Triple Bottom Line Assessment: Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate

Transcription

1 Triple Bottom Line Assessment: Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Prepared by Good Company For Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission June 2013

2 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 3 Introduction Triple Bottom Line Analysis Methodology Selection of Key Triple Bottom Line Aspects Structure of Report Mid-Level Results: Summary Tables Economic Aspects Environmental Aspects Social Aspects Appendix A: Detailed Results Economic Aspects Project Capital Cost and Net Present Value (20-year NPV) Operational Changes and Risks Environmental Aspects (Detailed Results) Habitat and Biodiversity Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance In-River Water Balance Energy, Materials, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Social Aspects (Detailed Results) Human Health and Safety Community Development Bibliography TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 2

3 Executive Summary The Eugene/Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) is regulated by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to meet temperature discharge levels into the Willamette River. The WPCF is deemed compliant so long as it implements a thermal load mitigation strategy, which can include developing recycled water capacity or purchasing riparian shade credits from a project developer. To consider the best value to the community, Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) requested that Kennedy / Jenks Consultants complete a Triple Bottom Line Analysis (TBL) that inventories and compares the economic, social and environmental performance of two alternative strategies for temperature compliance: (1) riparian shade credits, and (2) recycled water use at industrial aggregate sites. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants contracted with Good Company to perform the TBL. Purchase of Riparian Shading Credits from The Freshwater Trust Oregon DEQ and the USEPA recognize and promote water quality trading as a cost-effective means of regulatory compliance. Trading credits allows a point source, such as the WPCF, to either sponsor a riparian restoration project within the affected watershed or to purchase credits generated by an existing project. The restoration project would plant trees, creating new shade, which reduces the thermal load into the river in a quantity equal to the load in WPCF effluent. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (RWUIA), Asphalt and Concrete Production Effluent from the WPCF would be treated to Class A recycled water standards and conveyed by pipe to the site shared by Delta Sand & Gravel and Knife River (D/KR). Once on site, the water would be used for a variety of production and operational needs. The thermal load in the water consumed by D/KR would be displaced from discharge to the Willamette River. In addition to direct comparison between the alternatives described above, there are also times within the analysis when a comparison to Existing Conditions is meaningful. Existing Conditions: Currently, the WPCF discharges Class D recycled water to the Willamette River and D/KR withdraws water from the Willamette River coincidentally both Delta/KR s demand and the MWMC s thermal load mitigation need are approximately 3 million gallons per day (MGD). Comparing the industrial aggregate alternative to existing conditions is most useful for the energy and greenhouse gas emissions and human health and safety TBL aspects. 1 Purpose of the TBL The purpose of this analysis is to provide MWMC, wastewater staff and other decision-makers with a summary of relevant economic, environmental and social information from which to compare the compliance alternatives as close to side-by-side as possible. Since decision-making is subjective - the approach is to organize, sort, scale and distill all available information in a transparent way in order to highlight only those issues that represent a significant difference between the alternatives. The intent is to support the decision makers, but not to take away their ability to choose what is best for MWMC. If desired, further decision support tools can be developed to score and rank the alternatives, based on the values of the Commissioners and the people they represent. 1 Within this analysis there are TBL categories (economic, environmental and social). Within each category there are aspects, or sub categories such as Capital Costs and 20-Year NPV under the Economic category. Finally within each aspect there are indicators, which represent significant factors, comparisons, or metrics being used to assess the aspect. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 3

4 Methodology Triple bottom line analysis (TBL) is an evaluation framework used to identify economic, environmental and social benefits and concerns to determine overall best value of a system. No single, established protocol or methodology exists for conducting a TBL analysis, however there are a variety of frameworks publically available. Good Company has reviewed many of these frameworks and based on that review assembled a TBL Screening Tool, which includes the TBL aspects that are applicable to most organizations and projects. 2 To identify the key TBL aspects applicable to this decision, the research team s analysis began with a meeting of relevant Eugene and Springfield city staff to discuss benefits and concerns for each of the aspects included in the screening tool. In addition to this group interview, the research team determined the key TBL aspects based on data provided in a variety of existing technical memos, stakeholder interviews and publically available data. The key TBL aspects, by TBL category include: Economic Aspects Capital Costs and 20-Year Net Present Value Operational Change and Risk Environmental Aspects Habitat and Biodiversity Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance Greenhouse Gas Emissions In-River Water Balance Social Aspects Human Health & Safety Community Development These aspects rose to the surface as those having a significant difference between the two alternatives or between industrial aggregate and existing conditions. The aspects may be considered a benefit or a concern depending on the vantage point from which the issue is viewed. For this reason, this analysis considers three distinct vantage points related to three specific groups; 1) WPCF/MWMC organization interests, 2) D/KR organizational interests and 3) the community at large. Results The following points briefly summarize the results of this analysis, by compliance alternative. Both alternatives meet the fundamental compliance need of the WPCF continued temperature compliance for effluent discharge into the Willamette River for the purpose of improving water quality to protect fish habitat and biodiversity. Riparian Shading: Represents the lowest cost alternative (based on 20-year NPV) and externalizes most operational risk to the WPCF/MWMC. Riparian restoration reduces thermal load on the aquatic environment, but also enhances the terrestrial ecosystem for birds and other creatures. The concerns are that shade credits do not develop the recycled water infrastructure that could be leveraged in the future by MWMC and the community as a revenue source and a means of adapting to climate change. Also of concern is that the temperature mitigation will not happen at the point of discharge, which some stakeholders may find disagreeable. The final concern is the risk associated, for all organizations involved in water quality trading, is the 2 All significant aspects considered are listed in the section of the main body of the report titled, Selection of Key TBL Aspects. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 4

