Town of Palm Beach Water Committee documents and water quality reports (2008‑2009)

TOWN OF PALM BEACH Information for the Water Committee Meeting on January 29, 2009 To: Via: Water Committee: David A. Rosow, Chair Denis P. Coleman, Member Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager From: Sarah E. Hannah, Assistant Town Manager Re: Information Regarding Water Supply Date: January 23, 2009 The following documents are attached for your review in preparation for the Water Committee meeting on January 29 at 3 p.m.: 1. Agenda 2. PowerPoint presentation from the City of West Palm Beach regarding the four options for the Town’s water supply and relationship with the City. 3. Cost estimates and other information regarding private wells. 4. Follow-up on prior water committee information requests: a. Information from the City regarding per capita usage in Palm Beach. b. Information from the City regarding a comparison of the City’s water quality with New York City’s water quality c. Statistical analysis of the top 100 water consumers on the island. d. Average daily effluent flow for the cities that use the East Central Regional Water Reclamation Facility (ECRWR). e. Executive summary of the results from the Town’s testing of the City’s potable water (the rest of the report is available in the Town Manager’s Office). cc: Mayor and Town Council Eduardo Balbis, P.E., City of West Palm Beach Jane Struder, Finance Director H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works John Page, Director of Planning, Zoning, and Building James Bowser, Town Engineer TOWN OF PALM BEACH Town Manager’s Office WATER COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TENTATIVE- SUBJECT TO REVISION JANUARY 29, 2009 3:00 P.M. WELCOME! The progress of this meeting may be monitored by visiting the Town’s web site (www.townofpalmbeach.com) and selecting “Live Agenda” or “Council Audio”. If you have questions relative to these two features, please contact the Office of Information Systems (561) 227-6315. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. III. IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA PRESENTATION BY CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH OF FOUR (4) WATER SUPPLY OPTIONS V. DISCUSSION OF INDIVIDUAL PRIVATE WELLS FOR IRRIGATION VI. VII. VIII. FOLLOW-UP ON PRIOR WATER COMMITTEE INFORMATION REQUESTS ANY OTHER MATTERS ADJOURNMENT Note: Disabled persons who need an accommodation in order to participate in the Town Council Meeting are requested to contact the Town Manager’s Office at 838-5410 or through the Florida Relay Service by dialing 1-800-955-8770 for voice callers or 1-800-955-8771 for TDD callers, at least two (2) working days before this meeting. Post Office Box 2029 * 360 South County Road * Palm Beach, Florida 33480 Telephone (561) 838-5410 * Facsimile (561) 838-5411 * townmanager@townofpalmbeach.com 1/29//09, Water Committee Meeting TOWN OF PALM BEACH WATER COMMITTEE Discussion of Future Plant Options January 2009 PRESENTATION AGENDA � Competing Regulations � Desalination Water Plant � Floridan Water Plant � Town Remains As Equal Customer � Town Becomes Bulk Customer � Next Steps COMPETING REGULATIONS DRAFT YEAR ROUND IRRIGATION RULE � Latest draft SFWMD language dated October 31, 2008. � Public Hearing Scheduled for January 15 th . Unless the Town uses reclaimed water for irrigation it may be subject to the Year Round Irrigation Rule – even if Floridan or Seawater is used. SUPPLY SOURCES SURFACE WATER SOURCES GROUNDWATER SOURCES � � � � Clear Lake Existing Infrastructure Variable Quality Watering Restrictions Permitted � � � � � � � Surficial Aquifer 100 – 150 feet deep Consistent WQ Watering Restrictions Saline Intrusion Limited Allocation Availability Unknown 30 – 50 Sites Needed Atlantic Ocean Floridan Aquifer � Unlimited Supply � 1,000-1,200 1 ft deep � Complex � Consistent WQ Treatment � Long-Term Degradation � Consistent WQ � secure Greenhouse Gases reliable � Highest Cost � � � � Very Costly No Watering Restrictions Limited Allocation 12 – 20 Sites Needed sustainable DESALINATION PLANT OPTION City Dedicates Seawater Plant for Town � Town remains a customer of the City of West Palm Beach � Additional capital and operational costs to Town of Palm Beach � Desalination plant located on City property secure reliable sustainable WHY LOOK TO THE OCEAN? � Sustainable drought-proof source of water � Concern for availability of fresh surface water and groundwater resources = regulatory pressure � Decreasing costs due to technology improvements � Comparable costs to indirect potable water reuse projects TAMPA BAY DESALINATION FACILITY � 25 mgd plant � Co-located with power plant � 8.5-acres for WTP � Provides 10% water demand for region � Screening, filtration, RO membranes, chemical systems � AWS funding provided DESALINATION PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Source Pre-Treatment Membranes Post-Treatment Residuals ean Raw Water re & Pump Station Atlantic Oce ke Structu A Intak Fine Screens Coagulation & Flocculation Clarification Microfiltration Ultraviolet Light and 2 nd RO Passes 1 st a Calcite Contactor Storage Tank High Service Pump Station Chlorine Caustic Soda Fluoride Carbon Dioxide Calcium Carbonate Corrosion Inhibitor Backwash Equalization Gravity Sludge Thickening Dewatering Landfill Cartridge Filters Cleaning System Chlorine Coagulant Flocculant Aid Bisulfite Deep Injection Well PRE-TREATMENT IS KEY TO SUCCESS � Protect the Membranes � Screens remove shells, creatures, wood and debris greater than ¼ inch � Heavier solids settled out via flocculation and clarification � Smaller solids filtered via microfiltration membranes � Ultraviolet light controls biological activity and fouling � Control scale formation by adjusting pH and using antiscalants Fine screens Clarification Basin UV units SPECIALIZED MEMBRANES FOR TREATMENT � RO membranes allow water particles (dissolved ions) to pass through tiny screens, while blocking salts � Highly specialized technology � Large amounts of power required to “push” water through the membranes via pressure � Pre-treatment important to protect costly membranes SOLIDS HANDLING REQUIRED Desalination produces “waste” streams that require materials to be disposed via landfill. � Debris removed by screens (shells, wood, etc) must be landfilled � Clarification process & microfiltration backwash solids are thickened, dewatered, and sent to the landfill for disposal Transportation of solids increase facility operations cost and result with a larger carbon footprint. t DESALINATION PLANT LAYOUT DESALINATION PLANT ISSUES � 25 mgd facility required to produce 10 mgd potable water. � Approximately 10 acres required ed for infrastructure. � Complex treatment processes. � Brine by-product waste disposal via deep injection well (ocean outfalls no longer permitted for WTPs). � Dewatered sludge must be disposed at landfill. � Highly energy intensive to operate. � N t il t f d d t � Not necessarily exempt from proposed year-round water restrictions drafted by SFWMD DESALINATION PLANT COSTS Cost Estimate for 10 mgd Desalination Plant Site Work $ 3,000,000 Raw Water Intake, Pumping, Piping, and Fine Screens $ 12,000,000 Coagulation, Flocculation, Clarification $ 3,900,000 , Pretreatment Transfer Pumping $ 700,000 