos

Phase II, V Rules Well 5 Every 3 years, Nitrate annually

Synthetic organic chemicals Phase II, V Rules Well 5 Once every 3 years

Volatile organic chemicals Phase I, II, V Rules Well 5 Once every 3 years

Arsenic Arsenic Rule Well 5 Once every 3 years

Total coliform Total Coliform Rule Throughout distribution system & Well 5

Monthly

Disinfection By-Products (TTHMs and HAA5)

Stage 1 D/DBP Throughout distribution system

Quarterly

Disinfection By-Products (TTHMs and HAA5)

Stage 2 D/DBP – IDSE requirement

Stage 2 Compliance

Throughout distribution system

Throughout distribution

system

Per IDSE Plan – Every 2 months for

one year

Quarterly

Lead and copper Lead and Copper Rule

Customers’ taps throughout the

distribution system

Per Regional Monitoring Plan –

Every 3 years pH, alkalinity, and temperature

Lead and Copper Rule

10 sites, as per Regional Program

Fecal indicator specified by DOH

Groundwater Rule Well 5 Undetermined at this time

Future Regulations (known parameters)

Radon Radon Rule Well 5 Undetermined at this time


9.6. Response to Customer Inquiries or Complaints

The District’s Water Quality Department tracks and responds to about 95 percent of AWWD’s customer inquiries (other inquiries are directed to Finance or other appropriate departments). The Water Quality Department answers any customer questions, and, if warranted, conducts a site visit to look further into the complaint. Site visits are conducted in response to most dirty water and taste and odor complaints. If a cross-connection is possible or suspected, a site inspection is conducted.

Inquiries and complaints which are tracked according to these categories:

Bacteria-related Cross-connection Dirty water Health concern Hot water tanks Plumbing problems Pressure Taste and odor Water quality information Water quality parameter.

According to data for 2005 and 2006, AWWD received an average of 420 customer complaints each year. Additionally, the District receives about five requests for additional information each year. An industry benchmark for acceptable water quality is four complaints per 1,000 customers. During both years, about 40 percent of customer complaints were related to water pressure. Overall, the District receives about 3.6 customer complaints per 1,000 customers.


10. Operations and Maintenance Program

This chapter summarizes the programs and procedures used to ensure safe and reliable supply of potable water to the District’s customers. It includes a description of water system management and personnel, system operations and control, the comprehensive monitoring plan, the emergency response program, safety procedures, and the cross-connection control program.

10.1. Water System Management and Personnel The organizational structure of the District includes a Maintenance and Operations Department and Engineering Department. Maintenance and operations responsibilities have been clearly defined in order to support efficient and effective operation of the District’s water system.

10.2. Operator Certification Chapter 70.119 RCW requires that Group "A" public water systems have a certified operator on staff. Responsibilities of the certified operator may include supervising the technical direction of a water system’s operation, supervising an operating shift of such a system, or a major segment of a system necessary for monitoring or improving the quality of water. Chapter 246-292 WAC provides the requirements for certification of the water works operator. The District supports and encourages in-house training and external training opportunities for operators, for continuing education. Table 26 lists the District’s engineers and lead operations staff, as well as their certifications.

Table 26. Water System Certification Information

Position Staff Member Certification General Manager Arden Blackledge WDM IV District Engineer Nancy Davidson WDM IV Senior Project Engineer Brigitte McCarty WDM IV, CCS Project Engineer Chris Schumacher WDM IV Engineering Services Manager Dan Scheil WDM III, CCS Construction Inspection Supervisor Catherine Forrest WDM III M&O Director Joe Bolam WDM III, CSS III M&O Superintendent Mike Johnson WDM III, CSS I Field Operations Manager Brett Gehrke WDM II, CCS, BAT Water Quality Supervisor Darren Demontes WDM II, CCS Field Operations Manager Mike Oleson WDM III, CCS, CSS I

BAT = backflow assembly tester CCS = cross connection control specialist CSS = collection system specialist (for wastewater system) WDM = water distribution manager WDS = water distribution specialist


10.3. System Operations and Control

Chapter 2 of this Water Comprehensive Plan provides information on the District’s facilities. The routine operation and maintenance of the major elements of these facilities are summarized below.

10.3.1. SCADA and Telemetry System

A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system became fully operational in 2008. The day-to-day operation of the water system is visually monitored and controlled from SCADA computers. This includes pump station status, reservoir and tank levels, flows into the system, and flows through the wholesale master meters. A SCADA system allows for modifications of automatic control setpoints, pump sequence logic, and other control settings. The continuous monitoring of system operational status is provided through the data acquisition portion of the SCADA system. The SCADA system is also used to generate reports that are used to review operations and identify where changes can be made to improve operational efficiency.