5 possibility of legal challenges to credits as a compliance mechanism. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate: The D/KR site and operations provide a unique opportunity for development of recycled water infrastructure in our community as the site is close to the WPCF and that D/KR s water demand matches the WPCF s compliance needs and ODEQ s approved uses for recycled water. For D/KR specifically, the project offers installation of recycled water infrastructure at no cost and reduced energy costs (associated with pumping water). Recycled water offers a revenue/cost recovery opportunity for MWMC through the sale of recycled water and it offers the community a means for adapting to the possibility of increased frequency of low-flow river conditions due to climate change. By developing infrastructure and experience within the D/KR project, the MWMC is better positioned to produce recycled water in the future. However, there are numerous, significant and potentially insurmountable financial and operational barriers to overcome. These include: an additional 20-year cost of $2.3 million to MWMC (compared to the 20 year NPV of shading credits); Delta Sand & Gravel has stated that they are not interested in participating; neither Delta or Knife River are water limited for production; the likelihood of new permits being needed by D/KR or the WPCF; production concerns about product quality, liability and supply disruptions; insuring the health and safety of D/KR employees who are routinely and significantly exposed to the recycled water; and a limited lifetime of Delta s production at the site (estimated between years). Significant Data Gaps Beyond these findings specific to the alternatives, the research team identified a number of significant data gaps that, if filled, would provide more robust comparisons from which to base a decision. Exclusions to the 20-Year NPV analysis for industrial aggregate. The boundaries of the existing NPV calculation are based on the conceptual design for a recycled water system at the D/KR site, from MWMC s vantage point. The boundaries of the NPV calculation could be expanded to include; annual energy savings for D/KR, property insurance, additional staff time for administration, lab testing and customer relations, acquiring a new NPDES permit and valuation of project risk. Valuation of project risk is difficult to quantify, but the operational risks associated with the aggregate project are significant and currently are not represented in the cost comparison. Delta Sand & Gravel and Knife River energy and water use data. This data would allow for a more accurate comparison of the timing of D/KR s water demand to WPCF s compliance needs and the net energy balance, the associated costs or savings and the GHG emissions. The comparison of D/KR demand to the WPCF s compliance needs is particularly critical given the scale of investment for this project and the expectation that it fully meets current compliance needs. Current demand estimates are based on full D/KR water rights and do not take into account seasonal or historic demand variations. Water quality testing results for Class A recycled water and D/KR water at the river intake. Being able to accurately access water quality data is important from the standpoint of human health and safety and product quality. Market research to identify the type, number and scale of potential customers that could make use of recycled water. It is difficult to imagine and plan for a recycled water system without being able to see where potential customers are located and grouped and scale their potential future demand. Research on the predicted timing, frequency and severity of water related impacts due to climate change. Recycled water infrastructure provides our community a way to more fully utilize our water resources. Currently, the price of water is low, but in the future, the cost for water may increase with the community s population growth. Reviewing and summarizing existing research on the severity and timing of surface water flows will help MWMC and the community make decisions about the long-term value and timing of recycled water infrastructure. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 5