Microfiltration $ 22,000,000 Ultraviolet Light $ 4,100,000 Chemical Treatment $ 1,600,000 Reverse Osmosis Membrane System $ 48,600,000 000 Post Treatment Chemical Systems $ 2,300,000 Ground Storage Tanks $ 3,900,000 High Service Pumping $ 2,100,000 Residuals Handling $ 10,300,000 000 Administration & Laboratory Building $ 1,900,000 Brine Disposal Injection Well $ 6,000,000 Dedicated Water Transmission Piping $ 6,000,000 Conceptual Cost $ 128,400,000 General Requirements (2%) $ 2,568,000 Construction Mark-up (3%) $ 3,852,000 Mobilization (2%) $ 2,568,000 Contingency (10%) $ 12,840,000 Engineering and Other Non-Construction Costs (8%) $ 10,272,000 TOTAL CONCEPTUAL COST $ 160,500,000 Assumes plant on City property & no additional cost for land. FLORIDAN AQUIFER WATER PLANT OPTION City Dedicates Floridan Plant for Town of Palm Beach � Town remains a customer of the City of West Palm Beach � Additional capital and operational costs to Town of Palm Beach � Low Pressure Reverse Osmosis plant located on City property secure reliable sustainable WHY LOOK TO THE FLORIDAN AQUIFER? � Reliable and drought-proof source located approximately 1,200 feet below ground surface � Relatively stable water quality seasonally, but geographically variable � Reduces demands on water for the Everglades � Significantly less energy intensive than desalination processes � Landfill transportation and disposal costs not applicable LOCAL UTILITIES ARE USING FLORIDAN AQUIFER � Palm Beach County � Jupiter � Deerfield Beach � Broward County � Highland Beach � Fort Myers � Palm Coast � Marion County � St. John’s County � Hollywood � Miramar � Florida Keys Palm Beach County’s 10 mgd Lake Region WTP LOW PRESSURE RO PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Source Pre-Treatment Membranes Post-Treatment Distribution Wells Cartridge Filters Feed Pumps LPRO Membranes Degassification Transfer Clearwell Storage & High Service Sulfuric Acid Scale Inhibitor Cleaning System Chlorine Caustic Soda Fluoride Corrosion Inhibitor Deep Injection Well TREATMENT PROCESSES � SOURCE SOURCE - wells can be located near the plant. No existing users to cause interference (today). � PRE-TREATMENT TREATMENT- disposable 5 micron cartridge filters, pH adjustment, & scale inhibitor. � MEMBRANES MEMBRANES – Low Pressure Reverse Osmosis elements require less power to push water thru screens. � POST-TREATMENT TREATMENT – hydrogen sulfide removal with odor control, disinfection, pH adjustment, blending. � DISTRIBUTION – connect to existing water main network without subaqueous crossings. FLORIDAN PLANT LAYOUT LOCATION The Floridan Aquifer wells are not restricted with respect to specific location in that no other production wells exists today near the City’s WTP. FLORIDAN AQUIFER PLANT ISSUES � Floridan Aquifers can be used for both Aquifer Storage and Recovery and source water � Potential increased energy costs associated with lifting i water and impacts to adjacent users � Potential for decline in water quality over time ~Some pumping wells become saltier (up-coning of more saline water from below or laterally along coast) ~ Membrane design and periodic replacement ~Blending with Surficial Aquifer water � Estimated 125% of raw water to meet treated water demands � Concentrate disposal via deep injection well FLORIDAN AQUIFER PLANT COSTS Cost Estimate for 10 mgd Floridan Plant Site Work & Site Electrical $ 3,000,000 Raw Water Wells & Piping $ 13,500,000 Pretreatment t t System $ 5,000,000 Membrane Building w/LPRO system $ 19,000,000 Chemical Feed Systems $ 2,000,000 Yard Piping $ 1,500,000 Clearwell ll $ 1,200,000 000 Transfer Pump Station $ 1,000,000 High Service Pump Station $ 2,100,000 Ground Storage Tanks $ 3,900,000 Brine Disposal Injection Well $ 6,000,000 Dedicated Water Transmission Piping $ 6,000,000 Conceptual Cost $ 64,200,000 General Requirements (2%) $ 1,284,000 Construction Mark-up (3%) $ 1,926,000 Mobilization (2%) $ 1,284,000 Contingency (10%) $ 6,420,000 Engineering and Other Non-Construction Costs (8%) $ 5,136,000 TOTAL CONCEPTUAL COST $ 80,250,000 Assumes no additional cost for land. TOWN REMAINS AS EQUAL CUSTOMER � Town subject to same water restrictions imposed on water supply for the entire service area A portion of the City’s water supply IS supplemented with reclaimed water � Town subject to same rates and debt service as other customers. � Town’s demand met with City’s plant Pilot testing membrane treatment of surface water now secure reliable sustainable TOWN BECOMES A BULK CUSTOMER � Town sets its own rate structure � New Bulk Service Interlocal Agreement Required FINANCE � Town to become a retail utility service provider � Study on-going by City’s rate consultant regarding options for setting a bulk user rate CUSTOMER SERVICE OPERATIONS The City evaluated finished water demand data for all Town of Palm Beach customers. SUMMARY Option Capital Costs Retail Costs Bulk Costs Desalination Plant $160,500,000 000 TBD(+) N/A Dedicated Floridan Plant $80,250,000 TBD(+) N/A Bulk Customer N/A N/A(+) TBD Remain as Equal N/A Current Rates N/A secure reliable sustainable NEXT STEPS � SFWMD Rulemaking Outcome � Determine City’s Future Water System – Long-Term Improvements � Develop Bulk Rates secure reliable sustainable QUESTIONS? City of West Palm Beach, Florida Estimate of Gallon per Capita Per Day for the Town of Palm Beach Fiscal Year 2009 Line Single Family SRF and MF Total Town of No. Residential Residential Palm Beach (2) 1 Total Water Sales (ccf) (1) 1,226,662 2,205,898 2,961,994 2 Total Single Family Units 2,206 2,206 2,206 3 Total Multi-family Units 0 6,807 6,807 4 Total Residential Units Recognized 2,206 9,013 9,013 5 Water Use per Month per Residential Unit (ccf) 46.34 20.4 27.39 6 Water Use per Month per Residential Unit (gallons) 34,662 15,259 20,488 7 Average Daily Flow per Residential Unit 1,139 502 674 8 Assumed Household Size (3) 1.81 1.81 1.81 9 Household Per Capita Per Day Flow Estimate 629 277 372 Footnotes: (1) Water sales forecast based on the Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Rate and Charge Study prepared by PRMG dated March 24, 2008. (2) Includes all water sales, including irrigation and commercial use. (3) Household size derived from demographic information published on the Nationmaster.com website (www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Palm-Beach, -Fl). Note that the family size for the Town was 2.38 persons per household. :NationMaster - Encyclopedia: Palm Beach, Florida Page 3 of8 based firm Carrere and Hastings and helped establish the Palm Beach winter "season" by constant entertaining. The town was incorporated on April 17, 1911. Geography Palm Beach is the easternmost town in Florida, located on a sixteen-mile-long barrier island, centered at 26°42'S4"N, B002'22"W (26.715067, -80.039371)J4] According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the town has a total area of 27.0 km 2 (10.4 mi 2 ). 10.2 km 2 (3.9 mi 2 ) of it is land and 16.9 km 2 (6.5 mi 2 ) of it is water. The total area is 62.45% water. Demographics As of the 2000 census, over half the population (52.6%) are 65 years of age or older, with a median age of 67 years. 9.4% are under the age of 18, 1.5% are from 18 to 24, 11.5% are from 25 to 44, and 25.0% from 45 to 64. For every 100 females there are 79.