10.3.2. Storage Reservoirs

Reservoir maintenance includes periodic inspection and cleaning of interior and exterior surfaces, inspection of cathodic protection systems, and interior and exterior painting as required. The District has a regular maintenance and inspection schedule. The reservoirs are drained and cleaned every five years. Inspection of cathodic protection systems are performed annually.

10.3.3. Pump Stations

Start-up and shut-down procedures are posted in the pump station buildings. The safety procedures for operating the pump stations are also included in the Lock-Out Tag-Out Manual. Each pump station receives an on-site check daily and a daily log is kept documenting the inspection.

The following service is completed annually at each pump station:

Pump motor servicing Infrared testing of the electrical components Vibration analysis.

10.3.4. Disinfection Facilities

The District’s disinfection facilities re-chlorinate to provide adequate chlorine residual throughout the distribution system and out to the master meters of the District’s wholesale customers. A sodium hypochlorite facility is located at each of the four reservoir sites and chlorination is provided by the outlet of each one. Due to the disinfection/disinfection byproduct (D/DBP) requirements, the District is maintaining a more comprehensive program of monitoring chlorine residuals with on-line chlorine residual analyzers that report a continuous reading to the SCADA system.


Water supplied from the City of Everett has a chlorine residual of approximately 0.7 to 1.0 ppm. The District has significantly reduced the amount of re-chlorination, due to the high chlorine residual present in the Everett supply entering the District’s system. Currently the District is operating one of its four disinfection facilities at the lowest possible rate. The typical downstream residual is approximately 0.5 to 0.7 ppm. On the occasion when a high chlorine residual spikes at the District’s master meters to its wholesale customers then the District will temporarily shut down the associated disinfection facility to reduce the risk of generating disinfection by-products.

All preventive maintenance is performed per the manufacturer’s recommendations. Chlorine Residual Analyzers are calibrated monthly.

10.3.5. Pressure Reducing Valves

The District maintains various pressure reducing valve stations which regulate pressure Downstream pressure at each PRV is monitored continuously and alarm set-points (high and low) are incorporated in the District-wide SCADA system. The pressure reducing valves (PRVs) are checked periodically with scheduled maintenance as required.

10.3.6. Distribution Pipes

The District maintains an ongoing pipe replacement program, where older pipes known to be degraded or have high repair requirements are scheduled for replacement. The District has replaced all of the asbestos cement pipe that was present in prior decades. The District is also developing a program to replace its cast iron pipe over time. The District’s aggressive replacement program has resulted in a distribution system having low leakage (unaccounted-for water) and minimal pipe breaks.

10.3.7. Preventative Maintenance Program

The District’s computerized maintenance management system will be fully operational in 2009. Prior to the maintenance management system, the District was not equipped with the means to track and record regular and long-term maintenance schedules and reports on major system facilities. Reservoir inspections and cleaning were completed as required by State regulations and as needed. Maintenance of most of the other facilities was done as it was necessary.

In 2001 the District began a unidirectional flushing program to improve water quality and maintain optimal operational capabilities of the distribution system. The District is working its way through the distribution system beginning at the supply sources and moving out to the extremities of the system. Approximately three to five years is needed to complete flushing of the entire system. Once District staff has gone all the way through the system, they will begin again. As part of this flushing program all of the hydrants and blow-off valves are being serviced prior to flushing in any given area.

Once the new maintenance system is installed, the District will begin a regular preventative maintenance program on all of its major system facilities.

Regular servicing of pumps, motors, flow meters, and related mechanical and electrical equipment receives highest priority.


10.3.8. Equipment, Supplies, and Chemical Listing

The operations division maintains a detailed inventory of equipment, supplies, and materials. The District maintains an inventory of necessary supplies and spare parts for routine operations and emergency operations. Spare parts, such as valves, pipes, fittings, and electrical and electronic parts are kept current in the inventory. The District also maintains a detailed inventory of its vehicle fleet and large equipment.

10.4. Comprehensive Monitoring Plan

The District routinely monitors water quality parameters in accordance with State and Federal drinking water regulations. Details of the monitoring program are contained in Chapter 9 – Water Quality.

10.5. Emergency Response Program

Emergencies that could impede the supply of water on a short term basis include such occurrences as pipe breakage, hydrant damage, and short-term power outages. These emergencies are normally anticipated and handled by the District staff without significant difficulty.