6 Figure 1: Highest-level summary and comparison of Economic TBL Aspects. Economic Aspects Stakeholder Group Riparian Shade Credits Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Summary of Findings First Capital Costs: $4.5 million Annual O&M Costs: $0 20-Year NPV: $4.5 million Compliance Capacity: 3 MGD Thermal Reduction: 90 MKcal / day First Capital Costs: $4.3 million (with 20% contingency) Annual O&M Costs: $176,000 (first 10 years), $158,000 (yrs ) 20-Year NPV: $6.8 million (see Significant Data Gaps) Compliance Capacity: 3 MGD Thermal Reduction: 90 MKcal / day Reduction Cost: $0.05 / Kcal / day Reduction Cost: $0.08 / Kcal / day Capital Cost and 20-Year NPV MWMC Benefit: Lowest cost option, by $2.3 million over 20 years. Concerns: Does not develop recycled water infrastructure, which could become more valuable over time to MWMC and the community. Benefit: D/KR is a unique site based on location, existing infrastructure and similarity between water demand and WPCF compliance needs. Potential for revenue from recycled water sales. See the table below for price comparisons of local water sources. 3 Concerns: Larger annual O&M cost, 20-year NPV and thermal reduction costs. See row above to compare values. Data Gaps: NPV exclusions, recycled water market research. Water Product Water Price ($ / 1,000 gallons) Class A Production - Total Cost $0.31 Delta / Knife River Pumping Costs $0.17 EWEB Potable Industrial Rates $2.60 D / KR * Not applicable Benefit: Hedge against reduced future water availability resulting from climate change, installation of recycled water infrastructure to their property free of cost and reduction of energy costs (see Fig.2). Operational Change and Risk MWMC Concerns: Does not develop recycled water infrastructure. *Not applicable Benefits: Generally the scale of D/KR water demand matches the WPFC s compliance needs. The D/KR project builds experience and infrastructure that could be used for future compliance needs. Concerns: D/KR demand may not coincide with timing of compliance needs. WPCF staff is unfamiliar with production. Mutual reliance between two organizations that have not worked together in the past. Benefit: Second supply source for mission critical resource. Concern: D/KR may not be interested in participating, given concerns over no proven reliability of recycled water service (quality or quantity), impacts to product quality, potential for more regulatory compliance and no clear operational benefits. D / KR 3 For details on the calculation of the water prices, see Figure 10 in the main body of the report. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 6

7 Figure 2: Highest-level summary and comparison of Environmental TBL Aspects. Environmental Aspects Stakeholder Group Riparian Shade Credits Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Habitat and Biodiversity MWMC Community Concern: Temperature mitigation is not realized at the point of WPCF discharge. Potential Mitigation: Develop a local project. Benefits: Enhances both land and water habitat, which will likely benefit biodiversity, aesthetics are also improved at the point of the restoration. * No significant findings beyond benefits of thermal load reduction in the Willamette River. * No significant findings. The land where this development would take place is already industrial in nature and private. Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance Environmental Aspects Energy, Materials and GHGs MWMC D / KR Community Stakeholder Group Summary of Findings MWMC and D/KR Concern: Credit trading system is legally challenged and found to be invalid. Benefit: Reduces discharge of pollutants (temperature, bacteria and biological oxygen demand) to the river year round, by between 5% (wet weather) and 12% (dry). Data Gap: Actual D/KR seasonal and historic water usage. * Not applicable Benefit: Allows D/KR to substitute recycled water for production reducing stress on the Willamette River. Concern: Temperature mitigation benefits may not be realized locally. Existing Conditions Concern: D/KR (or MWMC) may need a new NPDES permit. Benefit: Year-round reduction of pollutants discharged into the Willamette, locally and downstream. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Figures 4, 5 and 6 summarize energy and GHGs results. Note: GHG comparison to Riparian Shade Credits will be completed in the next phase of analysis. The life-cycle GHGs for the Credits will include what is currently in Existing Conditions plus the emissions from restoration construction and supplies as well as an estimate of 20-years of carbon sequestration by new trees planted as part of the restoration project. *See Industrial Aggregate column for a comparison of the benefits and concerns. Emissions from existing conditions are outlined in Figures 4, 5 and 6. Benefits: Compared to existing conditions the project reduces GHG emissions, by 400 MT CO 2 e / year 4 and 4,100 MT CO 2 e / 20 years (or the equivalent of ~25% of MWMC s average emissions for 1 year). These reductions are primarily the result of energy savings by D/KR for water pumping. Concerns: New materials (chlorine and filter media), not currently consumed, are consumed as part of the Class A production operations. Data Gap: Actual D/KR energy data. 4 This analysis uses the internationally recognized GHG inventory unit, metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO 2e), to describe the project emissions. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2e) is a means of describing the cumulative effect of all greenhouse gases weighted by their 100-year global warming potential. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 7

8 Figure 3: Highest-level summary and comparison of Social TBL Aspects. Social Aspects Stakeholder Group Existing Conditions Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate MWMC * Not applicable Benefit: Class A recycled water receives the highest-level of treatment of all recycled water classes. Data Gap: Water quality testing for Class recycled water. Human Health and Safety D / KR Data Gap: Water quality testing of Willamette River water at the point of D/KR intake. There is appropriate concern and need for understanding the health risk posed to Delta employees from exposure to Class A recycled water, but the scale of that risk should be assessed with a comparison to existing conditions (i.e. bacteria levels in the river water currently being used for production). Concern: General concern for D/KR employee infection from bacteria, but specifically for those who work in rock crushing operations and are significantly exposed daily. Health effect of stream from asphalt production and recycled water residual on equipment. Mitigations: Increased training, signage, minimize worker exposure and increase monitoring frequency. Community * Not applicable Benefit: D/KR site is already fenced to help prevent public exposure. Setback distances to D/KR meet and exceed the requirements. Social Aspects Stakeholder Group Riparian Shade Credits Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Community Development Community Benefit: Improved aesthetics in the area for nearby neighbors and businesses. Concerns: Does not develop a recycled water infrastructure. While the riparian shading poses low operational risk to MWMC, but it does not result in development and ownership of recycled water production and delivery infrastructure by MWMC on behalf of the community. Benefits: Public / private partnership that results in a second source of water and lower energy costs, while meeting the regulatory compliance needs of the community s wastewater infrastructure. Begins development of a recycled water infrastructure that is valuable for future compliance needs and as a second source of water for the community. Concerns: Rate increase compared to riparian shading, based the incremental cost between alternatives ($2.3 million over 20 years). Data Gap: A literature review of the most up-to-date research on the predicted timing, frequency and severity of water related impacts due to climate change. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 8

