2. Overview and Project Approach  Clinton is currently experiencing surface water supply shortages in their raw water source, Clinton Lake, and has been relying solely on their treated water allocation from the Foss Reservoir.  A long-term water study was conducted by Garver USA, LLC, and the City requested that Professional Engineering Consultants, P.A. (PEC) review the findings and develop recommendations.  Project Approach: – Revise population projection and water demand – Identify potential surface water sources – Identify potential ground water sources – Determine raw water source recommendations based on establishing a diverse water source portfolio

3. Population and Water Demand YearPopulation Average Daily Demand (MGD) Residential Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) Residential Average Daily Demand (MGD) Residential + Commercial Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) Residential + Commercial 2010 9,7021.503.012.063.57 2015 10,4571.623.242.203.82 2020 11,2651.753.492.364.10 2025 12,1361.883.762.524.40 2030 13,0732.034.052.704.72 2035 14,0842.184.372.885.07 2040 15,1722.354.703.095.44 2045 16,3452.535.073.315.87 2050 17,6082.735.463.556.28 2055 18,9692.945.883.806.74 2060 20,4533.176.344.077.24

4. Existing Sources  Clinton Lake – Good water quality – Very low water levels and small drainage basin – Water treatment plant capable of producing 2.5 MGD – Due to low lake levels, the water treatment plant has not been in operation since November 2011  Foss Reservoir – Poor water quality – Able to provide Clinton with 0.7 – 2.19 MGD – Water treatment plant in poor condition  Burns Flat Well Field – Unknown water quality – Located on the Elk City aquifer – City has water rights for approximately 0.2 MGD – Existing well field has not been used in 40 years – Low existing well yields Clinton Lake – June 2012 Foss Reservoir – February 2011

5. Potential Sources - Purchasing Water  City of Clinton purchasing water from east Custer County – Known well fields currently using the aquifer as a source. – The amount of water provided to Clinton would depend on supplier’s demand and treatment capability. – Arsenic is found in some areas and would require treatment. – Purchasing water would require a pipeline.

6. Potential Sources - Surface Water LakeCounty Distance from City of Clinton Area (acres) Capacity (acre-feet) Water Quality Water Availability Foss Reservoir Custer9.5 miles8,800256,220PoorFair Clinton Lake Washita-3353,980GoodPoor Fort Cobb Reservoir Caddo30 miles4,10080,010GoodFair Rocky Lake Washita20 miles3504,120Poor Lugert-Altus Reservoir Greer35 miles6,260132,830GoodFair

7. Potential Sources - Ground Water AquiferArea (acres) Minimum Yield (MGD) Maximum Yield (MGD) Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Distance from City (miles) Rush Springs 896,0000.2880.864<50018 - 17 Elk City 193,0000.0360.432300 - 50018 - 20

8. Alternatives  Alternative 1 – Construction of a transmission line from the Lugert-Altus Reservoir, and either augmenting Clinton Lake or directly treating it. – While the Lugert-Altus Reservoir is currently experiencing lower water levels, it has the largest drainage basin of the surface water options, and has the highest probability of recovery. – Requires construction of an intake structure, pipeline, easements, and upgrading of the water treatment plant.  Alternative 2 – Obtain water rights and construct a well field in the Rush Springs aquifer. – Would require little treatment, and could be put directly into the distribution system. – Requires construction of a well field, transmission line and a disinfection station.  Alternative 3 – Construction of a transmission line from the Lugert-Altus Reservoir and the well field at the Rush Springs aquifer. – Could fill Clinton Lake and treat with existing water treatment plant. – Rush Springs well field to provide a yield of approximately 1.3 MGD.

9. Alternative Cost Estimates  Alternative 1 – Total = $16,475,500.00 – Does not include easements or upgrades to the water treatment plant.  Alternative 2 – Minimum Yield Total = $12,575,000.00 – Maximum Yield Total = $11,975,000.00 – Does not include easements.  Alternative 3 – Lugert-Altus Total = $16,475,500.00 – Rush Springs Total = $11,975,000.00 – Total = $28,450,500.00 – Assuming maximum yield from well field. – Does not include easements. – Phased construction over several years. Phase 1 is Burns Flat well field improvements. Phase 2 is the Rush Springs well field – completed incrementally. Phase 3 is the construction of the transmission line from the Lugert-Altus Reservoir.