Less frequently, water utilities must deal with natural and man-made disasters of greater proportions. These include earthquakes, volcanoes, hazardous material spills, vandalism, extended periods of unusually cold conditions, extended droughts, flooding, major power outages, and windstorms. Less extensive emergencies could include landslides, labor force strikes, and major mechanical failures.

Back-up facilities and safety procedures for the major elements of the water system have been identified by the District. A comprehensive emergency response plan (emergency plan) was prepared in connection with the District’s last Water System Plan update. This plan is updated as needed.

10.6. Safety Procedures and Programs

The District is committed to the safety of its maintenance and operations staff and ensuring the safe operation of all facilities. District personnel follow the safety procedures and training programs shown below:

District Accident Prevention Program

State Labor & Industries, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) standards outlined in applicable sections of the WAC Chapters 296-24, 296-27, 296-45, 296-62, 296-155, and 296-800 including but not limited to:

o Trenching and Shoring Safety, Confined Spaces Safety, and Flagger Certification

o District Lock-Out Tag-Out Training

o First Aid/AED/CPR Training based on current American Heart Association and DOSH guidelines

Water and Sewer Risk Management Pool – endorsed programs


Washington Environmental Training Center Certification Workshops

Certification Upgrades

The District Accident Prevention Program is adopted by resolution and updated as needed by the District Safety Office, the Safety Committee, and the Management Team. District personnel are routinely and regularly trained on all aspects of the safety programs to include the standards, best practices, and safe work procedures. Safety training is provided in house and by subject matter experts that are contracted on a regular basis.

10.7. Cross-Connection Control Program

The State Department of Health requires that public water systems be protected from “backflow” of water from unprotected piping systems where bacteria or other pathogens could occur. Under certain conditions, District policies require customers to install backflow-prevention assemblies for this purpose. There are approximately 2,218 privately-owned backflow prevention assemblies in the District’s service area. These devices are tested by private, DOH-certified, backflow assembly testers. The District has a computerized backflow prevention assembly tracking system (XC2) that is used to generate reminder letters to inform owners when their device is due for its annual inspection and testing. The District itself also owns more than 30 backflow prevention assemblies which are tested and inspected by DOH certified District personnel.

The District is required to develop and implement a Cross-Connection Control (CCC) Program in accordance with WAC 246-290-490. The water quality supervisor at the District is responsible for implementing and managing this program.

District Resolution No. 2385-2000 establishes a cross-connection control program within the District’s service area and gives the District the authority to implement and enforce the program. This resolution adopts the Washington State regulations and the American Water Works Association guidelines regarding cross-connection control.

10.8. Record Keeping and Reporting

When customer complaints occur repeatedly in the same area, this indicates a need for potential operations or maintenance attention. For example, these may indicate localized pressure or water quality problems. Complaints from the District’s customers are usually received by the Finance Department or the M&O Water Quality Department and are entered into a database.

Complaints that are pertinent to water quality are routed to Water Quality Department staff for action. The complaint or problem and the action taken are kept in a written log. The District’s new maintenance management program will allow Maintenance and Operations to keep more detailed records of complaints and report what action was needed and taken.


11. Capital Improvement Program

This chapter describes the methodology used in developing Alderwood Water and Wastewater District’s water system Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and presents the costs and schedules for projects planned for implementation in 2009-2028.

11.1. Development of CIP

The CIP was prepared by first identifying projects that address water system needs or deficiencies, as documented in earlier chapters of the WCP. In addition, recurring or annual capital projects related to system maintenance (e.g., reservoir recoating and water main replacement programs) have also been included in the list of improvements.

A 20-year implementation schedule of the projects was then developed. Generally, projects of higher priority (i.e., those that address current system needs) were scheduled for implementation within the six-year planning horizon (2009-2014). Projects that serve anticipated future needs associated with system growth, or are less critical to system operation, were scheduled for implementation between 2015 and 2028. Detailed scheduling of the higher priority projects was based primarily upon the District’s existing forecast of project implementation timelines. Where applicable, the timing of water system projects has been coordinated with sewer and street improvements planned for the same locations.

Planning-level (AACE2 Class 4) cost estimates have been developed for each capital project included in the 2009-2028 CIP. Generally, each project cost includes the following components:

Base construction cost. Sales tax. Construction contingency. Design engineering.

These elements are summed to determine the total project-level cost estimate for a project, expressed in 2008 dollars.

To account for inflation and the increase of construction costs over time, the base project-level costs have been escalated to their anticipated year of construction. It is impossible to predict accurately the rate at which construction costs will increase over the 2009-2028 period; however, a conventional method to estimate such increases is to examine cost index trends of past years.