9 Figure 4: Comparison of RWUIA energy costs to Existing Conditions. Figure 5: Comparison of RWUIA GHG emissions to Existing Conditions. Figure 6: Cost estimate for the industrial aggregate alternative. See Appendix A for details. NOTE: For details on all calculations see Appendix A. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 9

10 Introduction The Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) is regulated by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to meet temperature discharge levels into the Willamette River. The WPCF is deemed compliant so long as it implements a thermal load mitigation strategy, which can include developing recycled water capacity or purchasing riparian shade credits from a project developer. To consider the best value to the community, Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) contracted with Good Company and Kennedy / Jenks Consultants to complete a Triple Bottom Line Analysis (TBL) that inventories and compares the economic, social and environmental performance of two alternative strategies for temperature compliance. Purchase of Riparian Shading Credits from The Freshwater Trust Oregon DEQ and the USEPA recognize and promote water quality trading as a cost-effective means of regulatory compliance. Trading credits allows a point source, such as the WPCF, to either sponsor a riparian restoration project within the affected watershed or to purchase credits generated by an existing project. The restoration project would plant trees, creating new shade, which reduces the thermal load into the river in a quantity equal to the load in WPCF effluent. Recycled Water for Industrial Aggregate (IA), Asphalt and Concrete Production Effluent from the WPCF would be treated to Class A recycled water standards and conveyed by pipe to the site shared by Delta Sand & Gravel and Knife River (D/KR). Once on site, the water would be used for a variety of production and operational needs. The thermal load in the water consumed by D/KR would be displaced from discharge to the Willamette River. In addition to direct comparison between the alternatives described above, there are also times within the analysis when a comparison to Existing Conditions is meaningful. Existing Conditions: Currently, the WPCF discharges Class D recycled water to the Willamette River and D/KR withdraws water from the Willamette River coincidentally both Delta/KR s demand and the MWMC s thermal load mitigation need are approximately 3 million gallons per day (MGD). Comparing the industrial aggregate alternative to existing conditions is most useful for the energy and greenhouse gas emissions and human health and safety TBL aspects. 5 Purpose of the TBL The purpose of this analysis is to provide MWMC, wastewater staff and other decision-makers with a summary of relevant information from which to compare the compliance alternatives. The inherent challenge of TBL analysis is comparing very different types of issues in a consistent and transparent manner in order to reach a decision. For example, how does one compare and weight the significance of human health and safety issues the project s life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions? Because decisionmaking is subjective - the approach here is to organize, sort, scale and distill all available information in a transparent way in order to highlight only those issues that represent a significant difference between the alternatives for decision makers. The intent is to support the decision making process not to provide an answer. 5 Within this analysis there are TBL categories (economic, environmental and social). Within each category there are aspects, or sub categories such as Capital Costs and 20-Year NPV under the Economic category. Finally within each aspect there are indicators, which represent significant factors, comparisons, or metrics being used to assess the aspect. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 10