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there are 77.0 males. The per-capita income for the town is $109,219. Males have a median income of $71,685 versus $42,875 for females. 5.3% of the population and 2.4% of families are below the poverty line. 4.6% of those under the age of 18 and 2.9% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line. The racial makeup of the town is 96.00% White (93.8% were Non-Hispanic White,) [5] 2.57% Black or African American, 0.53% Asian, 0.04% Native American, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.21% from other races, and 0.63% from two or more races. 2.56% of the population are Hispanic or Latino of any race. l 0/4' 5' _~ /,11 S (1 ''l The 10,468 people in the town are organized into 5,789 households and 3,021 families. The population density is 1,031.'IIkm 2 (2,669.2/mj2). There are 9,948 housing units at an average density of 979.8/km 2 (2,536.6/mi 2 ). 7.7% of the households have children under the age of 18 living with them, 48.1 % are married couples living together, 3.3% have a female householder with no husband present, and 47.8% are non-families. 42.6% of all households are made up of individuals and 27.6% have someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 1.81 and the average family size is 2.38. Many of Palm Beach's residents are affluent, with a median household income of $94,562 and a median family income of $137,867. The town's affluence, and its "abundance of pleasures" and "strong community-oriented sensibility" were cited when it was selected in June, 2003 as America's "Best Place to Live" by Robb Report magazine. As of 2000, speakers of English was the first language of 87.81% of all residents, while French comprised 4.48%, Spanish consisted of 3.65%, German made up 2.16%, Italian speakers made up 0.45%, Yiddish made up 0.36%, Russian was at 0.30% (even though those of Russian ancestry made up 10.30% of the population), http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Pa1m-Beach%2C-F10rida 11/12/2008 NationMaster - Encyclopedia: West Palm Beach Page 20f3 c \i-~ CO~ We~-\-­ fcJ.-Y'J'. Ybeo..c~ As of the census 2 of 2000, there are 82,103 people, 34,769 households, and 18,253 families residing in the city. The population density is 574.9/kmO (1,488.9/miO). There are 40,461 housing units at an average density of 283.3/kmO (733.8/miO). The racial makeup of the city is 58.09% White, 32.21 % African American, 0.33% Native American, 1.46% Asian, 0.16% Pacific Islander, 4.35% from other races, and 3.40% from two or more races. 18.21% of the population are Hispanic or Latino of any race. ~Z"0.L:- 034,,01 2.:ib There are 34,769 households out of which 22.4% have children under the age of 18 living with them, 34.3% are married couples living together, 13.6% have a female householder with no husband present, and 47.5% are non-families. 37.6% of all households are made up of individuals and 11.8% have someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 2.26 and the average family size is 3.02. In the city the population is spread out with 21.3% under the age of 18, 9.8% from 18 to 24,31.5% from 25 to 44,21.4% from 45 to 64, and 16.0% who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 37 years. For every 100 females there are 97.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there are 94.8 males. The median income for a household in the city is $36,774, and the median income for a family is $42,074. Males have a median income of $30,221 versus $26,473 for females. The per capita income for the city is $23,188. 18.9% of the population and 14.5% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 29.2% of those under the age of 18 and 14.8% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line. The city has Palm Beach International Airport, which also serves Palm Beach County, Florida. External links • West Palm Beach official website (http://www.cityofwpb.coml) Maps and aerial photos Street map from Mapquest (http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp? /atlongtype=decima/&/atitude=26. 709992&/ongitude=-80.064373&zoom=6) or Google (http.l/maps.goog/e.com/maps?II=26. 709992, -80. 064373) Topographic map from Topozone (http://www.topozone.com/map.asp? /at=26. 709992&/on=-80. 064373&s=200&size=m&/ayer=DRG100) Aerial photograph from Microsoft Terraserver (http://terraserver.microsoft.com/map.aspx?t=1&s=14&/on=­ 80.064373&/at=26.709992&w=750&h=500) Regions of Florida Central Florida I Emerald Riviera I First Coast I Florida Panhandle I Florida Keys I Lee Island Coast I Nature Coast I Orlando Area I Redneck Riviera I Space Coast I Treasure Coast I South Florida I Sun Coast I Tampa Bay Area Largest Cities Cape Coral I ClealWater I Coral Springs I Fort Lauderdale I Hialeah I Hollywood I Jacksonville I Miami I Miramar I North Miami I Orlando I Pembroke Pines I Plantation I Pompano Beach I Port S1. Lucie I S1. Petersburg I Sunrise I Tallahassee ITampa IWest Palm Beach Counties o Flag of Florida http://www.nationmaster.com!encyclopedia/West-Palm-Beach 11/12/2008 From: To: Date: Subject: EBalbis@wpb.org SHannah@TownofPalmBeach.com 12/03/2008 01:26 PM Fw: WPB/NYC Water Quality Data Sarah, We have obtained information about the water supply in NYC as requested. Note that the City of NY produces about 33 times the amount of water than the City of West Palm Beach. We tried to compile data that can be comparable. However, NYC act as their own State agency and track different parameters than the State of Florida. See below for additional information. Eduardo E. Balbis, P.E. Assistant City Administrator City of West Palm Beach 200 - 2nd Street West Palm Beach, FL 33402 561-822-1400 561-822-1424 fax ----- Forwarded by Eduardo Balbis/WESTPALM on 12/03/2008 01:26 PM ----- David Hanks/WESTPALM 12/03/2008 10:33 AM To Eduardo Balbis/WESTPALM@WESTPALM cc Subject WPB/NYC Water Quality Data Please let know if you want any changes made. NCY produces 1.1 billion mgd per day. Below is what they say about their treatment process: Water Treatment All surface water and groundwater entering New York City’s distribution system is treated with chlorine, fluoride, food grade phosphoric acid and, in some cases, sodium hydroxide. New York City uses chlorine to meet the New York State Sanitary Code and federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) disinfection requirements. Fluoride, at a concentration of one part per million, is added to help prevent tooth decay and has been added since 1966 in accordance with the New York City Health Code. Phosphoric acid is added to create a protective film on pipes that reduces the release of metals such as lead from household plumbing. Sodium hydroxide is added to Catskill/Delaware water to raise the pH and reduce corrosivity. David Hanks Public Utilities Director City of West Palm Beach 1000 45th Street, Suite # 15 West Palm Beach, FL 33407 561-494-1046 Work 561-714-4619 Cell dhanks@wpb.org City of West Palm Beach and New York City Water Quality Tables CONTAMINANTS AND UNIT OF MEASURE LEVEL DETECTED WPB 2007 WPB 2006 WPB 2005 NY City 2007 NY City 2006 RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED Stage 1 Disinfectant / Disinfections By - Produce (D/DBP) Parameter RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED NY City 2005 RANGE OF RESULTS MCL* OR