The most comprehensive set of historical construction cost data in the United States is reflected in the RS Means Historical Cost Indexes. The Everett, Washington indexes indicate that construction costs have increased at an average rate of 5.6 percent per year over the past four years (2005-2008). This historic value is used to escalate construction project costs from base year (2008) dollars to costs in the anticipated year of construction.

2 Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering.


Where applicable, design costs are scheduled one year in advance of construction costs, to reflect the phasing typically used for larger projects.

11.2. Planned Projects

Table 27 presents the District’s schedule of CIP projects planned for implementation between 2009 and 2028. This CIP was adopted by the District’s Board of Commissioners on November 3, 2008. The District’s six-year CIP (for years 2009-2014) includes approximately $104 million in improvements (in inflation-adjusted dollars). The long-term CIP (2015-2028) includes approximately $100 million in additional improvements. These projects are intended to enable the District to provide high quality drinking water to its customers and meet desired system-wide conditions for pressure, fire flow, and other considerations, as the District’s customer base and service area population continue to grow.

Table 27. Capital Improvement Program (2009-2028)Schedule and Cost of Improvements (in thousands of dollars) (1)

Project No. Description

Base Project Cost (2008 Dollars) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

6-yr CIP TOTAL

20-yr CIP TOTAL

Water System Projects

Water SupplyS-10 Well No. 7 Upgrades (for Emergency Supply) 265 330 330 330

Water StorageST-2&3 Reservoir No. 2 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 220 220 10 230 230

ST-4&5 Reservoir No. 3 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 2,100 2,200 10 2,210 2,210

ST-14 Reservoir No. 1 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 270 440 (2017) 440

ST-16 Clearview Res No.1 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 310 700 (2023) 700

ST-20 High Tank No. 1 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 130 310 (2024) 310

ST-21 High Tank No.2 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 120 260 (2022) 260

ST-22 Nike Tank No. 1 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 130 310 (2024) 310

ST-23 Nike Tank No. 2 - Recoat Interior & Exterior 120 260 (2022) 260

ST-24 Canyon Park Tank - Recoat Interior & Exterior 150 5 5 410 (2017) 415

Water Pump StationsPS-1 PS No. 1 Elect.& Mech. Rehab/Replace (Incl. backup power) 7,750 2,487 6,165 8,652 8,652

PS-2 PS No. 2 Elect.& Mech. Rehab/Replace 7,810 12,460 (2016/17) 12,460

PS-3 Upgrade 724 Booster Station (1,715 gpm) 270 40 270 310 310

Water Distribution SystemProjects Addressing Previously Identified Deficiencies

D-1 (660/520/340 Zone) 196th St. SE Corridor- 35th Ave. SE, west to Filbert Rd. (15,010 ft - 24"). See also V- 2&3. 7,500 1,250 2,350 2,480 2,620 8,700 8,700

D-2 (660 Zone) Filbert Rd./405 Underpass (1,945 ft - 12"). See also V-1. 730 390 200 210 800 800

D-3 (660 Zone) 1st Ave. SE - 164th St. SW, south to 167th Pl. SW, west to North Rd. (2,280 ft - 16"). See also V-1. 1,050 550 290 310 1,150 1,150

D-4a 170th St. SW, from Alderwood Mall Bvld. to SR 525 (475 ft - 8"). 200 200 200 200D-4b Close loop on Fender Drive (490 ft - 8"). 250 250 250 250D-7 45th Ave. SE, from Canyon Park Tank to 228th St. SE (1,290 ft - 16"). 590 330 350 680 680D-8 45th Ave. SE, from 228th St. SE to 240th St. SE (3,985 ft - 12"). 1,490 830 880 1,710 1,710D-9 240th St. SE, from 45th Ave. SE to 39th Ave. SE (2,075 ft - 12"). 780 430 460 890 890D-10 Highway 99, from 136th St. SW to 116th St. W (7,105 ft - 16"). 10,477 574 9,500 520 10,594 10,594D-11 Highway 99, from High Tank to 116th Street W (5,700 ft - 12"). 7,850 574 7,000 520 8,094 8,094D-12 19th Ave. SE, from 228th St. SE south to end of 19th Dr. SE (460 ft - 12"). 180 210 210 210Newly Identified Projects - Implementation Prior to 2015D-20 Near Brightwater connection, north of Canyon Park. Upgrade existing 6" CI to 8" DI (2,030 ft - 8"). 670 830 830 830

D-21Replace existing 6" CI with 12" DI along 49th Ave SE, between 228th St SE and 51st Ave SE (3,935 ft - 12").