10. Water Conservation Recommendations – Clinton should begin a mandatory water conservation policy with the goal to limit the maximum daily demand to 2.19 MGD. – Residents of Clinton should be required to limit their water usage and minimize non- essential water usage. – The residents should be made active participants in water conservation with incentives to comply and fines for non-compliance. – The highest industrial users should explore water reuse options. – Water from irrigation wells with poor water quality should be utilized with point-of-use treatment.

11. Raw Water Supply Recommendations  Diverse raw water supply – Foss Reservoir Continue to utilize their allotment Only dependable water source available in the short term – Burns Flat Well Field Investigate the existing well field on the Elk City aquifer for yield and water quality Inspect, rehabilitate the wells, stand pipe and transmission lines Phase 1 construction – Cost Estimate Range: $5,396,600.00 to $10,331,000.00 – Rush Springs Well Field Obtain water rights Phase 2 construction – based on water demand, and to be completed incrementally – Cost Estimate Range: $11,975,000.00 to $12,575,000.00 – Lugert-Altus Reservoir Obtain water rights Phase 3 construction – Cost Estimate $16,475,500.00

13. Fort Cobb Reservoir Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL1LS $ 2,500.00 3 WATER LINE158,400LF $ 85.00 $ 13,464,000.00 4 INTAKE STRUCTURE1LS $ 750,000.00 5 ADJUSTMENT TO EXISTING UTILITIES1LS $ 5,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 14,231,500.00

14. Rocky Lake Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL1LS $ 2,500.00 3 WATER LINE105,600LF $ 85.00 $ 8,976,000.00 4 INTAKE STRUCTURE1LS $ 750,000.00 5 ADJUSTMENT TO EXISTING UTILITIES1LS $ 5,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 9,743,500.00

15. Lugert-Altus Reservior Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL1LS $ 2,500.00 3 WATER LINE184,800LF $ 85.00 $ 15,708,000.00 4 INTAKE STRUCTURE1LS $ 750,000.00 5 ADJUSTMENT TO EXISTING UTILITIES1LS $ 5,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 16,475,500.00

16. Rush Springs Minimum Yield Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 GROUNDWATER WELL11EA $ 100,000.00 $ 1,100,000.00 3 WATER LINE132,000LF $ 85.00 $ 11,220,000.00 4 WELL HOUSE1LS $ 200,000.00 5 TESTING1LS $ 30,000.00 6 CLEAN UP1LS $ 15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 12,575,000.00

17. Rush Springs Maximum Yield Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 GROUNDWATER WELL5EA $ 100,000.00 $ 500,000.00 3 WATER LINE132,000LF $ 85.00 $ 11,220,000.00 4 WELL HOUSE1LS $ 200,000.00 5 TESTING1LS $ 30,000.00 6 CLEAN UP1LS $ 15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 11,975,000.00

18. Elk City Minimum Yield Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 GROUNDWATER WELL125EA $ 100,000.00 $ 12,500,000.00 3 WATER LINE105,600LF $ 85.00 $ 8,976,000.00 4 WELL HOUSE1LS $ 200,000.00 5 TESTING1LS $ 30,000.00 6 CLEAN UP1LS $ 15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 21,731,000.00

19. Elk City Maximum Yield Cost Estimate ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 GROUNDWATER WELL11EA $ 100,000.00 $ 1,100,000.00 3 WATER LINE105,600LF $ 85.00 $ 8,976,000.00 4 WELL HOUSE1LS $ 200,000.00 5 TESTING1LS $ 30,000.00 6 CLEAN UP1LS $ 15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 10,331,000.00

20. Burns Flat Well Field ITEMDESCRIPTIONQUAN.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION1LS $ 10,000.00 2 GROUNDWATER WELL20EA $ 100,000.00 $ 2,000,000.00 3 WATER LINE36,960LF $ 85.00 $ 3,141,600.00 4 WELL HOUSE1LS $ 200,000.00 5 TESTING1LS $ 30,000.00 6 CLEAN UP1LS $ 15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 5,396,600.00