MRDL* LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION Trihalomethanes (TTHM) (ppb)* 73.5 6.95 -283.83** 25.29 6.70 - 35.7 21.1 10.9 - 41.9 220 .12-76 246 .10-81 218 19-69 MCL = 80 By-product of drinking water dis infection Haloacetic Acid (HAA5) (ppb) 30.79 1.82 - 70.0 22.9 9.08 - 37.0 24.4 12.8 - 42.9 218 19 - 62 245 19-69 215 21-69 MCL = 60 By-product of drinking water disinfection Chloramines (ppm)* 3.1 ND* - 5.8 3.33 1.0 - 4.2 3.1 0.3 - 4.2 MRDL = 4.0 Free Chlorine (ppm) 2.4 0.2 - 7.8 MDRL = 4.0 CONTAMINANTS AND UNIT OF MEASURE lead (tap water) (ppb) Copper (tap water) (ppm) Lead (tap water) (ppb) Copper (tap water) (ppm) Contaminants and unit of measure 90th PERCENTILE RESULT No of Sampling Sites Exceeding the AL 90 th PERCENTILE RESULTS No of Sampling Sites exceeding the AL 90th PERCENTILE RESULTS No of Sampling Sites exceeding the AL LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results *16.125.9 13 out of 100 7.6 5 out of 100 ND 0 out of 100 126 ND-122.3 120 ND-123.2 326 ND-11 15 0.433 1 out of 100 0.276 0 out of 100 ND 0 out of 100 126 ND-0.320 120 0.022-0.661 117 ND-198 1.3 10.5 8 out of 100 15 0.352 0 out of 100 1.3 Highest single measurement The lowest monthly percentage of samples meeting regulartory requirements Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results MCL MCL Water additive used to control microbes Water additive used to control microbes LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits Corrision of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits;leaching from wood preservatives Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits; leaching from wood preservatives LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION Turbidity Turbidy (ntu)* 0.46 95.6 0.33 97 0.37 100% 10061% 0.8-1.4% 966100% 0.8-1.5% 0% 0% TT* SOIL RUNOFF Lowesst monthly The Lowest The Lowest CONTAMINANTS AND UNIT OF MEASURE Highest single measurement percentage of samples meeting regulartoty requirements Highest single measurement Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements Highest single measurement Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements LEVEL Range of Results DETECTED Total Organic Carbon LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results MCL LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (RATIO) Lead and Copper (tap water) Round One Lead and Copper (Tap Water) Round Two 1.1 1.1 - 1.8 1.1 1.1 - 1.8 1.1 1.1 - 1.2 TT Naturally present in the environment CONTAMINANTS AND UNITS OS MEASURE Total Coliform Bacteria Highest single measurement Lowesst monthly percentage of samples meeting regulartoty requirements Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results Microbiological Contamanants LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results TT LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION 13.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NATURALLY PRESENT Contaminants and Unit of Measure Total Number of Positive Samples for Year MCLG Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements Highest single measurement The Lowest Monthly Percentage of Samples meeting Regulartory Requirements LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LEVEL DETECTED Range of Results LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION Fecal Coliform % Coli *41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Human and fecal waste Contaminants and Unit of Measure Highest Level Dectected Range of Results Highest Level Detected Range Results Highest Level Detected Range Results LEVEL RANGE OF DETECTED RESULTS Inorganic Contaminants LEVEL DETECTED RANGE OF RESULTS LEVEL DETECTED RANGE OF RESULTS9661 Antimony (ppb) 3.4 N/A 0.13 N/A 0.21 N/A 6 Barium (PPM) 0.0089 N/A 0.0079 N/A N/A 332 0.002-0.07 319 0.01-0.02 319 0.01-0.04 2 MCL LIKELY SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION discharge from petroleum refineries; fire - retardants; ceramics; electronics; solder Dishcharge or drilling wastes; discharge from metal refineries; erosion of naturaal deposits Floride (PPM) 0.946 N/A 0.71 N/A 0.51 N/A 1405 ND-1.3 4 Lead (Point of entry) (PPB) Nitrates (as Nitrogen) (PPB) 2.7 N/A 15 0.678 ND - 0.678 0.12 N/A 0.038 N/A 324 0.2-O.59 321 0.13-0.84 319 0.01-0.04 10 Sodium (ppm) 84.6 N/A 33 N/A 34 N/A 332 .4 - .11 319 .6-.12 160 Thallium (ppb) 0.067 N/A 2 Erosion of natural deposits; discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories; water additive which promotes strong teeth when at optimum levels between 0.7 and 1.2ppm Residue from man-made pollution such as auto emissions and paint;lead pipe, casing and solder Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from septic tanks, sewage; erosion of natural deposits Discharge or drilling wastes; discharge from metal refineries; erosion of natural deposits Leaching from ore-processing sites; discharge from electronics, glass, and drug factories. Endothal (ppb) 4.4 N/A 4.4 N/A 4.4 N/A 100 Runoff from herbicide use Gross Alpha Emitters (pCi/l) Combine radium (pCi/L 1 N/A 15 Erosion of natural deposits 1.3 N/A 6 #VALUE! 5 Erosion of natural deposits TOP 100 PALM BEACH ACCOUNTS BY AVERAGE MONTHLY CONSUMPTION FY 07-08 Customer's Name Address 1 FY 07-08 Average Monthly Consumption in CCF Average Monthly Consumption in Gallons FY 07-08 Average Monthly Bill Premise Type Percentage of Total Avg Monthly Consumption for Palm Beach Total Avg Monthly Revenue for Palm Beach 1 BREAKERS PB INC 100 E MAIN ST 5,277 3,947,138 $18,277.80 GEN 2.23% 3.12% 2 OCEAN GRAND RESORTS 2800 S OCEAN BLVD 3,908 2,922,839 $13,305.34 GEN 1.65% 2.27% 3 BREAKERS PB INC 100 VIA BETHESDA 3,009 2,250,962 $10,545.23 GEN 1.27% 1.80% 4 BREAKERS PB INC 100 PINEWALK 2,879 2,153,780 $10,134.22 GEN 1.22% 1.73% 5 TRUMP,DONALD J 1100 S OCEAN BLVD 2,746 2,053,663 $9,826.33 GEN 1.16% 1.68% 6 PALM BEACH TOWERS CO 44 COCOANUT ROW 2,671 1,997,735 $6,435.42 RES-MULT 1.13% 1.10% 7 TOWN OF PALM BEACH 2301 S OCEAN BLVD 1,827 1,366,769 $5,890.04 GEN 0.69% 1.00% 8 2000 CONDOMINIUM ASSOC 2000 S OCEAN BLVD 1,637 1,224,131 $3,675.58 RES-MULT 0.69% 0.63% 9 BEACH POINT CONDO ASSOC 2660 S OCEAN BLVD 1,527 1,142,311 $3,390.44 RES-MULT 0.65% 0.58% 10 COUNTY ROAD PROPERTY LLC 515 N COUNTY RD 1,373 1,026,755 $6,011.29 RES-MULT 0.58% 1.03% 11 PALM BEACH BILTMORE CONDO ASSOC INC 150 BRADLEY PL 1,292 966,309 $2,890.03 RES-MULT 0.55% 0.49% 12 REEF CONDO ASSOC INC 2275 S OCEAN BLVD 1,278 955,714 $2,889.17 RES-MULT 0.54% 0.49% 13 KRAMER,IRWIN 1295 S OCEAN BLVD 1,226 916,933 $4,020.31 RES 0.52% 0.69% 14 2295 S OCEAN BLVD ASSOC 2295 S OCEAN BLVD 1,145 856,115 $3,459.06 RES-MULT 0.48% 0.59% 15 PATRICIAN MGMT CORP 3450 S OCEAN BLVD 1,139 851,627 $3,676.41 RES-MULT 0.48% 0.63% 16 KRAVIS,HENRY R 700 N LAKE WAY 1,078 806,023 $3,100.25 RES-MULT 0.46% 0.53% 17 2100 CONDO ASSOC INC 2100 S OCEAN BLVD 1,027 767,966 $2,517.47 RES-MULT 0.43% 0.43% 18 ENCLAVE OF PB CONDO ASSOC,THE 3170 S OCEAN BLVD 979 732,062 $2,255.78 RES-MULT 0.41% 0.38% 19 OCEAN COVE CONDO 2600 S OCEAN BLVD 977 731,084 $2,255.21 RES-MULT 0.41% 0.38% 20 123 LLC 455 N COUNTY RD 925 691,900 $2,883.96 RES 0.39% 0.49% 21 SCHWARZMAN,STEPHEN 1768 S OCEAN BLVD 908 678,839 $2,882.59 RES 0.38% 0.49% 22 2500 S OCEAN BLVD INC 2500 S OCEAN BLVD 890 666,008 $1,991.55 RES-MULT 0.38% 0.34% 23 SYDELL MILLER 1415 S OCEAN BLVD 887 663,361 $2,873.34 RES 