11 Triple Bottom Line Analysis Methodology Triple bottom line analysis (TBL) is an evaluation framework used to identify economic, environmental and social benefits and concerns to determine overall best value of a system. No single, established protocol or methodology exists for conducting a TBL analysis, however there are a variety of TBL frameworks publically available. Good Company reviewed many of these frameworks and, based on that review, assembled a TBL Screening Tool, which includes the aspects that are applicable to most organizations and projects. Within this Screening Tool and this report there are three terms that the reader should understand. These include: TBL Categories, Aspects and Indicators. There are the TBL categories, which describe the three broad groupings of issues considered within a TBL analysis Economic, Environmental and Social. Within each category there are Aspects (or sub categories) such as the Capital Costs and 20-Year NPV Aspect under the Economic category. Finally, within each Aspect there are Indicators, which represent significant factors, comparisons, or metrics being used to assess each TBL Aspect. Selection of Key Triple Bottom Line Aspects To select the key TBL Aspects applicable to this decision, the research team began with a meeting of relevant Eugene and Springfield city staff to discuss the benefits and concerns for each of the aspects included in the TBL Screening Tool. In addition to this group interview, the research team reviewed a variety of existing technical memos, stakeholder interviews and publically available data to determine the key TBL aspects. Good Company assessed the temperature compliance alternatives against the following environmental, social and economic aspects for construction and 20 years of operations. Relevance of aspects is judged by the nature of the project and its benefits/impacts and by comparing the two alternatives to determine if a significant difference between the two exists. The research team considered other aspects, which were ultimately excluded due to finding no significant difference between the alternatives. These aspects listed below represent the significant differences between the two alternatives or between industrial aggregate and existing conditions. The aspects may be considered a benefit or a concern depending on the vantage point from which the issue is viewed. For this reason, this analysis considers three distinct vantage points related to three specific groups; 1) WPCF/MWMC organization interests, 2) D/KR organizational interests and 3) the community at large. Economic Aspects Selected Project Capital Costs and 20-Year Net-Present Value (NPV): Comparison of capital costs, annual O&M costs, 20-year net present value (NPV), thermal reduction per day, compliance capacity and cost effectiveness per unit of thermal reduction. Operational Change and Risk: Assess the day-to-day and long-term business effects and risk associated with the alternatives. This aspect is primarily focused on the industrial aggregate alternative and the effects on MWMC and D/KR organizations. The purchase of riparian shade credits is not expected to have any impact on the day-to-day operations of the WPCF. Excluded MWMC Financing and Wastewater Rates: All of the alternatives, based on scale of investment required for compliance purposes, will likely increase rates. There would be a greater impact to TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013)) 11

12 rates for the higher cost project (Industrial Aggregate Recycled Water Use). However, without more complete analysis of how the projects would be funded and how costs will be distributed over time, precise impact to rates cannot be estimated). DMWESB Companies: In all scenarios, DMWESB contractors could be selected for implementation so therefore this aspect is not a significant consideration. Environmental Aspects Selected Habitat and Biodiversity: All of the alternatives lower the temperature in the Willamette River 6 thereby creating a healthier habitat for spawning and rearing salmon and steelhead. This aspect considers additional benefits from the project and the importance of the location of temperature reduction. Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance: This aspect assesses the net change in water quality being discharged to the Willamette River as well as the potential impacts of water quality on industrial aggregate production. In-Stream Water Quantity Balance: Net impact on the instream flow of the Willamette River. Energy, Materials and Greenhouse Gases: Comparing life-cycle GHG emissions provides the information required to determine if one alterative offers a clear advantage. The quantity of energy and materials consumed during the project provides a means for estimating GHGs, but are also important metrics for comparing the alternatives. Excluded Local Air Quality: Neither of the alternatives is expected to have a significant impact on the quantity of criteria air pollutants emitted from either the WW treatment plant or the industrial aggregate site. Noise Pollution: Both alternatives will have some short-term construction noise. Long-term noise is expected to be minimal and limited to the pumping stations for the recycled water alternative, which isn t expected to be different from existing conditions at the D/KR site. Odor: None of the projects are expected to produce a significant source of odor. Social Aspects Selected Human Health and Safety: Identify any health and safety risks for the WPCF or D/KR employees and the community at large. The focus of this aspect is on the D/KR employees who are significantly exposed to water during production processes. Community Development: Assessment of the project s potential for development of community infrastructure to support economic growth, create or retain jobs and adapt to the predicted effects of climate change. Excluded 6 The alternatives reduce the thermal load on the river and/or result in localized river cooling (i.e. riparian shading on tributaries may provide cool water habitat for salmon, but have no measurable impact on the temp of the river at the point of maximum thermal impact. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013)) 12

13 Internal and / or External Collaboration: The industrial aggregate alternative does offer a unique opportunity for the employees of public and private sectors to work together, but this social collaboration was not found to be a significant benefit. Education / Skill Development for Employees or Community Members: There will be some skill development for WW staff related to Class A water treatment and in the riparian shading credit. Neither alternative was found to have new, significant learning nor is there a significant difference between alternatives. Equity and Access: MWMC is equally open to all parties interested in the use of recycled water, but are limited by delivery infrastructure and distance to the customer. Structure of Report This report presents the results of the analysis in 3 levels of detail. These levels are provided to allow the reader of the report to follow the pattern as deep into the details as is needed or required. The repeating pattern allows for greater transparency as the documentation and analysis gets more complicated. Most readers of this document are advised to stop reading at page 22, as these sections provide a robust summary of findings Executive Summary: Provides high-level findings and the form of brief narrative and summary tables and graphics for decision-making and easy reference. Mid-Level Results: Provides additional detail in the form of tabular summaries, beyond what is included in the Executive Summary, by providing an aspect description, the indicators considered within each TBL aspect and a more complete summary of all benefits, concerns, potential mitigations and data gaps. Detailed Results (Appendix A): Provides the full-layer of depth and includes the full details of the analysis. This level can be thought of the as a Technical Appendix to the report and includes full details on the data, calculations, and sources, as well as a full listing and discussion of all the issues considered within this analysis. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013)) 13