1,470 910 970 1,880 1,880

D-22aReplace existing 6" CI with 8" DI along 15th Ave SE to 8", between 231st St SE and 242nd St SE (5,575 ft - 12").

2,090 880 910 960 2,750 2,750

D-23 Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI on 2nd Ave W (665 ft - 8"). 220 270 270 270D-24a New connection at north end of expanded 520 Zone, along 196th St SW, west of SR 527 (1,390 ft - 8"). 460 640 640 640

D-24bNew connection to loop pipe to improve flows in western portion of expanded 520 Zone. Located near Royal Ann/North Road, just west of 9th Ave SE (420 ft - 8").

140 190 190 190

D-24c New connection near 223rd Pl SE and 6th Dr SE (235 ft - 8"). 80 110 110 110D-25 Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI along Fisher Road (6,325 ft - 8"). 2,110 940 970 1,910 1,020 (2015) 2,930D-26 Replace existing 4" CI with 8" DI along 202nd Pl SW (550 ft - 8"). 190 260 260 260D-27 Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI along 3rd Ave W (730 ft - 8"). 250 350 350 350

D-28 Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI along 49th Ave SE. North of new Brightwater connection and south of 212th St SE. Includes new connection (360 LF) near 216th Pl SE to connect pipes in this area (3,840 ft - 8").

1,280 840 890 1,730 1,730

D-30 New connection near 203rd Pl SW and 12th Pl W to loop pipe in this area (300 ft - 8"). 100 140 140 140D-31a Replace existing 6" DI with 8" DI on Wigen Road between Lincoln Way and 132nd St SW (1,685 ft - 8"). 560 780 780 780D-31b Replace existing 6" on 133rd St SW with 8" DI (1,125 ft - 8"). 380 530 530 530D-32a Replace existing 6" CI with 12" DI near vicinity of 40th Ave W and Admiralty Way/44th Ave W (1,515 - 12"). 570 790 790 790D-32b Replace existing 4" CI with 8" DI on Spruce Way (300 ft - 8"). 100 140 140 140

D-32cReplace existing 6" CI with 8" DI on 164th St SW, between 35th Ave SW and just west of intersection with 44th Ave W (1,655 ft - 8").

550 760 760 760

D-34Install parallel 16" DI along 35th Ave SE, between 180th St SE and 188th St SE; connect into Project D-1 (2,750 ft - 16").

1,260 780 830 1,610 1,610

D-35Replace existing 12" with 16" DI from end of project D1 (just west of intersection of Filbert Drive and Filbert Road) west to intersection of Filbert Road and North Road (1,750 ft - 16").

800 500 530 1,030 1,030

D-36Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI, in 18th Ave W and Oak Road (1,300 ft - 8").Replace existing 8" CI with 12" DI, along Ash Way, north of 164th St SW (3,005 ft - 12").

1,570 1,660 1,660 1,660

2015-2028 (2)

Table 27. Capital Improvement Program (2009-2028)Schedule and Cost of Improvements (in thousands of dollars) (1)

Project No. Description

Base Project Cost (2008 Dollars) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

6-yr CIP TOTAL

20-yr CIP TOTAL2015-2028 (2)

Newly Identified Projects - Implementation Prior to 2028

D-40 Replace existing 6" DI with 12" DI on South Danvers Road, between 205th St SW and Logan Road (970 ft - 12"). 360 860 (2024) 860

D-41New connection (8" pipe) to complete loop of existing pipe located along the 3rd Ave W right-of-way, between 209th Pl SW and Hubbard Road (290 ft - 8").

90 230 (2025) 230

D-43Replace existing 6" DI pipe with 12" DI on Picnic Point Road, from existing PRV station to where the pipe tees and heads north along Possession Lane and south along Picnic Point Road (1,720 ft - 10").

600 1,600 (2026) 1,600

D-44Replace existing 6" CI with 8" DI along 36th Ave W, between 214th St SW and 216th St SW. Connect to existing 8 inch pipe in right-of-way (490 ft - 8").

160 450 (2026) 450

D-45Loop existing pipe to improve pressures at high point in this area. Add 8" DI connection on 221st Pl SW right-of-way, just east of 34th Pl W. Connect to existing 8" pipe. This project also includes a new 8" DI connection to close loop on 32nd Ave W, just south of 221st Pl SW right-of-way (675 ft - 8").

220 620 (2027) 620

D-46Replace existing 12" DI pipe on Poplar Way with 16" DI. Project begins just to the east of the intersection of Poplar Way and 214th St SW, and continues along Poplar Way to the southeast to the intersection of 218th Pl SW (2,670 ft - 16").