0.37% 0.49% 24 LEVERETT HOUSE INC 110 SUNSET AVE 845 632,233 $1,993.92 RES-MULT 0.36% 0.34% 25 SUTTON PLACE CONDO ASSOC INC 2778 S OCEAN BLVD 838 626,651 $1,992.96 RES-MULT 0.35% 0.34% 26 SUN & SURF 100 SUNRISE AVE 813 608,469 $2,447.50 RES-MULT 0.34% 0.42% 27 BOHL REAL ESTATE MGMT CORP 184 BRADLEY PL 809 604,758 $1,762.83 RES-MULT 0.34% 0.30% 28 STERLING PALM BEACH LLC 10 ROYAL POINCIANA PLZ 792 592,202 $2,869.67 GEN 0.33% 0.49% 29 OASIS III CORP 3120 S OCEAN BLVD 772 577,456 $1,731.67 RES-MULT 0.33% 0.30% 30 WINTHROP HSE COND 100 WORTH AVE 750 560,827 $2,190.64 RES-MULT 0.32% 0.37% 31 KESSLER,PATRICIA 120 CASA BENDITA 730 545,810 $2,261.12 RES 0.31% 0.39% 32 LA PALMA COND APTS 2860 S OCEAN BLVD 720 538,330 $1,866.68 RES-MULT 0.30% 0.32% 33 HENRY MORRISON FLAGLER MUSEUM 1 WHITEHALL WAY 715 534,762 $2,539.20 GEN 0.30% 0.43% 34 BRAZILIAN COURT MGMT INC 300 BRAZILIAN AVE 712 532,921 $2,414.10 GEN 0.30% 0.41% 35 CHOPIN TRUSTEE PB TR,L FRANK 300 N LAKE WAY 666 498,382 $1,901.99 RES 0.28% 0.32% 36 PALM BEACH COUNTRY CLUB 760 N OCEAN BLVD 664 496,672 $2,413.12 GEN 0.28% 0.41% 37 T H COURT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 363 COCOANUT ROW 662 495,521 $2,178.26 GEN 0.28% 0.37% 38 THE COLONY HOTEL 155 HAMMON AVE 650 485,855 $2,285.71 GEN 0.27% 0.39% FY 07-08 Percentage of TOP 100 PALM BEACH ACCOUNTS BY AVERAGE MONTHLY CONSUMPTION FY 07-08 Customer's Name Address 1 FY 07-08 Average Monthly Consumption in CCF Average Monthly Consumption in Gallons FY 07-08 Average Monthly Bill Premise Type Percentage of Total Avg Monthly Consumption for Palm Beach Total Avg Monthly Revenue for Palm Beach 39 RESIDENCES AT SLOAN CURVE,THE 2000 S OCEAN BLVD 645 482,345 $1,445.07 RES-MULT 0.27% 0.25% 40 PELTZ,NELSON 548 N COUNTY RD 643 480,734 $2,161.55 GEN 0.27% 0.37% 41 TAYLOR,TERRY R 780 S OCEAN BLVD 636 475,670 $1,977.13 RES 0.27% 0.34% 42 CLARIDGES CONDO INC,THE 3456 S OCEAN BLVD 617 461,631 $1,950.41 RES-MULT 0.26% 0.33% 43 ROYAL SAXON INC 2840 S OCEAN BLVD 615 460,078 $2,262.94 RES-MULT 0.26% 0.39% 44 WILKENS,FRANK 1491 N OCEAN BLVD 614 459,042 $2,022.24 GEN 0.26% 0.34% 45 2770 CONDOMINUM,THE 2770 S OCEAN BLVD 605 452,885 $1,360.94 RES-MULT 0.26% 0.23% 46 PALM BEACH STRATFORD CONDO ASSOC INC 2580 S OCEAN BLVD 588 439,594 $1,382.49 RES-MULT 0.25% 0.24% 47 PALM BEACH HAMPTON CORP 3100 S OCEAN BLVD 568 424,806 $1,287.78 RES-MULT 0.24% 0.22% 48 VARGAS,VICTOR 1960 S OCEAN BLVD 563 421,182 $1,763.28 RES 0.24% 0.30% 49 DESMARAIS,PAUL 1600 S OCEAN BLVD 562 420,549 $1,860.38 GEN 0.24% 0.32% 50 SUBOTNICK TRUSTEE,STUART 89 MIDDLE RD 560 419,168 $1,769.33 RES-MULT 0.24% 0.30% 51 EMERAUDE CONDO ASSOC 3390 S OCEAN BLVD 556 415,715 $1,293.06 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.22% 52 BATH & TENNIS CLUB INC 1168 S OCEAN BLVD 549 410,710 $1,950.50 GEN 0.23% 0.33% 53 ROSS,STEPHEN M 702 N COUNTY RD 548 410,134 $1,812.82 RES 0.23% 0.31% 54 PALM BEACH HAMPTON CORP 3100 S OCEAN BLVD 548 409,731 $1,254.34 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.21% 55 389 CORP 389 S LAKE DR 543 406,337 $1,237.91 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.21% 56 PRESIDENT OF P B CONDO INC 2505 S OCEAN BLVD 542 405,646 $1,657.75 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.28% 57 HALCYON CONDO ASSOC 3440 S OCEAN BLVD 542 405,128 $1,333.89 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.23% 58 LA BONNE VIE COND AP 3475 S OCEAN BLVD 541 404,726 $1,835.83 RES-MULT 0.23% 0.31% 59 HAMMONDS,SANDRA 1275 S OCEAN BLVD 541 404,668 $1,955.04 RES 0.23% 0.33% 60 BEACH CLUB INC 755 N COUNTY RD 541 404,610 $1,959.22 GEN 0.23% 0.33% 61 ATRIUMS OF PB MGMT 3400 S OCEAN BLVD 530 396,325 $1,770.74 RES-MULT 0.22% 0.30% 62 BIENSTAR 151 GRACE TRL 529 395,692 $1,276.45 RES-MULT 0.22% 0.22% 63 DU PONT,WILLIS H 1860 S OCEAN BLVD 521 389,535 $1,473.75 RES-MULT 0.22% 0.25% 64 HALCYON CONDO ASSOC INC 3440 S OCEAN BLVD 520 389,018 $1,260.18 RES-MULT 0.22% 0.21% 65 AMBASSADOR SOUTH DEV CORP 2774 S OCEAN BLVD 518 387,637 $1,627.66 RES-MULT 0.22% 0.28% 66 105 CLARENDON CORP 105 CLARENDON AVE 514 384,472 $1,560.62 RES 0.22% 0.27% 67 123 LLC 455 N COUNTY RD 507 379,236 $2,304.58 GEN 0.21% 0.39% 68 MERIDIAN OF PALM BCH 3300 S OCEAN BLVD 506 378,488 $1,188.94 RES-MULT 0.21% 0.20% 69 CLARK,JAMES H 1500 S OCEAN BLVD 504 377,222 $1,738.51 GEN 0.21% 0.30% 70 PERGAMENT,LOUIS 333 SUNSET AVE 503 376,030 $1,420.95 RES-MULT 0.21% 0.24% 71 SUN & SURF 130 ASSOC 130 SUNRISE AVE 492 368,304 $1,721.05 RES-MULT 0.21% 0.29% 72 ATRIUMS II OF PB 3360 S OCEAN BLVD 483 361,514 $1,529.28 RES-MULT 0.20% 0.26% 73 BLACK,CONRAD 1930 S OCEAN BLVD 476 356,278 $1,453.39 RES 0.20% 0.25% 74 PALM BEACH TOWNHOUSES LTD PTN 230 BRADLEY PL 471 352,041 $964.09 RES-MULT 0.20% 0.16% 75 CARLYLE HOUSE ASSOC INC 2773 S OCEAN BLVD 466 348,913 $1,504.13 RES-MULT 0.20% 0.26% 76 L'ERMITAGE A PB CONDO ASSCINC 200 BRADLEY PL 454 339,913 $1,055.41 RES-MULT 0.19% 0.18% 77 COVE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC 2784 S OCEAN BLVD 451 337,348 $1,420.04 RES-MULT 0.19% 0.24% 78 300 SO OCEAN BLVD CORP OF PB 300 S OCEAN BLVD 444 331,898 $1,010.42 RES-MULT 0.19% 0.17% 79 PERIODICAL DSTRBTRS 691 N COUNTY RD 441 330,213 $1,344.31 RES-MULT 0.19% 0.23% 80 330 SOUTH OCEAN INC 330 S OCEAN BLVD 440 328,832 $987.36 RES-MULT 0.19% 0.17% FY 07-08 Percentage of TOP 100 PALM BEACH ACCOUNTS BY AVERAGE MONTHLY CONSUMPTION FY 07-08 Customer's Name Address 1 FY 07-08 Average Monthly Consumption in CCF Average Monthly Consumption in Gallons FY 07-08 Average Monthly Bill Premise Type Percentage of Total Avg Monthly Consumption for Palm Beach Total Avg Monthly Revenue for Palm Beach 81 APPLEBAUM,EUGENE 325 VIA LINDA 433 323,884 $1,238.27 RES 0.18% 0.21% 82 THE REGENCY OF P B INC 2760 S OCEAN BLVD 431 322,388 $1,421.00 RES-MULT 0.18% 0.24% 83 KIRKLAND HOUSE CONDO ASSOCIATION INC 101 WORTH AVE 429 321,007 $956.68 RES-MULT 0.18% 0.16% 84 MARTIN GRUSS 1574 S OCEAN BLVD 427 319,741 $1,454.71 GEN 0.18% 0.25% 85 CONDO ASSOC OF OCEAN TOWERS INC 170 N OCEAN BLVD 426 318,418 $1,214.23 RES-MULT 0.18% 0.21% 86 SOCIETY OF THE FOUR ARTS 417 ROYAL PALM WAY 423 316,511 $1,220.88 GEN 0.18% 0.21% 87 ATRIUMS OF PB MGMT 3400 S OCEAN BLVD 418 312,491 $1,357.12 GEN 0.18% 0.23% 88 NESBITT II,ABRAM 79 MIDDLE RD 415 310,420 $1,182.56 RES-MULT 0.18% 0.20% 89 LAUDER,JOSEPH 126 S OCEAN BLVD 412 308,176 $1,154.42 RES-MULT 0.17% 0.20% 90 BEACH CLUB INC 220 COUNTRY CLUB RD 410 306,947 $1,201.81 GEN 0.17% 0.21% 91 TRES VIDAS 2335 S OCEAN BLVD 407 304,724 $894.77 RES-MULT 0.17% 0.15% 92 MERIDIAN OF PALM BCH 3300 S OCEAN BLVD 405 302,940 $983.57 RES-MULT 0.17% 0.17% 93 CUNNINGHAM,JOHN 353 EL BRILLO WAY 404 302,480 $1,243.20 RES 0.17% 0.21% 94 MONTGOMERY,ROBERT M 1800 S OCEAN BLVD 402 300,869 $1,141.35 RES-MULT 0.17% 0.19% 95 THORNTON,JOHN L 1236 S OCEAN BLVD 393 294,285 $1,229.17 RES 0.17% 0.21% 96 LAKE TOWERS ASSOC INC 250 BRADLEY PL 393 294,017 $1,054.34 RES-MULT 0.17% 0.18% 97 PICOWER,JEFFRY M 1410 S OCEAN BLVD 389 291,030 $1,088.20 RES-MULT 0.16% 0.19% 98 EVERGLADES CLUB 409 COCOANUT ROW 385 287,922 $1,345.22 GEN 0.16% 0.23% 99 589 NORTH COUNTY ROAD LLC 589 N COUNTY RD 383 286,110 $1,156.78 RES-MULT 0.16% 0.20% 100 OCEANSIDE PALMS ESTATE CORP 641 N COUNTY RD 375 280,385 $1,049.12 RES-MULT 0.16% 0.18% FY 07-08 Total for Top 100 82,339 61,589,614 $ 247,769.35 Total for Palm Beach 236,498 176,900,442 $586,175.22 % of Use/Revenue for Top 100 35% 35% 42% * Top 10% of Consumption ** Top 10% of Revenue Percentage of Revenue produced by use and fixed service chrg only $561,794.65 % of Revenue for Top 100 (use & service charge) 44% Water Committee Town Sewage Effluent Jim Bowser to: Patricia Gayle-Gordon 01/22/2009 01:54 PM Pat, I believe one of the questions asked was what was the sewage flows to West Palm Beach. Here is an email to Peter sent on 1/9/09. James M. Bowser, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Palm Beach Public Works Department Post Office Box 2029 Palm Beach, Florida 33480-2029 email: jbowser@townofpalmbeach.com 561-838-5440 Fax : 561-835-4691 ----- Forwarded by Jim Bowser/PalmBeach on 01/22/2009 01:56 PM ----- From: To: Cc: Date: Subject: Jim Bowser/PalmBeach Peter B Elwell/PalmBeach@PalmBeach Paul Brazil/PalmBeach@PalmBeach, Eric Brown/PalmBeach@PalmBeach, Douglas Terry/PalmBeach@PalmBeach 01/09/2009 10:36 AM Town Sewage Effluent Peter, as requested, attached is sewage flow data from our Lake Worth Billings and ECRWRF monthly report. I am seeking the peak daily flows, but that is going to take additional time. Base upon the monthly flows, here is the average daily flow for each entity in Fiscal Year 2008 expressed as million gallons a day: Month WPB LW Oct 2.70 0.654 Nov 2.39 0.593 Dec 2.23 0.627 Jan 2.33 0.668 Feb 2.36 0.691 Mar 2.23 0.672 Apr 2.12 0.561 May 2.02 0.408 Jun 2.09 0.389 Jul 2.22 0.552 Aug 2.33 0.537 Sep 2.54 0.563 Yearly Ave 2.30 0.563 Total average daily flow from Town to ECRWRF 2.863 million gallons a day. James M. Bowser, P.E. Drinking Water Quality Evaluation: Analysis of the City of West Palm Beach’s Potable Water Product Delivered to The Town of Palm Beach HSA Project No. 803-0319 Prepared for: Town of Palm Beach Public Works Department 951 Old Okeechobee Rd., Suite D West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Prepared by: HSA Engineers & Scientists 1486-A Skees Road West Palm Beach, FL 33411 January 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………………………..1 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………….2 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH’S DRINKING WATER MONITORING PROGRAMS……………………………………………………3 POINTS OF ENTRY FOR THE CITY’S DELIVERY OF DRINKING WATER TO THE TOWN……………………………………….…………………………..4 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE DRINKING WATER PRODUCT DELIVERED TO THE TOWN……………………………………………………5 RESULTS FROM INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF THE CITY’S DRINKING WATER PRODUCT…………………………………5 COMPARISON TO RECENT CITY MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS……..6 APPLICATION OF DISINFECTION CHEMICALS, BYPRODUCTS, AND THE EFFECT ON TASTE…………………………………………………6 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………..7 FIGURES FIGURE 1 Site Location Map TABLES TABLE 1 Test Results Comparative to Regulatory Acceptable Maximum Limits per Chapter 62-550, Florida Administrative Code APPENDICES APPENDIX A Laboratory Report of Test Results Page 1 of 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recent Drinking Water Testing Completed and the Results The City of West Palm Beach (City) treats surface waters at their downtown facility and produces drinking water for the residents of West Palm Beach. Residents of the Town of Palm Beach (Town) receive potable water from the City through a franchise agreement that expires in the year 2029. Due, in part, to the highly publicized " precautionary boil water" notice issued by the City in September of 2007, concerns arose regarding the overall safety of the drinking water supply being provided to the Town. Accordingly, HSA Engineers and Scientists was asked to collect and analyze additional samples from the water supply. These additional samples were collected by HSA personnel on November 14, 2008 and were submitted to a laboratory independent of the ones used by the City for their routine drinking water testing requirements mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). There are more than 90 testing parameters that are required to be analyzed on drinking water supplies by the USEPA and the FDEP. HSA collected samples and tested for all of these drinking water parameters and the detailed results are supplied in the enclosed tabular summary. Also as shown in the attached detailed summary table, all of the testing results obtained from our recent sampling passed and all constituents were well below the allowable limits established by State and Federal regulations. What are Trihalomethanes (THMs) and Why Did We Receive a Notice That They Were Elevated? During the precautionary boil water notice that occurred during the latter part of 2007, the City added more chlorine to their finished drinking water to ensure adequate bacterial kill. Chlorine reacts with natural organics (that cause variations in the water’s color) producing a group of compounds called Trihalomethanes (THMs). Up to a point, the higher the chlorine dose added, the higher the THM concentrations produced. The USEPA has established a limit of 80 parts per billion (ppb) for drinking water supplies. In a few samples collected by the City during the ‘boil water notice’ time period, elevated THM test results were obtained due to the additional chlorine in the drinking water. This represented a one-time spike in THM results and the current level is well below the 80 parts per billion limit. During the special testing completed by HSA, the THM level was measured at slightly more than 50 parts per billion, well below the acceptable limit set by the regulators. Page 2 of 8 What Do I Need To Do To Ensure My Drinking Water is Safe? Aside from the recent test results collected and analyzed by HSA, we reviewed historical test results, also summarized in the enclosed table. The City produces a safe drinking water of high quality based on the test results over the last several years. According to the USEPA and the FDEP established standards, the City’s drinking water supply is of good quality and can be consumed directly without concern. For those who want an added measure of protection, substituting bottled drinking water is an option or under the kitchen counter reverse osmosis (RO) filtration system can be installed as added intermediary treatment to provide an excellent source of high quality of drinking water. These RO units are not cost prohibitive, can be easily installed, and can usually supply sufficient drinking water for a typical household. A separate tap is usually installed near the standard sink faucet so the RO water is delivered on demand. There are several local reputable vendors that can provide free quotation for installing under the kitchen counter RO units. Please note that the typical RO unit we are referring to does not treat the entire household water supply but rather just the water intended for drinking or cooking purposes. To add a layer of confidence to residents’ concerns about the quality of the City’s drinking water, we also recommend that the Town establish a primary point of contact for the City for courtesy notification and/or discussion of real time details related to issues with the City’s treatment and distribution processes. This could potentially avoid dramatized response to typically less-detailed public notification. INTRODUCTION