14 Mid-Level Results: Summary Tables, by Aspect The following tables (pages 14 21) summarize the results of the TBL analysis at a deeper level of detail without providing the source documents. The additional information includes; a description of the aspect; the indicators and metrics considered for each aspect; a detailed summary of benefits, concerns, potential mitigation of concerns, and data gaps. The following bullet points summarize the Aspects summarized considered in the Mid-Level Results, by TBL category. Economic Aspects Project Capital Costs and 20-Year Net-Present Value (NPV): Comparison of capital costs, annual O&M costs, 20-year net present value (NPV), thermal reduction per day, compliance capacity and cost effectiveness per unit of thermal reduction. Operational Change and Risk: Assess the day-to-day and long-term business effects and risk associated with the alternatives. This aspect is primarily focused on the industrial aggregate alternative and the effects on MWMC and D/KR organizations. The purchase of riparian shade credits is not expected to have any impact on the day-to-day operations of the WPCF. Environmental Aspects Habitat and Biodiversity: All of the alternatives lower the temperature in the Willamette River 7 thereby creating a healthier habitat for spawning and rearing salmon and steelhead. This aspect considers additional benefits from the project and the importance of the location of temperature reduction. Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance: This aspect assesses the net change in water quality being discharged to the Willamette River as well as the potential impacts of water quality on industrial aggregate production. In-River Water Balance: Net impact on the instream flow of the Willamette River. Energy, Materials and Greenhouse Gases: Comparing life-cycle GHG emissions provides the information required to determine if one alterative offers a clear advantage. The quantity of energy and materials consumed during the project provides a means for estimating GHGs, but are also important metrics for comparing the alternatives. Social Aspects Human Health and Safety: Identify any health and safety risks for the WPCF or D/KR employees and the community at large. The focus of this aspect is on the D/KR employees who are significantly exposed to water during production processes. Community Development: Assessment of the project s potential for developing our infrastructure to support economic growth, create or retain jobs and adapt to the predicted effects of climate change. 7 The alternatives reduce the thermal load on the river and/or result in localized river cooling (i.e. riparian shading on tributaries may provide cool water habitat for salmon, but have no measurable impact on the temp of the river at the point of maximum thermal impact. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013)) 14

15 Economic Aspects (Mid-Level Results) Construction Costs and 20-Year Net Present Value Description: Comparison of capital costs, annual O&M costs, 20-year net present value (NPV) and cost effectiveness per unit of thermal reduction. Indicators: See row below for the indicators considered for this aspect and a comparison between temperature compliance alternatives. Indicators: Riparian Shade Credits First Capital Costs: $4.5 million Annual O&M Costs: $0 / year 20-year NPV: $4.5 million Compliance Capacity: 3 MGD Thermal Reduction: 90 Mkcal/day Reduction Cost: $0.05 / kcal Benefits: Lowest cost option by $2.3 million over 20 years. Concerns: Does not develop recycled water infrastructure, which could become more valuable over time to MWMC as a means of compliance or revenue and the community as a water supply. Data Gaps: Actual restoration project location and associated data. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Indicators: First Capital Costs: $4.3 million Annual O&M Costs: $176,000 / year (1 st 10 years), $158,000 / year (years 11-20) 20-year NPV: $6.8 million Compliance Capacity: 3 MGD Thermal Reduction: 90 Mkcal/day Reduction Cost: $0.08 / kcal Benefits: MWMC: o The close geographic relationship of sites reduces construction cost, time and effort. o Utilizes existing delivery infrastructure already in place at the boundary of the D/KR site. o Revenue potential from recycled water sales. See Figure 10 for price comparison of local water sources. o May be grant opportunities to buy down capital costs. See Appendix A for a list of agencies. o Meets MWMC s recycled water strategic objectives for Goal 3: Cost and Goal 4: Cost Benefits. D/KR: o Installation of recycled water infrastructure to their property free of cost. o Reduces D/KR energy use / cost for water pumping and thermal conditioning by an estimated $64,000 / year. o New industrial water supply to hedge against the possibility of future water supply issues. o Potential for increased marketability for environmental attributes associated with recycled water. 8 Concerns: Delta Sand & Gravel has stated that at present they do not want to participate in the project. Project may require a new NPDES permit for the D/KR site or for MWMC. Delta Sand & Gravel only have gravel quantities for another years of production at current rates. Data Gaps: Complete and current energy consumption data set for Delta and Knife River The following items are currently excluded from the 20-year NPV calculation o Valuation of operational risk. o D/KR energy savings from water pumping and heating o Cost of property insurance, staff time (for administration, customer relations and lab services) associated with production of Class A recycled water o Grants or low-interest loans assumptions 8 It's important to note that U.S. Green Building Council, developers of the Leadership in (LEED) clarified that recycled water is not eligible to generate LEED credits. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 15