1,220 3,440 (2027) 3,440

D-47Replace existing 12" pipe with 16" DI on upstream side of PRV/PSV combination valve located near intersection of Magnolia Road and Filbert Road (450 ft - 16").

210 620 (2028) 620

D-48 Transmission/Distribution Piping Segregation Project (Analysis and Construction) 6,450 70 70 11,120 (2018) 11,190

Water ValvesV-1 New 660 Zone PRV/PSVs , See D-2 & D-3 300 320 320 320

V-2 Expanded 520 Zone PRVs, See D-1 370 410 410 410

V-3 New 340 Zone PRVs, See D-1 540 600 600 600

Water Maintenance and OperationsWM-1 Replace Substandard Fire Hydrants 4,570 1,210 1,270 1,350 1,420 5,250 5,250

WM-2 Water Main Looping/Water Quality Improvements (4) 150 180 190 200 210 780 4,480 5,260

WM-3 Water Main Replacement Program (4) 1,500 1,000 1,000 1,770 1,870 1,970 2,080 9,690 44,900 54,590

WM-B Contractor Fill Stations 400 210 220 430 430

WM-D Other Distribution Syst. Proj. (generated by other agencies) (4) 500 530 560 590 620 660 690 3,650 14,960 18,610

WM-E Water Comprehensive Plan Update 330 30 220 230 480 480

WM-H DCDA Replacement Program (approx 142 in system) 2,710 0 570 640 670 710 700 3,290 3,290

WM-I Valve Vaults over 24" Valves off original trans line (21A) 750 120 750 870 870

WM-J Air Vac/ Blow Off upgrade on original trans line (21A) 350 60 350 410 410

WM-K District-wide Meter Replacement Program (4) 8,350 1,270 3,680 4,530 9,480 9,480

WM-10 Transmission Main Upgrade at I-5 Crossing (at 164th St SW) 1,500 75 1,425 79 1,579 1,579

WM-11 Blow Off Replacement Program - Distribution System 1,890 110 420 450 470 500 1,950 1,950

WM-12 Canyon Park Tank - Altitude Control Valve Replacement 170 240 240 240

WM-13 Sodium Hypochlorite System Upgrade 60 0 90 (2015) 90

WM-14 Drainage and Paving Improvements Around Reservoirs 2 & 3 330 390 390 390

Subtotal - Water System 13,790 19,395 32,589 12,910 10,930 13,650 103,264 99,540 0 202,804

Combined Water and Sewer System Projects (3)

OP-1 Computerized Maintenance Management System 505 250 250 250 750 750

OP-2 Security Improvements 110 55 55 110 110

OP-3 Telemetry System Upgrade 65 30 30 30

Subtotal - Combined Water/Sewer Projects 335 305 250 0 0 0 890 0 890

Total Water System Improvements 14,125 19,700 32,839 12,910 10,930 13,650 104,154 99,540 203,694

Notes:(1) Costs are escalated from Base Project Cost (2008 dollars) to stated year of construction, assuming a 5.6% annual increase in costs. See Section 11.1 for more details.(2) Total costs associated with projects implemented in 2015 through 2028. Specific years of project implementation are noted where applicable. (3) Projects that apply to both the water and sewer systems. Costs are allocated 50/50 to the two systems, and costs shown in the table reflect the water system share only.(4) Project includes annually budgeted amount to cover unspecified project costs. Budgeted annual amounts (in 2008 dollars) are listed below by project. These costs are escalated per Note 1 to account for construction cost increases.

WM-2: $150,000WM-3: $1,500,000WM-D: $500,000


12. Financial Program

This chapter presents a financial plan to fund projected operating and capital costs of the system for the six-year period 2009 – 2014. The basis of the operating costs is the 2008 water system budget. The capital costs are based on the capital improvements plan presented in Chapter 11.

12.1 Past Financial History

The past five years of financial information for the water utility were evaluated to gain an understanding of the past performance and current financial status of the utility.

Provided below in Table 28 is a summary of the five-year financial history (2002-2006) for the District’s water utility. As can be seen from the table, the District’s revenue has exceeded its operating expenses thereby maintaining a positive cash balance during the five-year period. The District has also used grants and loans (State and Federal) as a supplemental source of revenue to meet the funding needs of the District’s capital improvement plan.