Residents of Palm Beach receive potable water from the City of West Palm Beach (City) through a franchise agreement Town of Palm Beach (Town). As required under rule 62-550, Florida Administrative Code, to protect the public health and ensure the quality of the delivered potable water product, these taps are routinely sampled by the City of West Palm Beach’s Public Utilities Department for specified monitoring parameters. Concerned about assuring the quality of the potable water product delivered to Town residents by the City, the Town authorized HSA Engineers & Scientists (HSA) to conduct a one-time sampling event from two of the sampling taps on the potable water distribution system (piping) serving the Town. Collected samples were targeted for laboratory analyses for regulated water chemistry parameters, constituents, and microbiologics most likely to be present in South Florida drinking water supplies. Page 3 of 8 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH’S DRINKING WATER MONITORING PROGRAMS HSA evaluated the City’s monitoring program and most recent results. Steve Schmidt, laboratory manager at the City’s water treatment plant and Chris Saliba of U.S. Water, Corporation, the City’s treatment system process and monitoring consultant, assisted with the acquisition of sampling protocols and laboratory analytical documentation related to the City’s drinking water monitoring program. Discussions with both yielded important information about the City’s drinking water monitoring and quality assurance programs. In addition, records of the City’s Monthly Operating Records (MORs) and recent results from the City’s water monitoring programs were obtained from the Palm Beach County Health Department (part of the State of Florida’s Department of Health, FDOH). The City conducts two programs to monitor its drinking water quality, a Compliance Monitoring Program (compliance) and a Routine Monitoring Program (routine). Sampling locations for the City’s two monitoring programs include the surface water impoundments, inbound raw water, aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) wells, treatment plant points of entry, distribution system points of entry, and distribution system pumps and sampling taps. While Routine program sampling events generally range from monthly to “as needed”, compliance program sampling events generally range from daily to quarterly to annually to sampling for contaminants (like asbestos) every ninth year. To monitor the drinking water quality delivered to the Town, the City conducts routine sampling at ten (10) permanent and temporary compliance distribution system sampling points (taps) situated within the Town’s boundaries. These include: • Distribution System Tap 3230 (located at 3230 S. Ocean Dr.); • Distribution System Tap 2780 (located at 2780 S. Ocean Dr.); • Distribution System Tap PBGC (located at the Palm Beach Golf Course); • Distribution System Tap SOFS (located at the South Fire Station); • Distribution System Tap ISRD (located at Island Rd.); • Distribution System Tap RPBR (located at Royal Poinciana Blvd. X Bradley Pl.); • Distribution System Tap NOFS (located at the North Fire Station); • Distribution System Tap 702 (located at 702 N. County Rd.); • Distribution System Tap LINL (located at List Rd. X N. Lake Wy.); and • Distribution System Tap IDSE #6 (located at the north end of Ocean Blvd.); Page 4 of 8 An eleventh distribution system tap, 4201, is located at 4201 South Ocean Boulevard (in the South Palm Beach municipality), outside the jurisdiction of the Town. The Phipps Park “Booster” Pumping Station (PS) is located within the Town’s jurisdiction. The Phipps Park “Booster” is not a point of entry (POE) to the Town’s distribution system. The City’s map indicates the locations of the sampling taps, the booster pump station, and a one million gallon (1 MG) storage tank within the Town’s jurisdiction. Figure 1 depicts the distribution system sampling taps, “booster” pumping station, and storage tank located within the Town’s boundary. The City conducts annual compliance sampling at several sampling locations, most notably from the first point of entry (POE) to the distribution system. According to the City’s Water Treatment Plant laboratory manager, the first POE is the tap located in the Water Treatment Plant’s analytical laboratory. POINTS OF ENTRY FOR THE CITY’S DELIVERY OF DRINKING WATER TO THE TOWN Plans of the distribution system serving the Town, provided by the Town’s Public Works Department (PWD), identified five potable water transmission mains (large diameter pipes) crossing the Intracoastal Waterway and connecting to the distribution system to deliver the City’s potable water product to the Town. These five pipes include: • A 24-inch diameter transmission main crossing the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) from/to 5th Street (in the City) to the eastern flank of the Royal Poinciana Bridge (in the Town): • A 16-inch diameter water main crossing the ICW from/to 45 th Street (in the City) to the intersection of North Lake Way and Orange Grove Road (in the Town); • A 16-inch diameter water main crossing the ICW from the southern end of Flagler Drive (in the City) to the west end of “Sloan’s Curve (on State Road A1A, in the Town); • A 16-inch diameter water main crossing the ICW from the intersection of Southern Boulevard with Flagler Drive (in the City) to the eastern flank of the Southern Boulevard Bridge (in the Town); and • A 20-inch main crossing the ICW from the City to Everglades Island, near Barcelona Avenue (in the Town). Page 5 of 8 Figure 1 also depicts the approximate ICW crossings and points of entry (POEs) of the transmission mains to the Town. The scale of the map does not allow an accurate depiction of the POEs associated with the mains. Maps of the Town’s distribution system provided by the PWD, generated at a significantly larger scale, were used to reference the locations of the POEs for the transmission mains. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE DRINKING WATER PRODUCT DELIVERED TO THE TOWN As a means to independently evaluate the quality of the drinking water being delivered to the Town, on November 14, 2008 HSA, accompanied by an employee of the City’s Public Utilities Department, sampled distribution system tap IDSE #6, representing the northern-most extent of the system, and tap 3230, representing the southern-most extent of the system,. Figure 1 depicts these sampling tap locations. Sampling was performed by modification of the City’s (distribution system) General Sampling Procedures to reflect the intended exclusion of sampling equipment, field parameter testing, associated equipment calibration requirements. Samples were collected in laboratorysupplied, unpreserved and pre-preserved containers. As required by select analytical methodologies, at the sampling locations preservative was added to those sample containers immediately prior to filling or to the water sample immediately prior to sealing the sample container. Collected water samples were submitted to FDOH/NELAC-certified testing laboratories for analysis for typical public potable water system routine and compliance monitoring parameters including Primary Drinking Water Standards (excluding select Disinfection