1. Metropolitan Council Environment Committee Master Water Supply Plan February 10, 2009 Christopher Elvrum Manager, Water Supply Planning Keith Buttleman Assistant General Manager, Environmental Quality Assurance

2. Purpose  Draft Master Water Supply Plan  Public review comments  Master Plan completion schedule

3. Master Plan Conclusions Overall supplies are regionally adequate Some water supply issues will occur using traditional sources Options available to address potential issues Early identification of issues critical Ongoing assessment will guide sustainable water use choices

4. Goal and Principles Goal: Ensure a sustainable water supply for current and future generations. Principles  Water supply integral component of planning  Regional context for local decisions  All hydrologic systems considered  Water quality important  Interjurisdictional cooperation viable option  Cost-effectiveness considered  Wise use critical

5. Availability Analysis Population forecasts Land use Water use Climate Groundwater recharge Contamination Aquifer analysis Water Supply Availability Analysis Issue Identification METROPOLITAN AREA WATER SUPPLY MASTER PLAN Ongoing Evaluation ConservationSurface Water Evaluation

6. Metro Model 2 4,913 miles 2 Includes entire metro 9 layers Unconsolidated Prairie du Chien St. Lawrence Ironton-Galesville Mt. Simon St. Peter Jordan Eau Claire Franconia

7. Model Questions Are supplies available where we need them? Will pumping harm: —neighboring wells —natural resources —the aquifer How will climate and land use affect future availability?

8. Planning horizons: 2030, 2050 Municipal water use drives water demand growth —Non-municipal demand included; no change forecasted Current sources used for future demand whenever possible Scope and Assumptions

9. Water Supply Development Issues Significant decline in aquifers Well interference Impacts on surface waters Significant uncertainty regarding aquifer extent and productivity Groundwater contamination and vulnerability to contamination

10. DRAFT

12. Reporting Results: Community Water Supply Profiles Current and projected water use Current Sources Available Sources Issues that need to be addressed Potential impact to surface waters

13. Issue Responses Issue: Potential impact to surface waters Threshold >1m predicted decline in surficial aquifer by 2030 Response Develop resource protection thresholds Daily measurements at wells and resource

14. Issue Responses Development of resource protection thresholds Increased monitoring and data collection Evaluation of supply alternatives Increased conservation Limit withdrawals - Use alternative source is an option

15. DRAFT

16. Components of the Plan Report Community Profiles Issue Responses Conservation Toolbox Water Supply Make-A-Map Application

17. Master Plan Public Comments Period November 3 – December 16 th Public Meetings 10:00am-Noon: December 2, City of Woodbury City Hall December 3, City of Savage, City Hall December 4, City of Maple Grove Government Center Email, US Mail, Voice Mail, Fax Mail: Metropolitan Council Data Center, 390 N. Robert Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 Fax: 651-602-1464 Public Comment Line: 651-602-1500 Email: data.center@metc.state.mn.usdata.center@metc.state.mn.us TTY: 651-291-0904

18. Public Commenters Public meetings —46 attendees from: –10 cities and townships –counties, –DNR, MDH, EQB, –consultants, non-profits –Metro Cities (AMM), and –Representative Paul Gardner —4 Metropolitan Area Water Supply Advisory Committee Members Letters/emails Total of 59 commenters

19. Comments General Comments Metro Model 2 Integrating Water Supply with Comprehensive Planning Development of community Profiles and Issue Responses Updating the Master Plan Surface water and Stormwater

20. General Comments General support How does the plan meet the statutory requirements What are recommendations

21. Metro Model 2 Model should be recalibrated prior to publication What were the methods and measures used to ensure the soundness of the Model

22. Integrating Water Supply with Comprehensive Planning Support/encourage integration with other comp planning Do not make water supply a metropolitan system

23. Community Profiles and Issue Responses How were the forecasts responses developed Do not introduce requirements (issue responses) without statutory authority How were local studies considered What is the reasonableness test for responses How will the Master Plan affect non-municipal water appropriators

24. Implementing the Master Plan What will the role of the Met Council and DNR be in implementing the plan How will existing plans and permits be affected How will the plan be updated How will local studies be incorporated

25. Surface Water and Stormwater Plan focuses on groundwater when 1/3 of population uses surface water Management of surface water source outside jurisdiction Support stormwater management activities that recharge groundwater Map soil contamination to evaluate recharge areas

26. Comment Responses Model Recalibration Add information/clarify plan text —Technical analysis —Integration with Comprehensive Planning —Permitting process —Plan implementation —Relationship to surface water and stormwater management

27. Next Steps Revise Plan – January/February Update Metro Model 2 – January/February Update profiles – February/March Final Advisory Committee Review – March 26 DNR/Met Council Approval – April/May