Table 28. Summary of Five-Year Financial History ($000s)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Sources of Funds

Single Family $7,456 $8,277 $8,524 $8,574 $9,460 Multi-Family 2,352 2,463 2,548 2,599 2,701 Commercial 847 873 913 938 976 Municipality 168 211 210 210 244 Hotel/Motel/Mobile Home/RV Park 461 484 508 488 507 Construction Meters 10 9 11 5 10 Private Fire 141 150 157 167 176 Irrigation 628 770 747 689 904 Sales for Resale 3,394 3,859 3,497 5,471 6,753

Total Rate Revenue $15,458 $17,096 $17,115 $19,141 $21,731 Total Miscellaneous Revenue $2,378 $2,046 $718 $1,182 $2,219 Total Revenue $17,836 $19,142 $17,833 $20,323 $23,950 Expenses

General O&M $10,494 $11,622 $11,589 $14,608 $17,032 Taxes and Transfers 662 697 731 752 810Debt Service 3,013 3,479 3,495 3,467 3,472 CIP from Rates 1,500 1,700 1,406 2,398 2,000

Total Expenses $15,669 $17,498 $17,221 $21,225 $23,314 Balance/(Deficiency) of Revenue $2,167 $1,644 $612 ($901) $636

As can be seen in Table 28, the utility has historically had adequate funding to meet operating and capital needs.

12.2 Review of the District’s Water Rates

The District has adopted water rates to meet its financial requirements. Provided in Table 29 are the current adopted water rates of the District.


Table 29. Overview of the District’s Current Water Rates

Meter Size Minimum Charge Meter Charge Per Month ¾ inch $10.35 1 inch 17.31 1 ½ inch 34.52 2 inch 55.25 3 inch 103.67 4 inch 172.83 6 inch 345.53 8 inch 552.89 10 inch 770.95 Detector Check/Private Fire Meter (Per month) 2 inch $4.26 4 inch 16.71 6 inch 37.93 8 inch 67.53 10 inch 105.51

Winter Summer Usage Charge Per CCF Single Family $1.40 $1.55 Multi-Family 1.67 1.86 Irrigation 1.73 2.05 Single Commercial 1.25 1.36 Multi Commercial 1.80 1.91 Construction Meter 1.40 1.55 Out of District Out of District rate is a 133% surcharge

The District’s rate structure consists of a meter charge and a usage charge per hundred cubic foot (CCF). A rate of $1.40 October through May and $1.55 June through September is applied per hundred cubic foot for all usage for a single family customer; $1.80 and $1.91 respectively for multi-commercial customers. The typical monthly bill for a District single-family customer, with a 5/8-inch by 3/4-inch meter with 10 CCF of usage would be approximately $24.35 per month October through May and $25.85 June through September. Analysis of the impact of any necessary rate adjustments to these rates is provided later in this chapter.

12.3 Financial Plan

A financial plan was developed to address projected revenues and expenses of the water system for 2009-2014. The six-year financial plan demonstrates the District’s ability to meet its operational and capital improvement needs through rate revenue. A summary of the financial plan and resulting financial status of the water system is provided below in Table 30.


Table 30. Summary of the District’s Six-Year Financial Plan ($000s)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Sources of Funds Rate Revenues $24,996 $25,496 $26,006 $26,526 $27,057 $27,598 Miscellaneous Revenues $145 $144 $145 $145 $145 $145 Total Sources of Funds $25,141 $25,641 $26,151 $26,671 $27,202 $27,743 Applications of Funds Oper. & Maint. Expenses $20,084 $21,361 $22,834 $24,277 $25,823 $26,481 Taxes/Transfer Payments 946 $965 985 1,004 1,024 1,045 Capital Imp. Funded Through Rates 2,650 2,700 2,800 3,000 3,150 3,300 Total Debt Service 1,918 2,307 3,720 4,264 4,562 4,942 Less 50% GFC revenue (230) (234) (962) (989) (1,016) ( 1,045) Net Debt Service 1,688 2,073 2,757 3,275 3,546 3,898 Total Applications of Funds $25,368 $27,099 $29,376 $31,556 $33,543 $35,723 Balance/Deficiency of Funds ($227) ($1,458) ($3,224) ($4,885) ($6,341) ($7,980) Balance as a % of Rates 0.9% 5.7% 12.4% 18.4% 23.4% 28.9%Other Financial Measures - Operations and Maintenance Fund $4,850 $4,850 $4,850 $4,850 $4,850 $4,850 Capital Improvement Fund $26,692 $19,186 $8,512 $8,426 $7,729 $5,792 Debt Service Coverage Ratios: Before Rate Adjustments 2.83 2.02 1.19 0.83 0.56 0.29 After Rate Adjustments 3.60 3.22 2.45 2.32 2.23 2.17 As can be seen from the above table, in order for the District to fund the full capital plan (as detailed in Table 29), and meet all operating expenses, rate adjustments will be required. The row labeled “balance as a percent of rates” is cumulative. Therefore, the total adjustment required to rates over the six-year projected period is 28.9%. It is important to note that this level of adjustment is based on an assumed growth rate of two percent in 2009 and 2010, and 2.77% each year thereafter. Should this growth slow down, or not occur, the level of required rate adjustment may need to be increased, or CIP could be deferred and debt financing delayed. This would reduce the revenue requirement to a certain degree. If CIP funding from rates is reduced this would reduce rates, but would also impact depreciation expense funding, which is not yet reaching the minimum target level of depreciation expense. To reduce CIP funding from rates also lowers the District’s debt service coverage ratio which can impact future bond interest rates, thereby increasing future rates.