Byproducts, Haloacetic Acids; Bromite; and Chlorite), for Secondary Drinking Water Standards, and for Total Coliform as listed in the Florida Administrative Code rule 62-550. Test America Laboratories performed all of the analyses for chemical parameters. Jupiter Environmental Laboratories performed the analyses for the microbiologics. RESULTS FROM INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF THE CITY’S DRINKING WATER PRODUCT Results of laboratory analysis for target Primary and Secondary Drinking Standards yielded all chemical and physical parameters below method detection limits (MDLs) or less than respective maximum contaminant limits (MCLs). Results of laboratory analysis for target microbiologicals yielded an absence of Total Coliform in the water samples collected from northern-most Tap A (IDSE #6) and southern-most Page 6 of 8 Tap B (3230). Table 1 arrays the target Primary and Secondary Drinking Standards, regulated MCLs, required sampling frequency, and laboratory analytical results for the November 14, 2008-collected water samples. Appendix A contains the laboratory analytical reports from HSA’s November 14, 2008 sampling event. COMPARISON TO RECENT CITY MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS The City’s most recent annual compliance monitoring event for Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards was performed in June 2008. The sample of ‘finished’ water product was collected at a sampling point (laboratory tap) at the water treatment plant. Analysis was performed by the City’s FDOH/NELAC-certified, vendor analytical laboratory, Genapure. Analysis yielded all target parameter results below method detection limits (MDLs) or less than respective maximum contaminant limits (MCLs) per Chapter 62-550, F.A.C. The City’s most recent quarterly routine monitoring event for Nitrate and Nitrite was performed in August 2008. The sample of ‘finished’ water product was also collected at the water treatment plant’s laboratory tap. Analysis was again performed by the City’s vendor analytical laboratory, Genapure. The detected concentration of Nitrate was less than the MCL (10 mg/L). The concentration of Nitrite was below the MDL (< 0.053 mg/L). Nitrate concentrations from HSA’s November 2008 sampling event are lower than either result reported from the City’s annual or latest quarterly sampling from the water treatment plant’s laboratory tap. The difference between these results is not relevant since the reported concentrations from the City and from HSA’s sampling event are still less than the MCL. Table 1 includes a comparative array of the City’s monitoring program results to the results from HSA’s November 2008 distribution system tap sampling for the target Primary and Secondary Drinking Standards. APPLICATION OF DISINFECTION CHEMICALS, BYPRODUCTS, AND THE EFFECT ON TASTE To eliminate the presence of microbiologics, such as Coliform bacteria, the City applies chlorine at the treatment plant to disinfect the processed supply water. This treatment process results in the formation of chemical compounds in the potable water product known as Disinfection Byproducts (DBPRs). The allowable concentrations of DBPRs in drinking water are set as Standards in FDEP rule 62-550, F.A.C. The latest quarterly (3-month) reporting period for the City’s weekly routine monitoring of DBPRs (Total Trihalomethanes, TTHMs) ended September 2008. The samples of water Page 7 of 8 product are regularly collected at a series of distribution system sampling taps. Analysis was performed by the City’s analysts at the Water Treatment Plant’s laboratory. Results from HSA’s sampling of the Town’s drinking water from northern-most Tap A (IDSE #6) are directly compared to the City’s routine sampling of drinking water from distribution system tap LINL (closest to Tap A). Results from HSA’s sampling of the Town’s drinking water from southernmost Tap B (3230) are compared directly to those from the City’s sampling of that tap. TTHM concentrations from HSA’s November 2008 sampling event are slightly higher than the averages of the results reported from the City’s latest quarterly sampling from tap LINL and tap 3230, respectively. The difference between these results is not relevant since the reported concentrations from the City and from HSA’s sampling event are still less than the MCL. It is noted that the concentration of TTHMs reported from the City’s annual compliance event (collected at the Treatment Plant) is close to the MCL. This is not unexpected as the sampling location (treatment plant laboratory tap) is much closer to the point of disinfection than the distribution system sampling taps. Table 1 includes a comparative array of the detected TTHM’s from City’s monitoring program to those detected from HSA’s November 2008 sampling event as well as the TTHM Standards per rule 62-550, F.A.C. The City Public Utilities Department acknowledges that to keep the potable water product free of microbiologics occasionally requires increasing the concentration of disinfecting chlorine added to the supply water. This results in brief incidences of potable water product with a notable change in the taste and higher concentrations of DBPRs. Concentrations of DBPRs and the stronger taste of chlorine subside with the inevitable reduction of chlorination. CONCLUSION As a measure of the quality of the drinking water product being delivered to the Town by the City, results from HSA’s November 2008 collection of potable water from the northern-most and southern-most distribution system sampling taps revealed target regulated drinking water parameters at concentrations below the MCL standards established in FDEP rule 62-770, F.A.C. A comparative of the results obtained from HSA’s sampling event to the City’s reported annual and quarterly results from 2008 monitoring events found minor variations in reported concentrations for select parameters (see Table 1). These variations pose no concern for the quality of the potable water product being delivered to the Town since all parameter concentrations reported from the City’s monitoring events and by HSA’s sampling event are less than respective MCLs. Page 8 of 8 Comparison of a three-year average of the concentrations of Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards from the City’s annual compliance monitoring events (circa 2006, 2007, and 2008) to the results from HSA’s November 2008 distribution system tap sampling reveals relative equivalence with irrelevant differences between select parameters concentrations since the averaged City results are less than respective MCLs (see Table 1). With the exception of the occasional spike in concentrations of DBPRs (and corresponding stronger taste of chlorine in the delivered drinking water) resulting from the City’s need to increase the application of sanitizing chemicals (i.e. chlorine) to treat supply water, HSA concludes that the quality of the potable water product delivered to the Town by the City meets or beats the criteria for the standards established under rule 62-550, F.A.C. Prepared by: HSA Engineers & Scientists A member of the CRA family of companies Michael R. Fisher, P.G. Senior Project Manager Thomas Emenhiser Regional Manager Attachments: Figure 1 Table 1 Appendix A – Laboratory Reports of Test Results