16 Operational Changes and Risks Description: Identify the day-to-day and long-term business changes and risk associated with the alternatives. Indicators: Identify significant operational changes and scale the impact. Insure Class A water meets the chemical limits in ASTM C1602 for concrete mixing. Insure D/KR demand and WPCF recycled water supply for compliance are in balance. Riparian Shade Credits Benefit: Low operational risk for MWMC. This alternative provides a means of paying for compliance vehicle approved by ODEQ thereby externalizing project risk to an approved credit development organization. Concern: Does not develop recycled water infrastructure. Benefits: WPCF: o o o D/KR: o o o Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate The D/KR water demand is well suited to temperature TDML compliance needs of the WPCF both are estimated at 3 MGD. In addition site location and existing distribution infrastructure make D/KR an ideal partner for a recycled water project. Project builds experience and infrastructure that could be used for future compliance needs. Provides D / KR with a mission-critical resource water for production and operations. This second source may become more valuable over time as climate change reduces the quantity of water available during the dry season. Not so much a benefit as a prerequisite for the project - Class A recycled water typically meets quality standards for concrete production (ASTM 1602), asphalt production and aggregate processing (e.g. rock crushing, etc.). In cold weather months, the thermal load of the recycled water would benefit production. Concerns: Sharing control between two, independent entities that do not currently have a working relationship. Risks to WPCF o Regulatory compliance would rely on an organization outside of MWMC s authority. o o The timing of D/KR demand does not match MWMC s thermal load offset need. WW staff will need to take on a production mindset (i.e. responsibility of consistently meeting a customer s quality and volume demands. Risks to D/KR o Recycled water may have negative quality or market perception impacts on products o Product liability concerns over using an untested water supply. Based on available information, Class A recycled water will meet ASTM specifications for concrete production, but more testing is required. o Production disruptions as a result of recycled water supply issues. Data Gaps: o Detailed D/KR historical and seasonal water demand data to insure it matches the WPCF s temperature TMDL compliance needs. o Class A recycled water quality testing results for concerns related to produce quality. o Definition of conditions that would lead to curtailment of D/KR water rights. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 16

17 Environmental Aspects (Mid-Level Results) Habitat and Biodiversity Description: Assess the benefits or concerns associated with the project related to habitat and biodiversity. Indicator: Net change to habitat and biodiversity Riparian Shade Credits Benefit: Achieves anticipated future temperature TMDL compliance and therefore benefits the aquatic ecosystem and its inhabitants, but specifically spawning salmon and steelhead. Riparian restoration enhances existing terrestrial habitat thereby supporting greater terrestrial biodiversity. The cost for the Riparian Shading Credits would be used to restore over 100 acres of riparian habitat. Depending on the location and its current state, a restoration effort has the potential to significantly improve the habitat for birds and other creatures. Concern: Temperature benefits are not realized at the point of WPCF effluent discharge. Related to the first bullet environmental organizations may not agree that reducing temperatures at the point of restoration is equal to reducing at the point source of discharge. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Benefit: Achieves anticipated future temperature TMDL compliance and therefore benefits the aquatic ecosystem and its inhabitants, but specifically spawning salmon and steelhead. Reduces discharges of other pollutants including solids, biological oxygen demand and bacterial further enhancing habitat. Address thermal load at its point source. Concern: Nothing significant to note. The land where this development would take place is already industrial and private, so this project would not damage any new green space not does the public currently have access. See Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance aspect for related findings. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 17

18 Water Quality and Regulatory Compliance Aspect Description: Assesses the net change in water quality being discharged to the Willamette River as well as any regulatory change. Indicators: Net change to quantity of pollutants discharged to the Willamette River. Net change in regulatory requirements. Riparian Shade Credits Benefit: Nothing of significant to note, beyond temperature compliance. Concern: Possibility of legal challenges to water quality credits as a compliance mechanism. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Benefits: Achieves temperature TMDL compliance and therefore benefits the aquatic ecosystem and its inhabitants, but specifically spawning salmon and steelhead. Substituting recycled water for river water or groundwater reduces stress on our water resources but also helps retain natural, cooler, water flows in the river. The industrial aggregate alternative also reduces the net discharge of other contaminants, like suspended solids, biological oxygen demand and bacteria to the Willamette River. Based on 3 MGD the reduction in pollutants would decrease by between 5% (in wet weather) and 12% (in dry). Note: These existence of these contaminants are not eliminated, rather they are discharged terrestrially rather than aquatically. Because of the way water is known to migrate through the Willamette River s hyporheic zone, groundwater contamination is not a significant concern, as any leakage into the soil will likely migrate back to the River, not into groundwater aquifers or wells. 9 Cross contamination of recycled water with potable water is not a concern. The design assumption is that the recycled water supply will have dedicated supply lines. This alternative meets MWMC s recycled water strategic objectives A and C for Goal 2: Regulatory Compliance. Concern: Use of recycled water for gravel washing and related activities and subsequent discharge into infiltration ponds connected to the river hyporheic zone could require consideration of an NPDES outfall permit instead of the general WPCF permit for sand and gravel operations. Data Gaps: Water quality testing for Class A recycled water. 9 Todd Miller (2012). Industrial Aggregate Water Fate and Discharge Assessment. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 18

