File 016636

Images

Text

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