Two indicators of financial viability are reserve levels and debt service coverage ratios. As can be seen in Table 30, the debt service coverage ratios are decreasing each year after the proposed rate adjustments, but do not drop below the target value of 1.5. Whereas before any assumed rate adjustments the debt service coverage ratio drops below the target minimum value of 1.25 in 2011. The assumed minimum balance for the working capital reserve is $2 million. The District’s fund balance remains above this reserve minimum throughout the projected period. The capital reserve fund balance will depend on the annual cost of the capital projects and the other funding sources available.

To implement the needed adjustments, a gradual implementation plan was developed. The rate transition plan ranges from 3.0% in 2009 to 5.5% in 2011 and 2012 and drops to 4.5% in 2014, as summarized in Table 31.


Table 31. Summary of the Six-Year Rate Adjustment Transition Plan ($000)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Phased-in Rate Adjustments 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 5.5% 4.5% 4.5%

12.5 Rate Impacts The rate impacts are slightly higher than cost of living adjustments in the middle years of the six-year projected period. Provided in Table 32 is a summary of the anticipated rate impact to a “typical” residential customer using 1000 cubic feet (10 CCF) of water in a month with a 5/8 x 3/4-inch meter.

Table 32. Summary of the Rate Impacts ($/Month) to a Typical Residential Customer [1]

$/Month (Winter)

Annual $ Change

Present Rate (2008) $24.35 $0.00 2009 25.08 0.73 2010 26.08 1.00 2011 27.52 1.43 2012 29.03 1.51 2013 30.34 1.31 2014 31.70 1.37

[1] Assumes a 5/8” x 3/4” meter @ 10 CF.

Based upon the financial plan developed herein, it appears that the rate impacts needed will be slightly higher than projected inflationary impacts. At the end of the six-year transition period, the rates will have increased $7.35 per month in the winter over 2008 rates for a typical single-family customer.

The phased-in rate adjustments presented in Table 31 should be applied to both the meter and usage charges in order to generate the appropriate level of revenue needed to fully meet operational and capital costs throughout the 6-year review period.

The financial plan results presented in this section indicate that water rates for the six-year projected time horizon of 2009 to 2014 will require adjustments to fund the projected O&M, capital, and debt service requirements. The District has demonstrated its commitment to responsible management of the utility by past rate adjustments, and by funding adequate levels of operations, capital, reserves, and capital funding from rates. Continued prudent fiscal management will enable the water utility to continue to operate on a financially sound basis.

12.6 Summary The financial plan results presented in this chapter indicate that water rates for the six-year projected time horizon of 2009 to 2014 will require adjustments to fund the projected O&M, capital, and debt service requirements. This chapter identifies the overall level of rate impact that may occur should the capital improvement plan provided in Chapter 11 move forward. However, the District conducts a detailed rate study, as needed, to set rates for the next few years. The rate study evaluates the District’s overall financial picture and develops rate


strategies that fully fund the comprehensive needs of the water and wastewater systems on a stand-alone basis by analyzing:

Long-term capital investment funding; Expenses incurred to operate, maintain, and manage the system; Debt repayment and issuance of new debt; Cash flow needs; and Fiscal policy achievement.

The District will be conducting a detailed rate study in 2009. The rate study will build on the financial planning in this comprehensive plan and develops detailed rates that are consistent with District fiscal policies such that sufficient revenues are generated to meet the financial needs of the District.

The District has demonstrated its commitment to responsible management of the utility by past rate adjustments and by funding adequate levels of operations, capital, reserves, and capital funding from rates. Continued prudent fiscal management will enable the water utility to continue to operate on a financially sound basis.

2009 water comprehensive plan - alderwood water district

Documents