19 In-River Water Balance Aspect Description: Net impact on the instream flow of the Willamette River. Indicator: Net change in Willamette River instream flow. Riparian Shade Credits Benefit: Net balance in Willamette would remain roughly the same. The WPCF would continue to put 3 MGD into the Willamette River. In addition to cooling the river water, restored riparian shade may also reduce evaporation thereby increasing river flow. Concern: No significant concerns. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Benefits: Balance would remain the same, as D/KR would substitute roughly 100% recycled water for fresh river water there by reducing their 3 MGD withdrawal from Willamette River. D/KR could lease their water rights to the Willamette River s instream flow. Concerns: No significant concerns. Potential concern: The only potential scenario in which there would be net reduction in river water is one in which D/KR uses the recycled water and pumps river water. D/KR s production is not limited by water and their managers expressed no need to increase production. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 19

20 Energy, Materials and Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) Aspect Description: Assess and compare life-cycle energy use, materials use and GHG emissions. Notes: As of this writing the energy/ghg analysis for Shade Credits is not complete. A comparison to Existing Conditions is provided for a point of comparison. The analysis for Riparian Shade Credits will be completed for the next version of this report, which will be completed and available August Indicators: Annual energy consumption Annual GHG emissions Annual operational and maintenance material consumption Existing Conditions Energy: Annual consumption (1 year): 8,552 MMBTU Life-cycle consumption (20 years): 171,042 MMBTU GHGs: Annual energy emissions (1 year): 872 MT CO 2 e Life-cycle emissions (20 years): 15,167 MT CO 2 e Construction: 528 MT CO 2e (represents pump replacement) Energy Use: 14,640 MT CO 2e Life-cycle emissions are equivalent to any one of the following: 3,160 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year Annual energy use by 781average homes Materials: Not applicable. Benefit: No significant findings. Concern: Greater energy use and GHG emissions compared to Recycled Water use alternative. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Energy (see Figure 16): Annual consumption (1 year): 4,785 MMBTU Life-cycle consumption (20 years): 95,705 MMBTU GHGs (see Figures 16 and 17): Annual energy emissions (1 year): 466 MT CO 2 e Life-cycle emissions (20 years): 11,027 MT CO 2 e Construction: 3,125 MT CO 2e Energy Use: 7,901 MT CO 2e Life-cycle emissions are equivalent to any one of the following: 2,297 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year Annual energy use by 568 average homes Materials: Requires 50 gallons per day of sodium hypochlorite. Also requires filtration media, but quantities are not readily available. Benefits: Compared to Existing Conditions (see description on page 3), the project reduces life-cycle energy and emissions. These reductions are the result of energy savings by D/KR for water pumping and heating. Concerns: Consumption of chemicals and filtration media are required. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 20

21 Social Aspects (Mid-Level Results) Human Health and Safety Description: Identification and evaluation of any potential human health and safety (H&S) concerns for MWMC, D/KR employees, riparian restoration employees, facility neighbors and the local community generally. Indicators: Identify uses that result in significant human exposure. Compare Class A total coliform standards to Willamette River water at the D/KR intake. Identify other specific health and safety concerns unique to the alternatives. Existing Conditions Benefit: Unknown. See data gap. Concern: Unknown. See data gap. Data Gap: Willamette River water testing for fecal coliform at D/KR intake. D/KR employees are currently exposed to Willamette surface water for which the coliform levels are unknown. Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate Benefits: Class A recycled water is filtered and disinfected and as a result can be used for a variety of beneficial uses (see Figure 24). The D/KR facilities are already fenced and isolated from public access and use. A multi-use pedestrian path runs along the south property line near the facility entrance, but the setback distances meet the requirements for Class A recycled water use. See Figure 23. Concerns: General concern for human infection from bacteria in the recycled water. The primary concern is risk of infection to D/KR employees who would be frequently exposed to the recycled water in the course of their duties and workday. The employee group of greatest concern is those who work in the rock crushing operations at Delta Sand & Gravel, where large quantities of water are used for dust control. It is common for employees present during operation to be significantly exposed to the water, including exposure to their mouth and eyes. Potential Mitigations: An important mitigation treating the recycled water to Class A standards instead of Class C has become the operational planning assumption for the industrial aggregate project to insure the health and safety of Delta employees. Develop training programs and signage that train and remind workers to avoid excess exposure to protect against accidentally ingesting the recycled water. Review the industrial process to reduce worker exposure to recycled water. Increase monitoring frequency to provide a higher-level assurance of treatment. Data Gap: Class A recycled water testing for fecal coliform. The standard for Class A water is 2.2 total coliform / 100 milliliters of recycled water. TBL Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Industrial Aggregate (June 2013) 21